Passim

Mandamus decisions / Western District of Washington

Ma v. Young

Western District of WashingtonRichard A. JonesDecided October 19, 2022No. 2:20-cv-01265

Read the decisionOriginal on CourtListener

2,914 written decisions from 2,661 cases in the whole mandamus and agency-delay group, the group's newest decided October 30, 2026. Updated November 3, 2026 at 1:24 a.m. CT; the Passim connector counts the live collection, which can differ by the day's additions and retirements (which total to quote). Coverage: of the 1,606 public decisions since January 1, 2025 that a CourtListener and GovInfo search for mandamus and agency delay finds, Passim holds 1,371 (85%), measured November 3, 2026. Some of what that search finds are not mandamus decisions. Tell us about a decision we're missing.

These are counts of past written decisions and dockets, not predictions of how any case will be decided. A distribution appears only when at least 5 decisions (or 5 dockets) are behind it; smaller groups are listed, not summarized. How it's counted.

What the decision decided

Each value cites the passage it was read from. Values read by a model were checked against that passage; values read by rule come from fixed text patterns. Read the decision before relying on either.

Agency USCIS Read by a model
Plaintiff Lan Ma brings a mandamus action to compel individual defendants with 19 the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services to render a decision on her Form I-526 20 petition.
Form or filing I-526 (investor petition) Read by a model
Plaintiff first filed the I-526 petition in September 2015.
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
In the Complaint, Plaintiff seeks a writ of mandamus compelling USCIS to 26 adjudicate her Form I-526.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For 16 the reasons below, the Court GRANTS the motion.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction Read by a model
Defendants now bring a motion to dismiss the complaint for lack 23 of subject matter jurisdiction.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
This matter is before the Court on Defendant’s motion to dismiss.
Disposition Dismissed as moot Dismissed or denied as moot because the agency acted. Read by a model
Because Plaintiff has received the relief sought in this action, this action 1 is moot and the Court no longer has subject matter jurisdiction over the case.
Prevailing party Neither side Read by a model
Because Plaintiff has received the relief sought in this action, this action 1 is moot and the Court no longer has subject matter jurisdiction over the case.
The delay claim Moot: the agency acted Read by a model
Because Plaintiff has received the relief sought in this action, this action 1 is moot and the Court no longer has subject matter jurisdiction over the case.
Months pending 81.2 months from the application to the agency's action Read by a model
On June 22, 2022, USCIS adjudicated Plaintiff’s Form 27 I-526.
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings Held moot Read by a model
Because Plaintiff has received the relief sought in this action, this action 1 is moot and the Court no longer has subject matter jurisdiction over the case.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 2:20-cv-01265
Filed
August 21, 2020
Ended
October 19, 2022
Suit's filing to its end
789 days
How it ended
Ended once the agency acted
From the record
idb disp 6 (judgment: motion before trial), judgment for defendant

A voluntary or stipulated dismissal is how most suits end once the agency acts; the docket rarely says why. Other suits in this court.

Supreme Court and Ninth Circuit authority

District decisions bind no one. On the questions this decision raises, the Supreme Court decisions and the circuit's published decisions listed here bind this court; a circuit disposition marked nonprecedential was not published as precedent and is persuasive only. ImmCite status as read November 3, 2026. Check the current status before relying on one.