Summary
This United States District Court order grants the defendants' motion to dismiss the plaintiffs' complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The plaintiffs sought a writ of mandamus and relief under the Administrative Procedure Act to compel the USCIS to adjudicate their pending family-based immigration petitions. The court found that neither the mandamus statute nor the APA provides jurisdiction because the pace of agency processing is committed to agency discretion rather than being a ministerial duty. Consequently, both counts of the complaint were dismissed without prejudice.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether plaintiffs' claim for mandamus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 1361 should be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
- Whether the court had subject matter jurisdiction under the Administrative Procedure Act and 28 U.S.C. § 1331 to compel USCIS to adjudicate the Form I-130 petitions within a reasonable time.
- Whether the court needed to address defendants' alternative Rule 12(b)(6) challenge to the APA count.
Holdings
- Count I must be dismissed without prejudice because plaintiffs could not establish a clear duty requiring USCIS to adjudicate their Form I-130 petitions within a particular time, and plaintiffs conceded that mandamus relief was unavailable.
- The court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over Count II because plaintiffs did not allege that the pace of USCIS's processing of their Form I-130 petitions was a ministerial or nondiscretionary action that could be compelled under APA § 706(1).
- The court did not reach defendants' alternative argument that Count II failed to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6).
Key quotations
“Because Plaintiffs have failed to allege that the processing of their Form I-130s “is a non-discretionary act actionable under the APA,” the APA “cannot serve to vest this Court with jurisdiction[.]”” (Section III.B)
“Plaintiffs’ Complaint for Writ of Mandamus and Declaratory Judgment (Doc. 1) is dismissed without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.” (Section IV)
Factual background
Rasem Abdouch and Joe Abdouch, both United States citizens, filed separate Form I-130 petitions for the benefit of Yara Abdouch, who resides in Syria. The petitions had allegedly remained pending before USCIS for approximately six years and eleven months and six years and five months, respectively, when the complaint was filed. Plaintiffs sought to compel USCIS officials to adjudicate the petitions through mandamus and the Administrative Procedure Act.
Procedural history
Plaintiffs filed an action seeking an order compelling USCIS officials to adjudicate two Form I-130 petitions allegedly pending for several years. Defendants moved to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and alternatively sought dismissal of the APA count under Rule 12(b)(6). The court granted the motion and dismissed the entire complaint without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, declining to reach the Rule 12(b)(6) argument.