Passim

Mandamus decisions / Southern District of California

Tilahun v. Trump

Southern District of CaliforniaCynthia BashantDecided July 15, 2025No. 3:25-cv-01802

Read the decisionOriginal on CourtListener

2,917 written decisions from 2,664 cases in the whole mandamus and agency-delay group, the group's newest decided October 30, 2026. Updated November 3, 2026 at 7:07 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 ICE Read by a model
Petitioner Sentayehu Shewamene Tilahun (“Petitioner”) is currently detained by Respondents Donald J. Trump; U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement;
Form or filing None named Read by a model
What the suit asked for Not recorded Read by a model
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
GRANTING PETITIONER’S EMERGENCY APPLICATION FOR A TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER
Motion decided Preliminary injunction or TRO Read by a model
GRANTING PETITIONER’S EMERGENCY APPLICATION FOR A TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER (ECF No. 2)
Whose motion The plaintiff's motion Read by a model
GRANTING PETITIONER’S EMERGENCY APPLICATION FOR A TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER
Disposition Granted in the applicant'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
GRANTING PETITIONER’S EMERGENCY APPLICATION FOR A TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER (ECF No. 2)
Prevailing party Applicant Read by a model
GRANTING PETITIONER’S EMERGENCY APPLICATION FOR A TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER (ECF No. 2)
The other claims Relief ordered Read by a model
immediately ENJOINED from: (a) Removing or deporting Petitioner from the United States; and (b) Transferring Petitioner outside of the Southern District of California during the pendency of these proceedings.
Months pending Not stated Read by a model
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings None Read by a model

How the case ended

Docket
No. 3:25-cv-01802
Filed
July 15, 2025
Ended
August 11, 2025
Suit's filing to its end
27 days
How it ended
Ended once the agency acted
From the record
stipulated dismissal 2025-08-11; idb disp 14 (dismissed: other)

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

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.