Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Columbia

Orlov v. Howard

District of ColumbiaJohn D. BatesDecided December 10, 2007

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 is actively processing plaintiffs application and has the discretion to complete all appropriate investigations before making a discretionary determination of whether to grant or deny relief to plaintiff.
Form or filing I-485 (adjustment of status) Read by a model
Plaintiff asks this Court to compel defendants to adjudicate without further delay his pending Form 1-485 application for an adjustment of immigration status to become a lawful permanent resident.
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
Plaintiff asks this Court to compel defendants to adjudicate without further delay his pending Form 1-485 application for an adjustment of immigration status to become a lawful permanent resident.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
Accordingly, defendants' motion to dismiss will be granted.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction Read by a model
Currently before the Court is defendants' motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Currently before the Court is defendants' motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
Accordingly, defendants' motion to dismiss will be granted.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
Accordingly, defendants' motion to dismiss will be granted.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
This Court lacks jurisdiction to review the ongoing pace at which plaintiffs application is being adjudicated.
Months pending 53.3 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
in 2003, plaintiffs wife filed with the Washington Field Office of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services ("USCIS") a Petition for an Alien Relative (Form I-130) along with plaintiff's Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status (Form 485).
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
The government's delay arguments Line-jumping accepted Read by a model
more litigious applicants are more likely to be moved to the top of the proverbial pile over other applicants that have waited even longer.
Threshold rulings Section 1252(a)(2)(B) bar applied Read by a model
This Court concludes, therefore, that, judicial review of plaintiffs claim of delay in the adjustment process is precluded by § 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii).
Nationality Russia Read by a model
Plaintiff Alexei G. Orlov, a citizen of the Russian Federation

How the case ended

This decision is not linked to a docket in the docket record yet, so how the case ended is not shown.

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.