Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Columbia

IVANOV v. TRUMP

District of ColumbiaRichard J. LeonDecided August 25, 2026No. 1:26-cv-00915

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
USCIS must resume ordinary adjudication of covered named plaintiffs' pending adjustment applications without applying the USCIS Pause.
Form or filing 221(g) (consular refusal); DS-260 (immigrant visa); I-485 (adjustment of status) Read by a model
Selectees who reside in the United States as nonimmigrants, or individuals lawfully admitted to the United States on a temporary basis, submit a Form I-485, which is reviewed by USCIS.
What the suit asked for Some other action Read by a model
Lifting the Pauses would not guarantee the issuance of visas for plaintiffs, but it would restore the opportunity for timely adjudication.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
plaintiffs' motions for summary judgment will be GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART, and the Government's cross-motions will be GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction; Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim; Summary judgment Read by a model
The Ivanov, Chersak, and Saito plaintiffs have moved for summary judgment, while the Government has cross-moved for summary judgment and moved to dismiss under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(l) and 12(b)(6).
Whose motion Cross-motions Read by a model
plaintiffs' motions for summary judgment will be GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART, and the Government's cross-motions will be GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.
Disposition Dismissed in part; some claims go on The government's motion to dismiss was granted in part: some claims were dismissed and others go on. Read by a model
The Government, on the other hand, is entitled to summary judgment on plaintiffs' claims for unlawful withholding, unreasonable delay, and mandamus relief, as well as the Ivanov plaintiffs' constitutional claims.
Prevailing party Each side in part Read by a model
The Government, on the other hand, is entitled to summary judgment on plaintiffs' claims for unlawful withholding, unreasonable delay, and mandamus relief, as well as the Ivanov plaintiffs' constitutional claims.
The delay claim Relief denied Read by a model
The Government, on the other hand, is entitled to summary judgment on plaintiffs' claims for unlawful withholding, unreasonable delay, and mandamus relief, as well as the Ivanov plaintiffs' constitutional claims.
The other claims Some dismissed, some go on Read by a model
plaintiffs' motions for summary judgment are GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART, and defendants' cross motions for summary judgment and motions to dismiss are GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.
Months pending Not stated Read by a model
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
The government's delay arguments Visa availability rejected Read by a model
Plaintiffs' alleged injuries do not depend on whether their case numbers are "current" at any given moment; rather, their injuries arise from the agencies' categorical refusal to issue any DV visas during the Pauses
Threshold rulings None Read by a model

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:26-cv-00915
Filed
March 15, 2026
Ended
April 20, 2026
Suit's filing to its end
36 days
How it ended
Transferred
From the record
transfer order 2026-04-20

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 D.C. 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.