Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Arizona

Kuria v. Garland et al

District of ArizonaDecided July 11, 2025No. 2:24-cv-03327

Read the decisionOriginal on GovInfo

2,996 written decisions from 2,731 cases in the whole mandamus and agency-delay group, the group's newest decided November 12, 2026. Updated November 14, 2026 at 1:17 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 1,617 public decisions since January 1, 2025 that a CourtListener and GovInfo search for mandamus and agency delay finds, Passim holds 1,406 (87%), 1,039 of them in this group, measured November 14, 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 stipulated or agreed order Read by a model
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED granting Plaintiff’s Motion to Dismiss and Withdraw the Case.
Motion decided Other motion to dismiss Read by a model
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED granting Plaintiff’s Motion to Dismiss and Withdraw the Case.
Whose motion The plaintiff's motion Read by a model
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED granting Plaintiff’s Motion to Dismiss and Withdraw the Case.
Disposition Stipulated or agreed order An order the parties asked for together, or the plaintiff's own dismissal. Not counted as either side's win. Read by a model
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED granting Plaintiff’s Motion to Dismiss and Withdraw the Case.
Prevailing party Neither side Read by a model
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED granting Plaintiff’s Motion to Dismiss and Withdraw the Case.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED dismissing Plaintiff’s Petition for Writ of Mandamus, without Prejudice.
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

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, this one. How decisions are grouped into cases.

DecisionDecidedJudgeDisposition
Kuria v. Garland et al April 18, 2025 Eileen S. Willett Magistrate judge's recommendation
Kuria v. Garland et alThis decisionThe case's latest decision: its outcome is the one counted July 11, 2025 Stipulated or agreed order

How the case ended

Docket
No. 2:24-cv-03327
On the docket
This ruling (ECF 15)
Filed
November 26, 2024
Ended
July 11, 2025
Suit's filing to its end
227 days
How it ended
Ended once the agency acted
From the record
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.

The ruling's entry is the docket's one order or judgment entered the day of the decision. Both come from CourtListener's copy of the docket; check them there.

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 14, 2026. Check the current status before relying on one.