Passim

Mandamus decisions / Northern District of Texas

Mysaev v. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services

Northern District of TexasJane J BoyleDecided July 18, 2022No. 3:22-cv-00371

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
Seventeen months later, on February 15, 2022, Mysaev brought this suit seeking to compel USCIS to adjudicate his I-485 application.
Form or filing I-485 (adjustment of status) Read by a model
Mysaev was granted asylum on December 6, 2019, and filed an I-485 Application for Adjustment of Status on September 10, 2020.
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
Seventeen months later, on February 15, 2022, Mysaev brought this suit seeking to compel USCIS to adjudicate his I-485 application.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
DISMISSES WITHOUT PREJUDICE Claim One, and DISMISSES WITH PREJUDICE Claim Two.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction; Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim Read by a model
On April 25, 2022, USCIS filed the instant motion to dismiss Claim One under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and Claim Two under Rule 12(b)(6).
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
On April 25, 2022, USCIS filed the instant motion to dismiss Claim One under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and Claim Two under Rule 12(b)(6).
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
Ac cordingly, t he C ourt DISMISSES WITHOUT PREJUDICE Claim One, and DISMISSES WITH PREJUDICE Claim Two.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
Ac cordingly, t he C ourt DISMISSES WITHOUT PREJUDICE Claim One, and DISMISSES WITH PREJUDICE Claim Two.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
DISMISSES WITHOUT PREJUDICE Claim One, and DISMISSES WITH PREJUDICE Claim Two.
The other claims Dismissed Read by a model
Mysaev has thus failed to state a valid Due Process claim, and Claim Two must be dismissed.
Months pending 17.2 months from the application to the suit; 22.2 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
Mysaev was granted asylum on December 6, 2019, and filed an I-485 Application for Adjustment of Status on September 10, 2020.
TRAC factors The court weighed the TRAC factors
  • 1. Rule of reasonfavors the government
  • 2. Congressional timetablefavors the government
  • 3. Human health and welfarefavors the government
  • 4. Competing prioritiesfavors the government
  • 5. Interests prejudicedfavors the government
  • 6. No impropriety needednot reached
Read by a model
Thus, the Court finds that, under these facts, USCIS’s FIFO process supports a reasonable pace of adjudication
The government's delay arguments First-in, first-out processing accepted; Line-jumping accepted Read by a model
Thus, the Court finds that, under these facts, USCIS’s FIFO process supports a reasonable pace of adjudication
Threshold rulings Section 1252(a)(2)(B) bar rejected Read by a model
Unlike Claim One, the C ourt has subject-mat ter jurisdiction over Claim Two because it involves a question arising under the United States Constitution.
Nationality Kyrgyzstan Read by a model
is a citizen of Kyrgyzstan

How the case ended

Docket
No. 3:22-cv-00371
Filed
February 15, 2022
Ended
July 18, 2022
Suit's filing to its end
153 days
How it ended
Dismissed on jurisdiction or the merits
From the record
idb disp 6 (judgment: motion before trial), judgment for defendant

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 Fifth 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.