Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Minnesota

Burni v. Frazier

District of MinnesotaPaul A. MagnusonDecided March 5, 2008

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
Here, plaintiff's application has been pending for over three years, and the Court finds that USCIS's failure to act on the application in that time frame constitutes final agency action for the purposes of this case.
Form or filing I-485 (adjustment of status) Read by a model
After marrying a U.S. citizen in 2004, he filed an I-485 application for adjustment of status to lawful permanent residency on or about December 10, 2004.
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
The Complaint seeks an order compelling defendants and those acting under them to complete the required background checks and adjudicate plaintiff's application for adjustment of status.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
The Report and Recommendation (Docket No. 17) is ADOPTED; and 2. Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Docket No. 5) is DENIED.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction Read by a model
Defendants move to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, arguing that none of the grounds for jurisdiction cited by plaintiff are valid, and that the Immigration and Nationality Act ("INA") bars plaintiffs claim.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Docket No. 5) is DENIED.
Disposition Government's motion denied; the case goes on The government's motion (to dismiss, or for summary judgment) was denied, so the case goes on. Counted as the applicant's ruling; a later decision in the case can still go either way. Read by a model
Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Docket No. 5) is DENIED.
Prevailing party Applicant Read by a model
Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Docket No. 5) is DENIED.
The delay claim The delay claim goes on Read by a model
Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Docket No. 5) is DENIED.
Months pending 38.8 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
After marrying a U.S. citizen in 2004, he filed an I-485 application for adjustment of status to lawful permanent residency on or about December 10, 2004.
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings Section 1252(a)(2)(B) bar rejected Read by a model
Having found that jurisdiction is not foreclosed by § 1252(a)(2)(B), the Court now turns to the question of whether it has subject matter jurisdiction to proceed.
Nationality Syria Read by a model
Plaintiff is a native of Saudi Arabia and a citizen of Syria who resides in Minnetonka, Minnesota.

How the case ended

This decision is not linked to a docket in the docket record yet, so how the case ended is not shown.

Supreme Court and Eighth 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.