Current stage: Motion Pending
The plaintiff filed a complaint challenging the USCIS pause policy and a summons was issued; the government moved to dismiss. On March 31, 2026 the court issued an opinion and order granting the motion in part—dismissing the plaintiff’s mandamus claim—but denying it as to the Administrative Procedure Act claim for unreasonable delay, which remains pending; the court has also set a Rule 16 scheduling conference by telephone.
Deadlines, hearings, and court-ordered dates from this docket
No key dates have been extracted from this case's docket yet.
Extracted from court filings. Check linked sources for official deadlines.
March 31, 2026
Key EventOn 2026-03-31 the court issued an order resolving the defendants' motion to dismiss (ECF No. 8), granting it in part and denying it in part. The complaint is dismissed only to the extent it seeks mandamus relief, and the plaintiff's Administrative Procedure Act claim remains pending.
March 31, 2026
Key EventThe court issued an opinion resolving the defendants' motion to dismiss: it found that it has subject-matter jurisdiction and that the plaintiff plausibly stated an APA claim for unreasonable delay, but it dismissed the plaintiff's request for mandamus relief as foreclosed because APA relief is available. The opinion states that a separate order will be entered consistent with the opinion.
March 16, 2026
The docket reflects that a court order was entered on 2026-03-16; the entry provides no information about the order's content or its procedural effect.
February 27, 2026
The docket entry appears to be an order rescheduling the Rule 16 scheduling conference, entered on 2026-02-27. The entry does not state the new date, time, or other details of the rescheduled conference.
February 19, 2026
Key EventThe docket entry appears to be a court order setting a Rule 16 scheduling conference to be conducted by telephone. The entry does not state the date, time, or any other details of the conference.
February 5, 2026
The docket entry labeled "Dismiss/Lack of Jurisdiction" appears to indicate a dismissal based on lack of jurisdiction. The entry is brief and does not make clear who filed it, whether the court entered an order, or whether the case is concluded.
December 26, 2025
The docket entry indicates a document titled "Stipulation and Order" was filed or docketed on 2025-12-26. The entry does not state the stipulation's contents or whether the court has approved or entered any order, so the exact procedural effect is unclear.
December 24, 2025
On 2025-12-24 a single document titled "Stipulation and Order (Proposed-one document)" was filed or submitted to the court. The entry does not state the stipulation's contents or whether the court has approved or entered the proposed order.
October 27, 2025
A docket entry labeled "Notice Regarding Assignment of Case" was filed or entered on 2025-10-27. The entry title alone does not state any substantive action, details, or future deadlines.
October 27, 2025
The docket entry indicates a summons was issued directing service on the United States. The entry does not state whether service was completed or any response deadline was set.
October 25, 2025
The docket entry indicates a proposed summons was submitted to the court and is labeled "to be issued." The exact procedural effect and whether the summons has actually been issued is unclear from the entry text.
October 25, 2025
The docket entry indicates a complaint was filed or docketed on 2025-10-25.