Passim

Mandamus decisions / Northern District of California

Yousefisahi v. Edlow

Northern District of CaliforniaLisa J. CisnerosDecided May 18, 2026No. 3:25-cv-09728

Read the decisionOriginal on GovInfo

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
The hold therefore did not affect USCIS’s ability to interview Plaintiff, but without some exception, it would prevent USCIS from adjudicating it.
Form or filing I-485 (adjustment of status) Read by a model
On February 9, 2024, Plaintiff submitted an I-485 application to adjust his status to that of a lawful permanent resident.
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
requiring Defendant to adjudicate Plaintiff’s pending I-485 application to adjust status to permanent residence.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For the reasons discussed above, Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss is DENIED.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction Read by a model
Defendant moves to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under Rule 12(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Defendant moves to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under Rule 12(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Disposition Denied in the applicant's favor 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
For the reasons discussed above, Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss is DENIED.
Prevailing party Applicant Read by a model
For the reasons discussed above, Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss is DENIED.
The delay claim The delay claim goes on Read by a model
For the reasons discussed above, Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss is DENIED.
Months pending 21.1 months from the application to the suit; 27.2 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
On February 9, 2024, Plaintiff submitted an I-485 application to adjust his status to that of a lawful permanent resident.
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings Section 1252(a)(2)(B) bar rejected Read by a model
Plaintiff’s claim for unreasonable delay does not implicate the sort of discretionary decisions that § 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii) insulates from review.
Nationality Iran Read by a model
Plaintiff is a national of Iran who was granted asylum in the United States in 2023.

Other orders in this case

The group holds 2 decisions from this suit, oldest first. Outcome counts on these pages count the case once, by its latest decision. How decisions are grouped into cases.

DecisionDecidedJudgeDisposition
Yousefisahi v. EdlowThis decision May 18, 2026 Lisa J. Cisneros Denied in the applicant's favor
Yousefisahi v. EdlowThe case's latest decision: its outcome is the one counted September 25, 2026 Lisa J. Cisneros Denied, neither side prevailed

How the case ended

Docket
No. 3:25-cv-09728
Filed
November 12, 2025
Status
Pending as of the last docket check

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.