Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Nevada

Ramirez v. Rubio

District of NevadaElayna J. YouchahDecided October 6, 2026

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 Not recorded Read by a model
Form or filing None named Read by a model
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
Defendants have unlawfully withheld and unreasonably delayed adjudication of Fresca Jaline Tabirao Ramirez’s “J-1 residence waiver application.”
Kind of order A discovery or record order Read by a model
For this reason, the Court denies the complete stay of discovery sought by Defendants.
Motion decided None Read by a model
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Before the Court is Defendants’ Motion to Stay Discovery Pending Ruling on Motion to Dismiss Amended Complaint.
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
For this reason, the Court denies the complete stay of discovery sought by Defendants.
Prevailing party Neither side Read by a model
For this reason, the Court denies the complete stay of discovery sought by Defendants.
The delay claim Not decided here Read by a model
Alternatively, the parties may request a hearing before the undersigned to discuss and ultimately address the scope of discovery appropriately conducted during the pendency of the Motion to Dismiss.
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

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.