Passim

Mandamus decisions / Northern District of California

Hedayati v. Edlow

Northern District of CaliforniaVirginia K. DemarchiDecided July 7, 2026No. 5:26-cv-04054

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
To the extent it has not already done so, USCIS must resume adjudicating the remaining plaintiffs’ I-765 applications in a manner consistent with USCIS’s non-hold policies.
Form or filing I-765 (EAD) Read by a model
their I-765 Applications for Employment Authorization (“I-765 applications”)
What the suit asked for Some other action Read by a model
Claiming that such withholding of adjudication is unlawful, plaintiffs filed the present action to enjoin the hold and to compel USCIS to adjudicate their I-765 applications.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
the government’s motion to stay these proceedings is denied without prejudice, and plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction is granted in part and denied in part.
Motion decided Preliminary injunction or TRO Read by a model
plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction is granted in part and denied in part.
Whose motion Cross-motions Read by a model
the government’s motion to stay these proceedings is denied without prejudice, and plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction is granted in part and denied in part.
Disposition Granted in part The principal motion was granted in part and denied in part. Read by a model
plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction is granted in part and denied in part.
Prevailing party Each side in part Read by a model
plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction is granted in part and denied in part.
The delay claim Relief ordered Read by a model
To the extent it has not already done so, USCIS must resume adjudicating the remaining plaintiffs’ I-765 applications in a manner consistent with USCIS’s non-hold policies.
The other claims Relief ordered Read by a model
USCIS is enjoined from applying the hold imposed by the Policy Memoranda to any I- 765 application filed by any plaintiff.
Months pending Not stated Read by a model
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
The government's delay arguments Line-jumping accepted Read by a model
In these circumstances, the Court concludes that an injunction prohibiting application of the hold imposed by the Policy Memoranda and directing USCIS to put plaintiffs back in the “normal queue” best balances the equities and serves the public interest.
Threshold rulings Section 1252(a)(2)(B) bar rejected Read by a model
Accordingly, the Court concludes that it has jurisdiction over plaintiffs’ claims.
Nationality Afghanistan Read by a model
Plaintiffs are 137 foreign nationals of 15 countries, including Afghanistan, Burma (Myanmar), Cote d’lvoire, Cuba, Haiti, Iran, Malawi, Nigeria, Senegal, Sudan, Syria, Togo, Turkmenistan, Venezuela, and Yemen.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 5:26-cv-04054
Filed
May 4, 2026
Ended
September 22, 2026
Suit's filing to its end
141 days
How it ended
Ended once the agency acted
From the record
voluntary dismissal 2026-09-22

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.