Passim

Mandamus decisions / Central District of California

Bekzad Dzhanpolatov v. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services

Central District of CaliforniaMark Christopher ScarsiDecided February 9, 2026No. 2:24-cv-05618

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 USCIS Read by a model
After concluding the Court possessed subject-matter jurisdiction over Plaintiff Bekzad Dzhanpolatov’s claim that Defendant United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) had unreasonably delayed adjudicating his asylum application, the Court on its own motion stayed the case.
Form or filing I-589 (asylum) Read by a model
However, Defendant has taken no action since the interview took place over eight months ago and has still not issued a final decision on Plaintiff’s I-589 application.
What the suit asked for Decide the asylum application Read by a model
After concluding the Court possessed subject-matter jurisdiction over Plaintiff Bekzad Dzhanpolatov’s claim that Defendant United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) had unreasonably delayed adjudicating his asylum application, the Court on its own motion stayed the case.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
Based on what appears to be an honest mistake by Plaintiff and Defendant’s non-opposition, the Court exercises its discretion to grant Plaintiff relief from his voluntary dismissal.
Motion decided None Read by a model
Whose motion The plaintiff's motion Read by a model
Plaintiff now moves for relief from his voluntary dismissal and seeks to return this case to the Court’s active docket.
Disposition Granted in part The principal motion was granted in part and denied in part. Read by a model
The motion is granted in part and denied in part.
Prevailing party Each side in part Read by a model
The Court sets aside Plaintiff’s notice of voluntary dismissal (ECF No. 40) but maintains the stay until September 1, 2026.
The delay claim Not decided here Read by a model
The Court sets aside Plaintiff’s notice of voluntary dismissal (ECF No. 40) but maintains the stay until September 1, 2026.
Months pending 52.4 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
Here, Plaintiff filed his application on September 29, 2021, less than five years ago.
TRAC factors The court weighed the TRAC factors
  • 1. Rule of reasonfavors the government
  • 2. Congressional timetablenot reached
  • 3. Human health and welfarenot reached
  • 4. Competing prioritiesnot reached
  • 5. Interests prejudicednot reached
  • 6. No impropriety needednot reached
Read by a model
Here, Plaintiff filed his application on September 29, 2021, less than five years ago. (Compl. ¶ 9, ECF No. 1.) While his application is still pending, he participated in an asylum interview since he initiated this case, which is a meaningful development.
Threshold rulings None Read by a model

How the case ended

Docket
No. 2:24-cv-05618
Filed
July 2, 2024
Ended
November 27, 2024
Suit's filing to its end
148 days
How it ended
Ended, outcome not recorded
From the record
idb disp 18 (statistical closing)

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