Passim

Mandamus decisions / Northern District of Illinois

Patel v. Noem

Northern District of IllinoisRobert William GettlemanDecided July 22, 2026No. 1:25-cv-11018

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
Plaintiffs seek to compel defendants to act on their petitions for U nonimmigrant status and applications for work authorization (Form I-765) filed by plaintiffs with USCIS on or about May 13, 2024.
Form or filing I-765 (EAD); I-918 (U visa) Read by a model
Plaintiffs seek to compel defendants to act on their petitions for U nonimmigrant status and applications for work authorization (Form I-765) filed by plaintiffs with USCIS on or about May 13, 2024.
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
Plaintiffs seek to compel defendants to act on their petitions for U nonimmigrant status and applications for work authorization (Form I-765) filed by plaintiffs with USCIS on or about May 13, 2024.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For the above reasons, defendants’ motion to dismiss [7] is 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 Read by a model
Defendants move to dismiss the complaint under Fed. R Civ. P 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6).
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Defendants move to dismiss the complaint under Fed R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) and (6).
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
Defendants’ motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ APA claims is denied.
Prevailing party Each side in part Read by a model
Defendants’ motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ APA claims is denied.
The delay claim The delay claim goes on Read by a model
Defendants’ motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ APA claims is denied.
Months pending 26.3 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
Plaintiffs seek to compel defendants to act on their petitions for U nonimmigrant status and applications for work authorization (Form I-765) filed by plaintiffs with USCIS on or about May 13, 2024.
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings Section 1252(a)(2)(B) bar applied; Section 1252(a)(2)(B) bar rejected; APA adequate-remedy bar applied (mandamus claim fails) Read by a model
The court agrees with the government that §1252(a)(2)(B)(ii) precludes this court, or any court, from reviewing the decision to grant work authorization to plaintiffs.
U visa claims Final decision: goes on; Bona fide determination: goes on; Work permit: dismissed under 1252(a)(2)(b); Waiting list: goes on Read by a model
Defendants’ motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ APA claims is denied.
Nationality India Read by a model
Vipulkumar Patel is a native and citizen of India, as are his wife, Sunitaben, and daughter, Arohi.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:25-cv-11018
Filed
September 12, 2025
Status
Pending as of the last docket check

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 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 3, 2026. Check the current status before relying on one.