Passim

Mandamus decisions / Northern District of California

Y. v. Noem

Northern District of CaliforniaSallie KimDecided July 1, 2026No. 4:25-cv-01017

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
He alleges that USCIS’s policy of adjudicating asylum applications 25 through “last-in, first-out” (LIFO) scheduling has led to an unreasonable delay in adjudication of 26 pending applications, including his.
Form or filing I-589 (asylum) Read by a model
unreasonably delayed adjudicating his pending asylum application.
What the suit asked for Decide the asylum application Read by a model
claiming that Defendants had 16 unreasonably delayed adjudicating his pending asylum application.
Kind of order A discovery or record order Read by a model
Plaintiff’s motion for discovery is GRANTED IN PART.
Motion decided None Read by a model
Whose motion The plaintiff's motion Read by a model
Plaintiff now seeks discovery from Defendants.
Disposition Discovery or record order An order on discovery or the administrative record. It decides no claim, so it is not counted as either side's win. Read by a model
Plaintiff’s motion for discovery is GRANTED IN PART.
Prevailing party Neither side Read by a model
Plaintiff’s motion for discovery is GRANTED IN PART.
The delay claim Not decided here Read by a model
Plaintiff’s motion for discovery is GRANTED IN PART.
Months pending 36 months from the application to the suit; 53.5 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
Plaintiff, a citizen of Ethiopia, applied for asylum in January 2022.
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings None Read by a model
Nationality Ethiopia Read by a model
Plaintiff, a citizen of Ethiopia

How the case ended

Docket
No. 4:25-cv-01017
Filed
January 31, 2025
Ended
August 15, 2025
Suit's filing to its end
196 days
How it ended
Dismissed, ground not recorded
From the record
idb disp 14 (dismissed: other)

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.