"Mandamus" — Latin for "We Command"
I am a federal immigration attorney who compels U.S. government agencies to act. If USCIS has been sitting on your green card, citizenship, or visa application for over a year, a Writ of Mandamus may be the answer.
A Writ of Mandamus is a federal cause of action rooted in the American common law tradition and codified in statutes including 28 U.S.C. § 1361 and 8 U.S.C. § 1447(b). It is, at its core, a federal court order commanding a government official or agency to perform a mandatory, non-discretionary duty they have unlawfully refused or unreasonably delayed performing.
In the immigration context, this means filing a lawsuit in federal district court asking a judge to order USCIS — or the Department of State — to simply do their job: adjudicate the application sitting on their desk. Adjudicating an application is not discretionary. They must do it. The only question is when.
In my experience handling dozens of Mandamus petitions, I have found that filing a federal lawsuit tends to concentrate minds at USCIS very effectively. Many cases resolve within 45 to 90 days of filing — not because the government suddenly found extra resources, but because a pending federal lawsuit creates obligations and deadlines that USCIS cannot ignore.
Courts evaluate whether a delay is "unreasonable" using the six-factor TRAC test, established in Telecommunications Research & Action Center v. FCC, 750 F.2d 70 (D.C. Cir. 1984).
Congress gave the spouse of a U.S. citizen a way to wait in the United States while the I-130 is pending: the K-3 visa, requested with Form I-129F. Since May 2026 USCIS has closed those petitions administratively instead of deciding them, on the ground that the I-130 was, or will be, approved first. The result is a benefit that is almost never granted.
On August 27, 2026 I filed Jimenez v. Mullin in the District of Connecticut. On October 17, 2026 the case was amended into a proposed nationwide class action with a motion for certification under Rule 23(b)(2): one class for petitioners whose K-3 petitions were closed without a decision, one for petitioners whose I-130s have been pending beyond USCIS’s own published median. Three named plaintiffs, all represented pro bono. The government’s response is due December 14, 2026.
If the court certifies the classes, every petitioner who fits a definition is covered without signing anything and without paying anything. The classes are proposed, not yet certified, and nothing on this page is a promise of any outcome.
Each card below links to a dedicated page with the full legal framework, the relevant case law, and the strategic considerations for that case type. Use the navigation menus above for the complete catalog of practice areas. For strategy on where to file, see the district-by-district filing guide, and if you are considering filing without a lawyer, start with the pro se mandamus guide.
Green card applications delayed beyond 14 months due to background check holds are strong candidates for Mandamus relief.
A non-citizen already in the United States may seek to adjust to lawful permanent resident status by filing Form I-485. When background check delays push these applications past 14 months with no movement, I regularly file Mandamus petitions to break the deadlock.
A particularly dangerous wrinkle arises when an immigrant category falls into retrogression after filing.
Once USCIS conducts your naturalization interview, they have exactly 120 days to decide. After that, the federal courts can adjudicate the case directly.
N-400 naturalization applications get stuck for several reasons: extended FBI name checks, USCIS doubts about whether the applicant's underlying green card was properly obtained, or simple agency backlog.
I-130 petition processing times have worsened significantly. Families separated by USCIS inaction now routinely turn to Mandamus.
A U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident files Form I-130 to establish a qualifying family relationship with a non-citizen relative. When an I-130 has been pending over a year with no updates, the delay is very likely unreasonable.
Post-interview "administrative processing" that drags on for months or years is one of the most frustrating and least transparent forms of government delay.
Consular processing cases are the hardest mandamus cases to win. No statute prescribes a timeframe, and in 2026 a growing number of D.D.C. judges hold, following Karimova v. Abate, that a § 221(g) refusal leaves nothing for a court to compel; the judges who disagree have treated delays of two years or more as reasonable under the TRAC factors. I am not accepting new consular mandamus cases at the moment. The consular page keeps the case law current.
N-600K eligibility ends at age 18 — permanently. If USCIS delays adjudication until your child ages out, the opportunity is lost forever.
The N-600K is filed by U.S. citizens residing abroad to naturalize their minor children and grandchildren. The hard deadline is the child's 18th birthday.
