Venkata et al v. Edlow

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
DALLAS DIVISION
PRADEEP REDDY GALI
VENKATA and HARITHA
PALLILA.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
JOSEPH EDLOW,
Defendant.
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
Civil Action No. 3:26-CV-0542-X
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
In this immigration case, the plaintiffs ask the Court to compel the defendant
to adjudicate each plaintiffs’ pending I-485 application to Register Permanent
Residence or Adjust Status. The plaintiffs contend that the defendant has failed to
adjudicate their I-485 applications within a reasonable time and request this Court’s
intervention under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).1 But, as explained
below, the plaintiffs have failed to demonstrate why this Court has subject-matter
jurisdiction over their claims. The Court accordingly DISMISSES WITHOUT
PREJUDICE this case and grants the plaintiffs twenty-eight (28) days to refile their
complaint and address the Court’s concerns.
Jurisdiction over these claims hinges entirely on agency discretion, or lack
thereof. The APA does not provide judicial review to the extent that “agency action
1 5 U.S.C. § 706.
Case 3:26-cv-00542-X Document 6 Filed 02/20/26 Page 1 of 3 PageID <pageID>

2
is committed to agency discretion by law.”2 The Immigration and Naturalization Act
(INA) confers such discretion on executive branch agencies.3 And then the INA strips
courts of jurisdiction over individual immigration decisions or actions the executive
branch is to make:
[n]otwithstanding any other provision of law (statutory or nonstatutory)
. . . and [28 U.S.C.] sections 1361 and 1651 . . . no court shall have
jurisdiction to review—
(i) any judgment regarding the granting of relief under section . . .
1255 [adjustment of status] . . . or
(ii) any other decision or action of the Attorney General or the
Secretary of Homeland Security the authority for which is
specified under this subchapter to be in the discretion of the
Attorney General or the Secretary of Homeland Security.4
The Fifth Circuit has confirmed that courts are without jurisdiction to entertain such
APA claims, and that Section 1252 applies to the government’s “grant or denial of an
application for adjustment of status.”5
The Court will not proceed amidst such jurisdictional uncertainty. The Court
lacks subject-matter jurisdiction to adjudicate what Congress has said it cannot
adjudicate, and plaintiffs have failed to present any statutory authority proving the
2 5 U.S.C. § 701(a)(2); see also Bian v. Clinton, 605 F.3d 249, 255 (5th Cir. 2010) (“The APA
provides for judicial review of government action ‘only where a plaintiff asserts that an agency failed
to take a discrete agency action that it is required to take.’” (quoting Norton v. S. Utah Wilderness All.,
542 U.S. 55, 64–65 (2004)), vacated on mootness grounds, Nos. 09-10568 & 09-10742, 2010 WL 3633770
(Sept. 16, 2010)).
3 See, e.g., 8 U.S.C. § 1255(a) (“The status of an alien who was inspected and admitted or
paroled into the United States . . . may be adjusted by the Attorney General, in his discretion and
under such regulations as he may prescribe, to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent
residence if (1) the alien makes an application for such adjustment, (2) the alien is eligible to receive
an immigrant visa and is admissible to the United States for permanent residence, and (3) an
immigrant visa is immediately available to him at the time his application is filed.”).
4 Bian, 605 F.3d at 253 (alterations in original) (quoting 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)).
5 Id.
Case 3:26-cv-00542-X Document 6 Filed 02/20/26 Page 2 of 3 PageID <pageID>

3
government lacks discretion regarding the actions they challenge. The case is thus
DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. The plaintiffs may refile their complaint
within twenty-eight (28) days, which should address this Court’s subject-matter
jurisdiction over their claims to avoid dismissal with prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 20th day of February, 2026.
____________________________________
BRANTLEY STARR
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Case 3:26-cv-00542-X Document 6 Filed 02/20/26 Page 3 of 3 PageID <pageID>