Passim

Mandamus decisions / Western District of Washington

Zhuang v. Walker

Western District of WashingtonJames L. RobartDecided August 31, 2026

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 Department of State Read by a model
On October 23, 2025, however, the consulate returned Mr. Zhuang’s passport without issuing a visa, and informed him that further administrative processing was required.
Form or filing 221(g) (consular refusal); DS-160 (nonimmigrant visa) Read by a model
On August 11, 2025, Mr. Zhuang underwent a nonimmigrant visa interview at the U.S. Consulate General in Shanghai, China, where the consular officer refused his application under Immigration and Nationality Act § 221(g), 8 U.S.C. § 1201(g),
What the suit asked for Finish 221(g) processing Read by a model
As relief, he seeks a writ of mandamus compelling the Government to adjudicate his H1-B application within 30 days
Kind of order A transfer order Read by a model
the court GRANTS in part the Government’s motion to dismiss (Dkt. # 5) for improper venue and TRANSFERS this action to the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.
Motion decided Other motion to dismiss; Transfer Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, the court GRANTS in part the Government’s motion to dismiss (Dkt. # 5) for improper venue and TRANSFERS this action to the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Before the court is the Government’s1 motion to dismiss Plaintiff Yuquian Zhuang’s complaint for improper venue and/or for failure to state a claim.
Disposition Transferred to another court An order moving the case to another court. It decides where the suit is heard, not who wins, so it is not counted as either side's win. Read by a model
the court GRANTS in part the Government’s motion to dismiss (Dkt. # 5) for improper venue and TRANSFERS this action to the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.
Prevailing party Neither side Read by a model
the court GRANTS in part the Government’s motion to dismiss (Dkt. # 5) for improper venue and TRANSFERS this action to the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.
The delay claim Not decided here Read by a model
the court GRANTS in part the Government’s motion to dismiss (Dkt. # 5) for improper venue and TRANSFERS this action to the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.
The other claims Not decided here Read by a model
the court GRANTS in part the Government’s motion to dismiss (Dkt. # 5) for improper venue and TRANSFERS this action to the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.
Months pending 9.1 months from the application to the suit; 2.4 months from the application to the agency's action Read by a model
On October 23, 2025, however, the consulate returned Mr. Zhuang’s passport without issuing a visa, and informed him that further administrative processing was required.
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings None Read by a model
Nationality China Read by a model
Mr. Zhuang, a citizen of the People’s Republic of China

How the case ended

This decision is not linked to a docket in the docket record yet, so how the case ended is not shown.

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.