The 540-day automatic extension ended on October 30, 2025. EAD delays now directly cause loss of employment.
For renewals filed on or after October 30, 2025, the automatic extension is gone. If USCIS does not adjudicate before the existing EAD expires, the worker loses authorization the next day. Mandamus is now the primary tool to preserve work authorization.
EB-1, EB-2, EB-3 petitions stalled in standard processing or in the RFE-response black hole after premium processing.
An unadjudicated I-140 cascades into loss of H-1B extensions past the cap, AC21 job portability, and dependent H-4 EAD eligibility. I have personally litigated many I-140 mandamus petitions.
K-1 visa delays at USCIS, NVC, or in administrative processing trap couples in limbo across continents.
K-1 petitions touch three agencies — USCIS, NVC, and the Department of State. Delays at any one of them can stretch the case to two or three years. I have personally litigated K-1 mandamus at each stage.
EB-5 investors and conditional residents face some of the longest USCIS processing times in the system — averaging four to five years per stage.
Mandamus is increasingly the only realistic tool to compel adjudication on EB-5 petitions and I-829 removal of conditions filings, particularly where the investor has fully complied with all program requirements.
A U.S. citizen with a long-pending spousal I-130 may file Form I-129F for a K-3 visa and then sue at once over USCIS’s practice of closing the petition instead of deciding it — the practice challenged in the proposed class action Jimenez v. Mullin.
The complaint pairs the K-3 closure claim with the delay claim on the I-130 itself, so one federal action presses both petitions. Whether the route fits depends on where the couple lives, how long the I-130 has been pending, and whether the beneficiary is abroad. It is within my current intake for residents of the districts listed on the inquiry page.
Use the menus above for additional practice areas: VAWA, Asylum, SIJS, I-730, I-751, I-601A, I-131, DV Lottery, PERM, EOIR Mandamus, and more.
Unlike the vast majority of Mandamus attorneys, I operate a streamlined process that allows me to file most petitions within 10 calendar days of being retained. Here is what to expect:
I study your case in detail. Every Mandamus petition, while sharing a common legal framework, must be tailored to the specific facts of your application and the specific agency conduct at issue. I draft a compelling petition that puts the government on notice.
The petition is filed with the appropriate federal district court through PACER. The clerk reviews it for completeness, then issues Summons to the named government defendants — typically USCIS and its officers in their official capacities.
Service of process on government agencies is accomplished by certified mail. This step is technically straightforward but procedurally important — improper service can delay the case.
The government technically has 60 days to respond. In practice, USCIS often reaches out within 45 days to propose a consent order, or simply resumes processing the application within weeks of being served. The lawsuit does the work. My flat fee covers the entire process — I will not charge additional fees even if the government decides to litigate.
Cases involving charges of misrepresentation, criminal records, or other complicating factors are evaluated individually. I am proud to be among the very few attorneys who offer a genuine flat fee for Mandamus litigation.
In August 2017, I tried a federal criminal case to verdict — obtaining an unprecedented "not guilty" jury verdict on all felony counts in the first known click-fraud criminal trial in the United States. My client, Fabio Gasperini, faced up to 70 years in prison if convicted as charged on a complex cybercrime indictment.
This was not an immigration case. But it demonstrates something important: I do not get intimidated litigating against the U.S. government, and I perform under extreme pressure. The same relentlessness I brought to that trial is what I bring to every Mandamus petition.
For my full attorney profile — including corporate immigration, federal criminal defense, trademark litigation, and international probate — visit my main website.
bertollini.com →I take a defined set of federal delay cases, in a defined set of districts. The inquiry form checks those criteria first and then takes the facts that matter: the form, the filing date, and anything unusual about the case. Every inquiry comes to me, not to a call center.
Current intake: N-400, I-485, I-130 (including the I-129F/K-3 route), and I-129 or I-140 petitions where the petitioner is the plaintiff · New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Colorado, the District of Columbia, Florida (Middle and Southern Districts), Texas (Southern and Northern Districts).
Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. This website is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Submitting an inquiry does not create an attorney-client relationship.