Passim

Mandamus decisions / Northern District of California

Zheng v. Mayorkas

Northern District of CaliforniaKandis A. WestmoreDecided January 11, 2024No. 4:23-cv-02707

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
Using these new resources, USCIS is targeting completion of at least 1,000 of the longest pending affirmative asylum cases per month, and the agency met that target for FY 2022.
Form or filing I-589 (asylum) Read by a model
Plaintiff Xiaolian Zheng is a Chinese citizen, who filed a Form I-589 Application for Asylum and for Withholding Removal on July 2, 2020.
What the suit asked for Decide the asylum application Read by a model
Plaintiff’s complaint consists of a single cause of action for adjudication of his asylum application.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For the reasons stated above, the Court DENIES Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment and GRANTS Defendants’ cross-motion for summary judgment.
Motion decided Summary judgment Read by a model
For the reasons stated above, the Court DENIES Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment and GRANTS Defendants’ cross-motion for summary judgment.
Whose motion Cross-motions Read by a model
On August 30, 2023, Plaintiff filed a motion for summary judgment. On October 16, 2023, Defendants filed an opposition and cross-motion for summary judgment.
Disposition Granted in the government's favor The principal motion was granted in full: summary judgment for either side, an injunction or TRO, a writ or order to act, fees. A motion to dismiss granted in full counts as Dismissed; a transfer is listed apart. Read by a model
For the reasons stated above, the Court DENIES Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment and GRANTS Defendants’ cross-motion for summary judgment.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
Judgment shall be entered in favor of Defendants, and the Clerk will be directed to close this case.
The delay claim Relief denied Read by a model
Accordingly, Defendants are entitled to summary judgment on Plaintiff’s sole cause of action.
Months pending 34.9 months from the application to the suit; 42.3 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
Plaintiff submitted his asylum application on July 2, 2020.
TRAC factors The court weighed the TRAC factors
  • 1. Rule of reasonfavors the government
  • 2. Congressional timetableneutral
  • 3. Human health and welfarefavors the government
  • 4. Competing prioritiesfavors the government
  • 5. Interests prejudicedfavors the government
  • 6. No impropriety neededneutral
Read by a model
Thus, the first factor favors Defendants.
The government's delay arguments First-in, first-out processing accepted; Line-jumping accepted Read by a model
The Court finds that Defendants have explained why LIFO is a rule of reason, including the reasons for its implementation and effects on reducing the backlog while deterring frivolous or non-meritorious asylum filings.
Threshold rulings None Read by a model
Nationality China Read by a model
Plaintiff Xiaolian Zheng is a Chinese citizen

How the case ended

Docket
No. 4:23-cv-02707
Filed
May 31, 2023
Ended
January 11, 2024
Suit's filing to its end
225 days
How it ended
Dismissed on jurisdiction or the merits
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.