Case StudyMandamusMandamus Brings Movement to a Long-Pending I-130 and I-485: Second Interview Leads to Approval

The Case

The applicants were pursuing family-based immigration through a Form I-130 petition and Form I-485 applications.

The I-130 petition was filed on behalf of the family member, while the applicants pursued adjustment of status through their pending Form I-485 applications.

The applicants completed the required steps in the adjustment-of-status process, including an initial USCIS interview.

Despite completing these steps, the immigration cases remained pending without a final decision.

The Prolonged Delay

The applications remained pending for approximately 19 months.

During that period, the applicants continued waiting for USCIS to complete adjudication of their cases.

Efforts were also made to obtain information about the pending applications. A congressional inquiry was submitted, but the cases continued to remain unresolved.

The applicants therefore faced prolonged uncertainty without a clear indication of when USCIS would issue a final decision.

The Mandamus Lawsuit

After reviewing the history of the pending cases, federal mandamus litigation was evaluated as a potential way to seek action from USCIS.

A mandamus lawsuit does not ask a federal court to decide that an applicant must receive an immigration benefit. Instead, the lawsuit seeks action from the government agency responsible for adjudicating the application.

In an I-130 or I-485 delay case, the requested relief generally concerns the government’s failure to take action within a reasonable period.

The lawsuit therefore sought to move the long-pending cases toward an actual adjudicative decision.

Relief Law filed the federal mandamus lawsuit after the cases had remained pending for approximately 19 months.

USCIS Scheduled a Second Interview

Following the filing of the mandamus lawsuit, USCIS took additional action on the pending cases.

Rather than remaining pending without further action, USCIS scheduled the applicants for a second adjustment-of-status interview.

This was an important development. The applicants had already completed an initial interview, yet USCIS determined that another interview was appropriate before completing adjudication.

From the applicants’ perspective, the significance was that the cases were no longer simply sitting without a final decision. USCIS was actively taking another step toward adjudication.

The applicants appeared for the second interview and completed the additional USCIS review.

A second interview does not necessarily mean that an application is in trouble. USCIS may determine that an additional interview is necessary before completing adjudication.

In this case, the second interview became an important step toward the final resolution of the pending cases.

The I-130 and I-485 Cases Were Approved

Following the additional USCIS action, the applicants’ immigration cases were successfully resolved.

USCIS approved the Form I-130 petition and the pending Form I-485 applications.

The result brought the prolonged immigration process to a successful conclusion.

The case progressed through several important stages:

What This Case Shows About Mandamus

This case demonstrates one of the potential benefits of mandamus litigation in a delayed immigration matter: bringing movement to a case that has remained pending for an extended period.

Before the lawsuit, the applications had remained pending for approximately 19 months despite efforts to obtain a resolution.

After the lawsuit was filed, USCIS took additional action by scheduling a second interview. The cases then proceeded toward final resolution.

The important point is that mandamus litigation does not necessarily produce an immediate approval. The government may first take another step in the adjudication process.

Here, that additional step was a second interview, followed by approval of the I-130 and I-485 cases.

The case therefore illustrates the distinction between seeking approval and seeking action.

Mandamus generally focuses on obtaining the latter, while the ultimate immigration decision remains with USCIS.

A Second Interview Can Be a Positive Development

Applicants may understandably become concerned when USCIS schedules another interview after a long period of waiting.

However, an additional interview does not automatically indicate that the application will be denied.

USCIS may determine that another interview is necessary to complete the adjudication or obtain additional information before reaching a final decision.

For these applicants, the second interview represented meaningful movement after a prolonged period of inactivity.

The interview was followed by approval of the pending immigration cases.

Mandamus Does Not Guarantee a Particular Outcome

Every delayed immigration case is different.

A mandamus lawsuit does not guarantee approval of an I-130, I-485, or any other immigration application.

After litigation begins, USCIS may approve the application, request additional evidence, schedule an interview, conduct additional background or security review, issue a notice of intent to deny, deny the application, or take another action necessary to complete adjudication.

The appropriate approach depends on the facts and procedural history of the individual case.