G. Michael Harvey
Written decisions in the mandamus and agency-delay group that Judge G. Michael Harvey signed, every one listed below, and the agency-delay suits that name the judge.
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.
Read these counts as a record of past decisions, not a rate at which this judge rules for either side and not a prediction. Each decision turned on its own facts, its posture and what the parties asked for; the suits that reach a written decision are the contested minority. Read the decisions before drawing anything from them.
How the decisions came out
This page counts 11 of the group's written decisions, from 10 cases; the newest of them was decided August 12, 2026. The line at the top counts the whole group.
11written decisions
10cases they come from
1decisions weigh the TRAC factors
–median months from the application to the suit
Each case counts once in these outcome counts, by its latest decision here: the 1 other order in those cases is listed with their case, not counted again. A motion to dismiss denied and a later judgment for the government count as the judgment. How decisions are grouped into cases.
Months from the application to the suit
Fewer than five cases state it (1); no distribution is shown.
Months from the application to the court's decision
39.4 months at the median; half fall between 30.8 and 63.8. 9 decisions state it.
What the suits asked for, by case
- Finish 221(g) processing9
- Some other action1
Agency, by case
- Department of State10
Decisions by year
TRAC rulings
Decisions in which the judge weighed the TRAC factors, newest first, with how the judge found each factor. Factors the decision did not reach are left blank.
| Decision | Decided | 1. Rule of reason | 2. Congressional timetable | 3. Human health and welfare | 4. Competing priorities | 5. Interests prejudiced | 6. No impropriety needed | Disposition |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Shoaie v. Blinken | November 6, 2024 | favors the government | favors the applicant | favors the government | favors the applicant | Dismissed in part; some claims go on |
Every decision, by case
All 11 of the judge's decisions in the group, in 10 cases, newest first. Each case's latest decision comes first and is the one the counts above count; the case's other orders follow it. Download every decision as a spreadsheet (CSV).
| Decision | Decided | Agency | Form | Disposition | Prevailing party |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROUHIGILAVAN v. BLINKEN | August 12, 2026 | Department of State | 221(g), DS-160 | Dismissed | Government |
| ZELENSKAIA v. RUBIO | June 3, 2026 | Department of State | 221(g), DS-160 | Dismissed | Government |
| SHOAIE v. BLINKEN and 1 other order in this case, below | April 28, 2026 | Department of State | 221(g), DS-260 | Dismissed | Government |
| Other order in this case Shoaie v. Blinken | November 6, 2024 | Department of State | 221(g), DS-260 | Dismissed in part; some claims go on | Each side in part |
| ALNADDAF v. RUBIO | February 27, 2026 | Department of State | 221(g), DS-260 | Dismissed | Government |
| Moradi v. Blinken | July 7, 2025 | Department of State | 221(g), DS-160 | Dismissed | Government |
| Dehshiri v. Blinken | July 7, 2025 | Department of State | 221(g), DS-160 | Dismissed | Government |
| Forouzandeh v. Blinken | July 7, 2025 | Department of State | 221(g), DS-260 | Dismissed | Government |
| Naseri v. Blinken | July 7, 2025 | Department of State | 221(g), DS-260 | Dismissed | Government |
| ULIANOV v. BLINKEN | July 7, 2025 | Department of State | 221(g), DS-160 | Dismissed | Government |
| ESMAEILZADEH v. BLINKEN | July 7, 2025 | Department of State | 221(g), DS-260 | Dismissed | Government |
How agency-delay suits ended
Most suits end without a written decision: the agency acts and the parties dismiss. These counts come from the docket record (the federal courts' Integrated Database and CourtListener) and count every mandamus, APA and section 1447(b) suit against any immigration agency, whatever year it was filed, among the dockets that name this judge. Check a delay counts fewer: a court's suits of the last three years against the form's agency.
15suits in the docket record
14have ended
1still pending
227.5median days from the suit's filing to its end
How the ended suits ended
- Dismissed on jurisdiction or the meritsDismissed for want of jurisdiction or on the TRAC factors, or judgment for the government.8
- Ended once the agency actedThe plaintiff dismissed, the parties stipulated to dismissal, or the court dismissed as moot: how suits end once the agency decides. The docket rarely says why, or whether the agency approved or denied.4
- TransferredMoved to another district court.1
- Ended, outcome not recordedThe record shows the suit ended but not how.1
Days from the suit's filing to its end
227.5 days at the median; half fall between 165 and 337.5. 14 dockets state it.
Days from the suit's filing to its end, when it ended once the agency acted
Fewer than five dockets state it (4); no distribution is shown.
10 of these suits have a written decision in the group.