Passim

Mandamus decisions / Western District of Washington

Sun v. Mayorkas

Western District of WashingtonLauren KingDecided June 5, 2024No. 2:23-cv-00863

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
This matter comes before the Court on Defendants’ Status Report and Motion to Dismiss, which states that U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) adjudicated and approved Plaintiff Yeguang Sun’s asylum application on April 5, 2024.
Form or filing I-589 (asylum) Read by a model
This matter comes before the Court on Defendants’ Status Report and Motion to Dismiss, which states that U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) adjudicated and approved Plaintiff Yeguang Sun’s asylum application on April 5, 2024.
What the suit asked for Decide the asylum application Read by a model
prayer for relief asking the Court to order USCIS to adjudicate Mr. Sun’s asylum application
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Defendants’ motion to dismiss, Dkt. No. 16, and DISMISSES this matter without prejudice.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction Read by a model
USCIS argues that because the case is now moot, the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Defendants’ motion to dismiss, Dkt. No. 16, and DISMISSES this matter without prejudice.
Disposition Dismissed as moot Dismissed or denied as moot because the agency acted. Read by a model
Here, Mr. Sun has achieved the relief he sought, and he has not identified any further relief the Court can grant or any applicable exception to the mootness doctrine.
Prevailing party Neither side Read by a model
Here, Mr. Sun has achieved the relief he sought, and he has not identified any further relief the Court can grant or any applicable exception to the mootness doctrine.
The delay claim Moot: the agency acted Read by a model
Here, Mr. Sun has achieved the relief he sought, and he has not identified any further relief the Court can grant or any applicable exception to the mootness doctrine.
Months pending Not stated at filing The agency acted before this decision, so the months up to the decision are not a delay and are not shown. Read by a model
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings Held moot Read by a model
Here, Mr. Sun has achieved the relief he sought, and he has not identified any further relief the Court can grant or any applicable exception to the mootness doctrine.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 2:23-cv-00863
Filed
June 7, 2023
Ended
June 6, 2024
Suit's filing to its end
365 days
How it ended
Ended once the agency acted
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.