Passim

Mandamus decisions / Western District of Kentucky

Patel v. Jaddou

Western District of KentuckyGreg N. StiversDecided September 1, 2023No. 1:22-cv-00163

Read the decisionOriginal on CourtListener

2,996 written decisions from 2,731 cases in the whole mandamus and agency-delay group, the group's newest decided November 12, 2026. Updated November 14, 2026 at 1:17 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 1,617 public decisions since January 1, 2025 that a CourtListener and GovInfo search for mandamus and agency delay finds, Passim holds 1,406 (87%), 1,039 of them in this group, measured November 14, 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
In moving to dismiss the Complaint, Jaddou explains that the USCIS made the BFD, granted the Patels EADs, and deferred a removal action for four years.
Form or filing I-918 (U visa) Read by a model
The Patels allege that the agency violated the Administrative Procedure Act by unreasonably delaying its evaluation of their U nonimmigrant status applications.
What the suit asked for Issue a work permit Read by a model
The first is to compel USCIS to make bona fide determinations (“BFDs”) and issue employment authorization documents (“EADs”)
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (DN 8) is GRANTED, and the Complaint is DISMISSED.
Motion decided Other motion to dismiss Read by a model
Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (DN 8) is GRANTED
Whose motion Cross-motions Read by a model
This matter is before the Court on Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (DN 8), Defendant’s Motion for Leave to Seal (DN 9), and Plaintiffs’ Motion for Civil Money Penalties (DN 11).
Disposition Dismissed as moot Dismissed or denied as moot because the agency acted. Read by a model
second cause of action is similarly rendered moot because BFD determination and waitlist approval are two distinct paths to a U visa, and USCIS does not place an applicant on both.
Prevailing party Neither side Read by a model
second cause of action is similarly rendered moot because BFD determination and waitlist approval are two distinct paths to a U visa, and USCIS does not place an applicant on both.
The delay claim Moot: the agency acted Read by a model
second cause of action is similarly rendered moot because BFD determination and waitlist approval are two distinct paths to a U visa, and USCIS does not place an applicant on both.
Months pending Not stated at filing The agency acted before this decision, so the months up to the decision are not a delay and are not shown. Read by a model
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings Held moot Read by a model
second cause of action is similarly rendered moot because BFD determination and waitlist approval are two distinct paths to a U visa, and USCIS does not place an applicant on both.
U visa claims Bona fide determination: moot: the agency acted; Waiting list: moot: the agency acted Read by a model
In moving to dismiss the Complaint, Jaddou explains that the USCIS made the BFD, granted the Patels EADs, and deferred a removal action for four years.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:22-cv-00163
Filed
December 12, 2022
Ended
September 1, 2023
Suit's filing to its end
263 days
How it ended
Ended once the agency acted
From the record
order 2023-09-01 for the defendants, ground not stated; 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 Sixth 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 14, 2026. Check the current status before relying on one.