Zixiang Li v. John F. Kerry, 710 F.3d 995

EB-3 visas for Chinese applicants; DOS allocates annually under per-country/worldwide limits with monthly cut-off dates.
Plaintiffs allege DOS’s Visa Office misallocated visa numbers in 2008–2009, delaying Chinese applicants’ eligibility.
USCIS must adjudicate adjustment of status only after DOS allocates a visa number; timing/order are governed by DOS allocations.
District court dismissed for lack of statutory duty on USCIS and mootness of past-year recapture claims; prospective-relief claims also dismissed.
Plaintiffs appeal the dismissal, arguing USCIS/ DOS mismanagement caused misallocation and sought injunctive relief and data-access measures.
Court affirms district court; finds no live controversy over past-year cut-offs or required discrete actions by agency; no standing for recapture or APA relief.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether USCIS may be sued for misallocation order claims	Plaintiffs argue USCIS violated INA § 203(e)	USCIS’s duties are limited and DOS allocates visas	Claims against USCIS fail
Whether recapture of past-year visa numbers is jurisdictionally viable	Past-year numbers should be recaptured for class members	Visa numbers expire end of year; no statutory authority to recapture	Moot; district court correct
Whether Plaintiffs’ APA prospective-relief claims are reviewable	Agency failed to take discrete actions required by law	No legally required discrete actions identified	No claim under 706(1)

INS v. Pangilinan, 486 U.S. 875 (1988) (Congressional terms; terms for rights; cannot modify statute by court decree)
Norton v. Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, 542 U.S. 55 (2004) (discrete, legally required agency actions only; governs 706(1) scope)
Hells Canyon Pres. Council v. U.S. Forest Serv., 593 F.3d 923 (9th Cir. 2010) (limited 706(1) to discrete, legally required actions)
Lujan v. Nat’l Wildlife Fed’n, 497 U.S. 871 (1990) (standing and injury requirements; prudence of relief)