Mandamus decisions / Eastern District of Kentucky
Hosseini v. Napolitano
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
Here, there is no question that USCIS has a nondiscretion-ary duty to act upon a properly-filed 1-485 application. |
|---|---|
| Form or filing |
I-485 (adjustment of status)
Read by a model
the Form 1-485 Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status |
| What the suit asked for |
Decide the application
Read by a model
seeks mandamus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 1361 to compel USCIS to decide his application. |
| Kind of order |
A ruling on a motion or the petition
Read by a model
Hosseini’s Motion for Summary Judgment [R. 21] is GRANTED. |
| Motion decided |
Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction; Summary judgment
Read by a model
The Court will therefore deny the defendants’ motion to dismiss and for summary judgment, and will grant the plaintiffs motion for summary judgment. |
| Whose motion |
Cross-motions
Read by a model
The Court will therefore deny the defendants’ motion to dismiss and for summary judgment, and will grant the plaintiffs motion for summary judgment. |
| Disposition |
Granted in the applicant's favor
The principal motion was granted in full: summary judgment for either side, an injunction or TRO, a writ or order to act, fees. A motion to dismiss granted in full counts as Dismissed; a transfer is listed apart.
Read by a model
Hosseini’s Motion for Summary Judgment [R. 21] is GRANTED. |
| Prevailing party |
Applicant
Read by a model
The defendants are ORDERED to adjudicate Hosseini’s 1-485 application forthwith, but in no event more than sixty (60) days after the entry of this Order. |
| The delay claim |
Relief ordered
Read by a model
The defendants are ORDERED to adjudicate Hosseini’s 1-485 application forthwith, but in no event more than sixty (60) days after the entry of this Order. |
| Months pending |
143.2 months from the application to the suit; 155.5 months from the application to the court's decision
Read by a model
On April 19, 2001, Hosseini filed an 1-485 application seeking adjustment of his status to that of a lawful permanent resident. |
| TRAC factors |
The court weighed the TRAC factors
The Court has little difficulty concluding that these factors strongly support a determination that USCIS’s 12-year delay in deciding Hosseini’s 1-485 application is manifestly unreasonable. |
| Threshold rulings |
Section 1252(a)(2)(B) bar rejected
Read by a model
the divestment of jurisdiction contained in § 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii) does not apply to bar a challenge like Hosseini’s to USCIS’s failure to decide his 1-485 application for over 12 years. |
| Nationality |
Iran
Read by a model
the defendants indicate that Hosseini is a native and citizen of Iran. |
How the case ended
- Docket
- No. 5:13-cv-00082
- Filed
- March 26, 2013
- Ended
- April 3, 2014
- Suit's filing to its end
- 373 days
- How it ended
- Judgment for the plaintiff
- From the record
- idb disp 6 (judgment: motion before trial), judgment for plaintiff
A voluntary or stipulated dismissal is how most suits end once the agency acts; the docket rarely says why.
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 3, 2026. Check the current status before relying on one.
-
Kucana v. Holder, 558 U.S. 233
Supreme Court, January 20, 2010. Section 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii) bars review only of decisions whose discretionary character is specified by statute, not discretion the agency gives itself by regulation.
ImmCite: treatment available, history exists, not clearance
-
Patel v. Garland, 596 U.S. 328
Supreme Court, May 16, 2022. Section 1252(a)(2)(B)(i) bars review of any judgment regarding the granting of the listed forms of relief, including the factual findings on which a denial of adjustment rests.
ImmCite: treatment available, history exists, not clearance
-
Bouarfa v. Mayorkas, 604 U.S. 6
Supreme Court, December 10, 2024. Revoking an approved visa petition under § 1155 is a discretionary decision or action that § 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii) places beyond judicial review.
ImmCite: treatment available, history exists, not clearance
-
Norton v. Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, 542 U.S. 55
Supreme Court, June 14, 2004. Section 706(1) and mandamus reach only a discrete agency action that the agency is legally required to take, so a court cannot compel programmatic improvements or action the law leaves to agency discretion.
ImmCite: treatment available, history exists, not clearance
-
Barrios Garcia v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security, 25 F.4th 430
Sixth Circuit, February 10, 2022. Courts may review and compel unreasonably delayed U-visa waitlist placement and bona fide determinations under TRAC, though not discretionary pre-waitlist work authorization, disagreeing in part with the Fourth Circuit's Gonzalez.
ImmCite: unchecked, treatment not confirmed yet, not evidence either way. No verified adverse treatment has been found so far. All 2 precedential decisions citing this case have been reviewed as of 2026-10-29.