Passim

Mandamus decisions / Western District of Washington

Sanchez Cruz v. Mullin

Western District of WashingtonJohn H. ChunDecided November 2, 2026No. 2:26-cv-04182

Read the decisionOriginal on CourtListener

2,948 written decisions from 2,691 cases in the whole mandamus and agency-delay group, the group's newest decided November 10, 2026. Updated November 11, 2026 at 1:21 p.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 1,632 public decisions since January 1, 2025 that a CourtListener and GovInfo search for mandamus and agency delay finds, Passim holds 1,398 (86%), measured November 11, 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
And the Court notes that it does not believe that USCIS is open, let alone processing Form I- 130’s, outside of normal business hours.
Form or filing I-130 (relative petition) Read by a model
Plaintiffs’ pending Form I-130 petition
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
[c]ompel[ling] the Defendants to adjudicate Plaintiffs’ pending Form I-130 petition no later than November 2, 2026, without directing the outcome of that adjudication[.]
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For the reasons below, the Court DENIES the Motion.
Motion decided Preliminary injunction or TRO Read by a model
This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiffs’ Emergency Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Expedited Response.
Whose motion The plaintiff's motion Read by a model
This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiffs’ Emergency Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Expedited Response.
Disposition Denied in the government's favor The principal motion was denied in full: a motion to dismiss denied so the case goes on, or relief denied on the merits. Read by a model
For the reasons below, the Court DENIES the Motion.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
For the reasons below, the Court DENIES the Motion.
The delay claim Relief denied Read by a model
For the reasons below, the Court DENIES the Motion.
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

How the case ended

Docket
No. 2:26-cv-04182
Filed
October 29, 2026
Status
Pending as of the last docket check

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 11, 2026. Check the current status before relying on one.