Salgar v. Noem et al

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
HOUSTON DIVISION
ALEXANDER SALGAR,
Plaintiff,
V.
KRISTIE NOEM, et al.,
Defendant.
§
§
§
§
§ 	CIVIL ACTION NO. H-25-4613
§
§
§
§
§
§
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Alexander Salgar is a non-citizen I-360 self-petitioner who alleges that the defendants have
failed to timely adjudicate his asylum application. 	(Docket Entry No. 1 at 2). 	Salgar filed his
application on August 6, 2024; attended a biometrics appointment on September 10, 2024; and
was granted a prima facie determination of approval on September 26, 2024. (Id at 4-5). Since
then, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services has not taken further "affirmative steps in
adjudicating" Salgar's application. (Id at 5).
Salgar seeks an order compelling the defendants to adjudicate his application, alleging a
violation of the Administrative Procedure Act's requirement that administrative agencies conclude
matters presented to them within a reasonable time. 5 U.S.C. § 555(b); see id § 706(1) (explaining
that district courts may "compel agency action unlawfully withheld or unreasonably delayed").
The defendants have moved to dismiss and, in the alternative, for summary judgment. 	(Docket
Entry No. 6). 	The defendants argue that this court lacks subject-matter jurisdiction to consider
Salgar's complaint and that their delay in adjudicating Salgar's petition is not unreasonable. (Id
at 11-21).
United States District Court
Southern District of Texas
ENTERED
February 04, 2026
Nathan Ochsner, Clerk
Case 4:25-cv-04613 Document 9 Filed 02/02/26 in TXSD Page 1 of 3

The defendants' motion for summary judgment, (Docket Entry No. 6), is granted on the
merits.
First, this court has subject-matter jurisdiction over the plaintiffs complaint. 	This court
recently ruled that it has subject-matter jurisdiction to review similar complaints of unlawful
agency delay because "5 U.S.C. § 555(b) imposes a nondiscretionary duty on USCIS to adjudicate
i
I
asylum applications within a reasonable time." Cotto Rivas v. US. Dep 't Homeland Sec., No. 25-
435, ECF No. 28 at 1 n.1 (S.D. Tex. Jan. 12, 2026) (citing Ahmed v. Bitter, 727 F. Supp. 3d 630,
636 (S.D. Tex. 2024)).
I
Second, the defendants have not unreasonably delayed in adjudicating Salgar' s applicatiori.
Salgar's application has been pending for 17 months. 	(See Docket Entry No. 1 at 4-5). But tJe
. 	I
"current estimated processing time for VAWA I-360 self-petitions is 45 months." (Docket Entry
No. 6-1 at 5). 	"While the court sympathizes with" Salgar's "frustration, it is a frustration shared
by" many in his position. Ayana v. Jaddou, No. CV H-23-2937, 2023 WL 8936700, at *4 (S.D.
Tex. Dec. 27, 2023). 	"To give him an accelerated place in line would add to the wait another
would endure." 	Id 	Salgar's application is well within the normal processing times for similar
petitions. 	It is also well within the four-to-five-year period in which courts have concluded that
agency delay is reasonable. See, e.g., Teymouri v. US. Citizenship and Immigrations Servs., No.
CV 22-7689, 2022 WL 	18717560, at *4 (C.D. 	Cal. 	Jan. 	31, 2022) (five-year delay not
unreasonable); Maxhuni v. Mayorkas, No. 23-cv-09076, 2024 WL 3090165 (S.D.N.Y. June 20,
2024) (almost five-year delay not unreasonable); Yavari v. Pompeo, No. 2:19-cv-02524, 2019 WL
6720995, at *8 (C.D. Cal. Oct. 10, 2019) (collecting cases and noting that district courts in
California had generally found that "immigration delays in excess of five, six, seven years are
unreasonable, while those between three to five years are not unreasonable."). 	Salgar offers no
2
Case 4:25-cv-04613 Document 9 Filed 02/02/26 in TXSD Page 2 of 3

record evidence or similar case that shows that the defendants have unreasonably delayed in
adjudicating his application.
For these reasons, the defendants' motion for summary judgment, (Docket Entry No. 6), is
granted. The court will enter separately a final judgment.
SIGNED on February 2, 2026, at Houston, Texas.
Lee H. Rosenthal
Senior United States District Judge
3
Case 4:25-cv-04613 Document 9 Filed 02/02/26 in TXSD Page 3 of 3