Passim

Mandamus decisions / Western District of Washington

Figueira De Aguiar Meneses Borges v. Mullin

Western District of WashingtonJames L. RobartDecided March 17, 2026No. 2:25-cv-02620

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 Not recorded Read by a model
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
Accordingly, the court DENIES Defendants’ motion to dismiss (Dkt. # 11) without prejudice to renewing their motion based on Ms. Borges’s amended complaint.
Motion decided Other motion to dismiss Read by a model
Accordingly, the court DENIES Defendants’ motion to dismiss (Dkt. # 11) without prejudice to renewing their motion based on Ms. Borges’s amended complaint.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Defendants moved to dismiss the complaint on March 11, 2026.
Disposition Denied, neither side prevailed 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
Accordingly, the court DENIES Defendants’ motion to dismiss (Dkt. # 11) without prejudice to renewing their motion based on Ms. Borges’s amended complaint.
Prevailing party Neither side Read by a model
Because Ms. Borges filed her amended complaint fewer than 21 days after Defendants filed their motion to dismiss, its filing was timely, and Defendants’ motion is moot.
The delay claim Not decided here Read by a model
Accordingly, the court DENIES Defendants’ motion to dismiss (Dkt. # 11) without prejudice to renewing their motion based on Ms. Borges’s amended complaint.
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. 2:25-cv-02620
Filed
December 19, 2025
Ended
May 26, 2026
Suit's filing to its end
158 days
How it ended
Ended once the agency acted
From the record
decided 2026-05-26 on a stipulated dismissal; 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.