Passim

Mandamus decisions / Northern District of California

Emami v. Nielsen

Northern District of CaliforniaJames DonatoDecided June 5, 2020

Read the decisionOriginal on CourtListener

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 Department of State Read by a model
The heart of this claim was that “the State Department has acted arbitrarily and unlawfully by disregarding its own procedures and rules in administering the waiver program” established by the Proclamation.
Form or filing None named Read by a model
What the suit asked for Some other action Read by a model
Plaintiffs allege that these actions should be invalidated under Accardi, 347 U.S. 260.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
This order resolves those motions.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim; Summary judgment Read by a model
Defendants have filed motions to dismiss, or to obtain summary judgment for, the second amended complaint in Emami and the complaint in Pars.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Defendants have filed motions to dismiss, or to obtain summary judgment for, the second amended complaint in Emami and the complaint in Pars.
Disposition Dismissed in part; some claims go on The government's motion to dismiss was granted in part: some claims were dismissed and others go on. Read by a model
The mandamus claim is dismissed.
Prevailing party Each side in part Read by a model
The mandamus claim is dismissed.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
The mandamus claim is dismissed.
The other claims Some dismissed, some go on Read by a model
In the Pars case, defendants’ motion to dismiss is denied as to plaintiffs’ APA claim and Accardi claim, but granted as to the Fifth Amendment claim.
Months pending Not stated Read by a model
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings Consular nonreviewability rejected Read by a model
This is a justiciable controversy properly before the Court.
Nationality Iran Read by a model
Plaintiffs focus on nationals of Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria and Yemen
212(f) proclamation Proclamation 9645 Read by a model
These related cases concern Presidential Proclamation 9645, “Enhancing Vetting Capabilities and Processes for Detecting Attempted Entry Into the United States by Terrorists or Other Public-Safety Threats.”

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
Emami v. Nielsen February 4, 2019 Donato Dismissed in part; some claims go on
Emami v. NielsenThis decisionThe case's latest decision: its outcome is the one counted June 5, 2020 James Donato Dismissed in part; some claims go on

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