Passim

Mandamus decisions / Southern District of New York

Konde v. Raufer

Southern District of New YorkJohn P. CronanDecided May 16, 2024No. 1:23-cv-04265

Read the decisionOriginal on CourtListener

2,914 written decisions from 2,661 cases in the whole mandamus and agency-delay group, the group's newest decided October 30, 2026. Updated November 3, 2026 at 1:24 a.m. CT; the Passim connector counts the live collection, which can differ by the day's additions and retirements (which total to quote). Coverage: of the 1,606 public decisions since January 1, 2025 that a CourtListener and GovInfo search for mandamus and agency delay finds, Passim holds 1,371 (85%), measured November 3, 2026. Some of what that search finds are not mandamus decisions. Tell us about a decision we're missing.

These are counts of past written decisions and dockets, not predictions of how any case will be decided. A distribution appears only when at least 5 decisions (or 5 dockets) are behind it; smaller groups are listed, not summarized. How it's counted.

What the decision decided

Each value cites the passage it was read from. Values read by a model were checked against that passage; values read by rule come from fixed text patterns. Read the decision before relying on either.

Agency USCIS Read by a model
Plaintiff, a native of Burkina Faso, submitted an asylum application, which was received by USCIS on August 26, 2020.
Form or filing I-589 (asylum) Read by a model
Plaintiff, a native of Burkina Faso, submitted an asylum application
What the suit asked for Decide the asylum application Read by a model
As relief, Plaintiff asks this Court to “[c]ompel [Defendant] to schedule [Plaintiff]’s asylum interview.”
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For the reasons that follow, the Court grants Defendant’s motion and dismisses the Complaint in its entirety.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction; Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim Read by a model
Defendant moves to dismiss the Complaint pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6), arguing that this Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s mandamus claim and that Plaintiff has failed to state a claim under the APA.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
On September 5, 2023, Defendant moved to dismiss the Complaint for want of jurisdiction and for failure to state a claim.
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, the Court grants Defendant’s motion to dismiss and dismisses without prejudice Plaintiffs Complaint in its entirety.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, the Court grants Defendant’s motion to dismiss and dismisses without prejudice Plaintiffs Complaint in its entirety.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, the Court grants Defendant’s motion to dismiss and dismisses without prejudice Plaintiffs Complaint in its entirety.
Months pending 32.9 months from the application to the suit; 44.6 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
Plaintiff, a native of Burkina Faso, submitted an asylum application, which was received by USCIS on August 26, 2020.
TRAC factors The court weighed the TRAC factors
  • 1. Rule of reasonfavors the government
  • 2. Congressional timetablefavors the government
  • 3. Human health and welfarefavors the government
  • 4. Competing prioritiesfavors the government
  • 5. Interests prejudicedfavors the government
  • 6. No impropriety needednot reached
Read by a model
Turning to the first TRAC Factor, the Court joins the chorus of judges in this Circuit finding that the time USCIS takes to adjudicate asylum applications through its LIFO policy is governed by a rule of reason.
The government's delay arguments First-in, first-out processing accepted; Line-jumping accepted Read by a model
Turning to the first TRAC Factor, the Court joins the chorus of judges in this Circuit finding that the time USCIS takes to adjudicate asylum applications through its LIFO policy is governed by a rule of reason.
Threshold rulings APA adequate-remedy bar applied (mandamus claim fails) Read by a model
Here, Plaintiff has available an alternative remedy under the APA, thus depriving this Court of subject matter jurisdiction over her mandamus claim.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:23-cv-04265
Filed
May 23, 2023
Ended
May 16, 2024
Suit's filing to its end
359 days
How it ended
Dismissed on jurisdiction or the merits
From the record
order 2024-05-16 dismisses for want of jurisdiction; idb disp 6 (judgment: motion before trial), judgment for defendant

A voluntary or stipulated dismissal is how most suits end once the agency acts; the docket rarely says why. Other suits in this court.

Supreme Court and Second Circuit authority

District decisions bind no one. On the questions this decision raises, the Supreme Court decisions and the circuit's published decisions listed here bind this court; a circuit disposition marked nonprecedential was not published as precedent and is persuasive only. ImmCite status as read November 3, 2026. Check the current status before relying on one.