Passim

Mandamus decisions / Eastern District of New York

Richards v. Napolitano

Eastern District of New YorkDecided June 30, 2009No. 1:09-cv-01663

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
By notice dated February 4, 2009, and by decision dated February 6, 2009 (the "Decision"), USCIS denied the I-130 petition without addressing whether the marriage was bona fide.
Form or filing I-130 (relative petition); I-485 (adjustment of status) Read by a model
directing USCIS to reopen her I-130 petition and I-485 application and to adjudicate them on the merits.
What the suit asked for Some other action Read by a model
directing USCIS to reopen her I-130 petition and I-485 application and to adjudicate them on the merits.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
plaintiff's requests for declaratory judgment, mandamus relief, and injunctive relief are granted in part and denied in part
Motion decided Fees under EAJA; Preliminary injunction or TRO Read by a model
plaintiff's requests for declaratory judgment, mandamus relief, and injunctive relief are granted in part and denied in part, and her request for costs and attorney's fees is denied without prejudice
Whose motion The plaintiff's motion Read by a model
plaintiff's requests for declaratory judgment, mandamus relief, and injunctive relief are granted in part and denied in part
Disposition Granted in part The principal motion was granted in part and denied in part. Read by a model
plaintiff's requests for declaratory judgment, mandamus relief, and injunctive relief are granted in part and denied in part
Prevailing party Each side in part Read by a model
plaintiff's requests for declaratory judgment, mandamus relief, and injunctive relief are granted in part and denied in part
The other claims Relief ordered Read by a model
plaintiff's requests for declaratory judgment, mandamus relief, and injunctive relief are granted in part and denied in part
Months pending 38.9 months from the application to the suit; 36.4 months from the application to the agency's action Read by a model
By notice dated February 4, 2009, and by decision dated February 6, 2009 (the "Decision"), USCIS denied the I-130 petition without addressing whether the marriage was bona fide.
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
the INA's jurisdictional bar, 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii), which precludes judicial review of most discretionary immigration decisions, does not apply in this case.
I-130 category Immediate relative Read by a model
Thus, because plaintiff is still a spouse, her eligibility to qualify as an immediate relative is unaffected by her husband's death.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:09-cv-01663
Filed
April 22, 2009
Ended
June 30, 2009
Suit's filing to its end
69 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.

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 14, 2026. Check the current status before relying on one.