Passim

Mandamus decisions / Northern District of Illinois

Taylor v. Rodriguez et al

Northern District of IllinoisDecided April 12, 2017No. 1:16-cv-10754

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
Plaintiff alleges that although he is eligible to receive a U-visa, USCIS has not granted him a U-visa due solely to the fiscal year limit.
Form or filing I-918 (U visa) Read by a model
He applied for a U-visa
What the suit asked for Some other action Read by a model
requests the Court to compel the USCIS to issue 80,000 U- visas, including Plaintiff’s, nunc pro tunc.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, the Court grants Defendants’ motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint with prejudice.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction; Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim Read by a model
For purposes of a motion to dismiss under either Rule 12(b)(1) or Rule 12(b)(6), the Court accepts all well-pleaded factual allegations as true and construes all reasonable inferences in the plaintiff’s favor.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Defendants have moved to dismiss Plaintiff’s complaint
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, the Court grants Defendants’ motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint with prejudice.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, the Court grants Defendants’ motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint with prejudice.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, the Court grants Defendants’ motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint with prejudice.
Months pending 12 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
the delay here was one year, not seven years
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
The government's delay arguments First-in, first-out processing accepted; Visa availability accepted Read by a model
(2) U-visa applicants on the waiting list are processed according to the date their petitions are filed;
Threshold rulings None Read by a model
U visa claims Final decision: dismissed Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, the Court grants Defendants’ motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint with prejudice.
Nationality Ireland Read by a model
Plaintiff, Thomas Taylor, a native and citizen of Ireland

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:16-cv-10754
Filed
November 21, 2016
Ended
April 12, 2017
Suit's filing to its end
142 days
How it ended
Dismissed on jurisdiction or the merits
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.

Supreme Court and Seventh 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.