Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Colorado

Borski v. Lynch et al

District of ColoradoRaymond P. MooreDecided March 27, 2017No. 1:16-cv-00924

Read the decisionOriginal on GovInfo

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
compel the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (“CIS”) to explain why it had not made a determination on plaintiff’s application for naturalization, compel CIS to render such a determination
Form or filing N-400 (naturalization) Read by a model
On July 21, 2014, plaintiff submitted an application for naturalization.
What the suit asked for Naturalization hearing or remand (1447(b)) Read by a model
As to ordering CIS to render a decision on plaintiff’s application for naturalization, § 1429 clearly prohibits the Court from ordering this relief.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For the reasons discussed herein, the Court GRANTS the motion to dismiss (ECF No. 15)
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction; Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim; Preliminary injunction or TRO Read by a model
motion for a preliminary injunction (ECF No. 9), which seeks to enjoin defendants from investigating the validity of plaintiff’s former marriage, is DENIED.14 IV. Conclusion For the reasons discussed herein, the Court GRANTS the motion to dismiss (ECF No. 15)
Whose motion Cross-motions Read by a model
One day later, defendants filed a motion to dismiss the mandamus petition (“the motion to dismiss”), pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(1) (“Rule 12(b)(1)”) and Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) (“Rule 12(b)(6)”).
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
the Court finds that plaintiff’s claims relying upon § 1447(b) are constitutionally moot, and thus, those claims are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for lack of jurisdiction.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
the Court finds that plaintiff’s claims relying upon § 1447(b) are constitutionally moot, and thus, those claims are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for lack of jurisdiction.
The delay claim Moot: the agency acted Read by a model
the Court finds that plaintiff’s claims relying upon § 1447(b) are constitutionally moot, and thus, those claims are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for lack of jurisdiction.
The other claims Dismissed Read by a model
Plaintiff’s equitable estoppel claim is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for failure to state a claim.
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. A section 1447(b) suit: these months run from the naturalization application. The statute's 120 days run from the interview, which they do not measure. Read by a model
On July 21, 2014, plaintiff submitted an application for naturalization.
Months since the naturalization interview 24.1 months from the interview (2015-03-23) Read by a model
On March 23, 2015, plaintiff was ordered to appear for an examination at the Denver Field Office.
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings Held moot Read by a model
Accordingly, the Court finds plaintiff’s § 1447(b) claims to be constitutionally moot.
Nationality Czech Republic Read by a model
Plaintiff is a citizen and national of the Czech Republic.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:16-cv-00924
Filed
April 25, 2016
Ended
March 28, 2017
Suit's filing to its end
337 days
How it ended
Ended once the agency acted
From the record
idb disp 3 (dismissed: lack of jurisdiction)

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 Tenth 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.