Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Minnesota

Kollie v. Noem

District of MinnesotaPatrick J. SchiltzDecided November 24, 2025No. 0:25-cv-02628

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 USCIS Read by a model
Pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1447(b), this matter is REMANDED to United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) for a decision on the Form N(cid:556)400 Application for Naturalization submitted by plaintiff.
Form or filing N-400 (naturalization) Read by a model
Plaintiff Samuel K. filed this action to remedy the delay in processing his Form N(cid:556)400 naturalization application.
What the suit asked for Naturalization hearing or remand (1447(b)) Read by a model
Samuel seeks to have this Court either grant his pending application or, in the alternative, order United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) to promptly adjudicate the application. ECF No. 1 at 8; see 8 U.S.C. § 1447(b)
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
Defendants’ motion to remand [ECF No. 9] is GRANTED.
Motion decided Remand under 1447(b) Read by a model
This matter is before the Court on defendants’ motion to remand this matter to USCIS so that it may issue a decision on Samuel’s application within 60 days.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
This matter is before the Court on defendants’ motion to remand this matter to USCIS so that it may issue a decision on Samuel’s application within 60 days.
Disposition Remanded to the agency Sent back to the agency, with or without instructions. Read by a model
Pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1447(b), this matter is REMANDED to United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) for a decision on the Form N(cid:556)400 Application for Naturalization submitted by plaintiff.
Prevailing party Applicant Read by a model
USCIS must render its decision on plaintiff’s application no later than 60 days after the date of this order.
The delay claim Remanded to the agency Read by a model
Pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1447(b), this matter is REMANDED to United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) for a decision on the Form N(cid:556)400 Application for Naturalization submitted by plaintiff.
Months pending Not stated A section 1447(b) suit: these months run from the naturalization application. The statute's 120 days run from the interview, which they do not measure. 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. 0:25-cv-02628
Filed
June 24, 2025
Ended
March 31, 2026
Suit's filing to its end
280 days
How it ended
Remanded to the agency
From the record
idb disp 11 (remanded to U.S. agency)

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 Eighth 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.