Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Massachusetts

Brito Gonzalez v. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services

District of MassachusettsF. Dennis Saylor, IVDecided March 4, 2022No. 1:21-cv-10286

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 Luis Brito Gonzalez, a lawful permanent resident of the United States, filed an application for citizenship that was administratively closed by defendant United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”), allegedly in violation of federal law.
Form or filing N-400 (naturalization) Read by a model
Gonzalez alleges that he filed a Form N-400 and that he was subsequently interviewed by USCIS on November 6, 2020.
What the suit asked for Naturalization hearing or remand (1447(b)) Read by a model
Gonzalez seeks a writ of mandamus as well as an order directing USCIS to grant his application for naturalization under 28 U.S.C. § 1361 and declaring that the delay of his application was unlawful and discriminatory.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, defendant’s motion to dismiss is GRANTED.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction Read by a model
USCIS has moved to dismiss under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, defendant’s motion to dismiss is GRANTED.
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, defendant’s motion to dismiss is GRANTED.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, defendant’s motion to dismiss is GRANTED.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
dismissal is warranted based on lack of subject-matter jurisdiction alone.
The other claims Dismissed Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, defendant’s motion to dismiss is GRANTED.
Months pending Not stated A section 1447(b) suit: these months run from the naturalization application. The statute's 120 days run from the interview, which they do not measure. Read by a model
Months since the naturalization interview 0 months from the interview (2020-11-06) Read by a model
Gonzalez alleges that he filed a Form N-400 and that he was subsequently interviewed by USCIS on November 6, 2020.
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings None Read by a model
Nationality Dominican Republic Read by a model
Luis Brito Gonzalez is a citizen of the Dominican Republic.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:21-cv-10286
Filed
February 19, 2021
Ended
March 4, 2022
Suit's filing to its end
378 days
How it ended
Dismissed, ground not recorded
From the record
idb disp 14 (dismissed: other)

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 First 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.