Opinion
22-CV-06556 (VEC)(SN)
06-20-2023
LIANQUN LI, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES, Defendant.
REPORT & RECOMMENDATION
SARAH NETBURN, United States Magistrate Judge
TO THE HONORABLE VALERIE E. CAPRONI:
Pro se plaintiff Lianqun Li (“Li”) brings this mandamus action against defendant United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) to adjudicate her Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status (“Form I-485”). USCIS has moved to dismiss the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under Rule 12(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. USCIS's motion should be granted.
Subsequent references to “Rules” are to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
BACKGROUND
Li is a citizen of China. She filed her Form I-485 with USCIS on July 8, 2021. On August 2, 2022, Li brought this mandamus action against USCIS for a determination on her Form I-485. USCIS approved Li's Form I-485 on January 4, 2023, and issued a Notice of Approval on January 5, 2023.
USCIS now moves to dismiss this action under Rule 12(b)(1) for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. It argues that the case should be dismissed as moot because no case or controversy remains in this action after USCIS decided Li's application. Li has not opposed the motion.
DISCUSSION
I. The Action Is Moot
An action is moot when it no longer involves any “‘live'” issue or when “‘the parties lack a legally cognizable interest'” in its outcome. Hassoun v. Searls, 976 F.3d 121, 130 (2d Cir. 2020) (quoting Powell v. McCormack, 395 U.S. 486, 496 (1969)). Parties lack a legally cognizable interest in the outcome of an action when they have received all the relief sought. See Ruesch v. Comm'r, 25 F.4th 67, 70 (2d Cir. 2022). Here, Li sued USCIS for a decision on her Form I-485. When USCIS approved her Form I-485, Li received the relief she sought, so the case is moot.
II. Dismissal Under Rule 12(b)(1) Is Proper
Rule 12(b)(1) permits a party to move to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Given the “case or controversy” requirement in Article III of the Constitution, the Court has subject matter jurisdiction only when there is an actual dispute between the parties. See Ruesch, 25 F.4th at 70. When an action becomes moot, the Court loses jurisdiction over it. Hassoun, 976 F.3d at 127. To decide whether an action is moot, the Court can consider information extrinsic to the pleadings, such as the Form I-485 approval in this case. See Gualandi v. Adams, 385 F.3d 236, 244 (2d Cir. 2004). Because USCIS's approval of the Form I-485 rendered this action moot, it should be dismissed under Rule 12(b)(1) for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
CONCLUSION
The Court recommends GRANTING the motion to dismiss.
NOTICE OF PROCEDURE FOR FILING OBJECTIONS TO THIS REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
The parties shall have fourteen days from the service of this Report and Recommendation to file written objections under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Rule 72(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. A party may respond to another party's objections within fourteen days after being served with a copy. Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b)(2). These objections shall be filed with the Clerk of the Court, with courtesy copies delivered to the chambers of the Honorable Valerie E. Caproni at the United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, New York, New York 10007, and to any opposing parties. See 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1); Fed.R.Civ.P. 6(a), 6(d), 72(b). Any requests for an extension of time for filing objections must be addressed to Judge Caproni. The failure to file these timely objections will result in a waiver of those objections for purposes of appeal. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed.R.Civ.P. 6(a), 6(d), 72(b); Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985).