Passim

Mandamus decisions / Northern District of California

Gao v. United States Department of Homeland Security

Northern District of CaliforniaSusan G. Van KeulenDecided April 8, 2026No. 5:25-cv-01479

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
USCIS engages in a multi-step process when evaluating an application for adjustment of status.
Form or filing I-485 (adjustment of status) Read by a model
his I-485 Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status (“I-485 Application”)
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
challenging the failure to adjudicate his I-485 Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status (“I-485 Application”).
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss is DENIED.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction Read by a model
A. Motions to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1)
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
On February 11, 2026, Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss
Disposition Denied in the applicant's favor The principal motion was denied in full: a motion to dismiss denied so the case goes on, or relief denied on the merits. Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss is DENIED.
Prevailing party Applicant Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss is DENIED.
The delay claim The delay claim goes on Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss is DENIED.
Months pending 43.3 months from the application to the suit; 57.1 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
Plaintiff’s I-485 Application was filed on July 6, 2021.
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings Section 1252(a)(2)(B) bar rejected Read by a model
8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii) Does Not Strip this Court of Subject Matter Jurisdiction Over “Pace-of-Adjudication” Claims Because Defendants Have a Non-Discretionary Duty to Adjudicate I-485 Applications

How the case ended

Docket
No. 5:25-cv-01479
Filed
February 12, 2025
Ended
April 28, 2026
Suit's filing to its end
440 days
How it ended
Ended once the agency acted
From the record
stipulated dismissal 2026-04-22; idb disp 12 (dismissed: voluntarily)

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.