Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Columbia

Ewoudou v. Scott

District of ColumbiaReggie B. WaltonDecided March 20, 2026No. 1:25-cv-00888

Read the decisionOriginal on CourtListener

2,914 written decisions from 2,661 cases in the whole mandamus and agency-delay group, the group's newest decided October 30, 2026. Updated November 3, 2026 at 1:24 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 1,606 public decisions since January 1, 2025 that a CourtListener and GovInfo search for mandamus and agency delay finds, Passim holds 1,371 (85%), measured November 3, 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
According to the plaintiff, “the application is currently pending at the USCIS Potomac Service Center.”
Form or filing I-589 (asylum) Read by a model
Here, the Complaint indicates that the plaintiff filed his I-589 application on December 18, 2021, id. ¶ 15, just slightly over four years ago.
What the suit asked for Decide the asylum application Read by a model
Rather he claims that his goal in compelling agency action on his application is “to ensure that he—along with other asylum applicants—will obtain adjudication at some point and without unreasonable delay.”
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
the Court must grant the defendants’ motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s claims.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim Read by a model
Currently pending before the Court is the defendants’ motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6).
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Currently pending before the Court is the defendants’ motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6).
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
the Court must grant the defendants’ motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s claims.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
the Court must grant the defendants’ motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s claims.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
the Court must grant the defendants’ motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s claims.
Months pending 39.2 months from the application to the suit; 51 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
Here, the Complaint indicates that the plaintiff filed his I-589 application on December 18, 2021, id. ¶ 15, just slightly over four years ago.
TRAC factors The court weighed the TRAC factors
  • 1. Rule of reasonfavors the government
  • 2. Congressional timetablefavors the government
  • 3. Human health and welfarefavors the government
  • 4. Competing prioritiesfavors the government
  • 5. Interests prejudicedfavors the government
  • 6. No impropriety neededfavors the government
Read by a model
In other words, the first two factors, considered together, favor the defendants.
The government's delay arguments Line-jumping accepted Read by a model
“But this argument ignores that a court order directing [the defendants] to process [the plaintiff’s] application would still put him ahead in the queue of those similarly situated.”
Threshold rulings None Read by a model
Nationality Cameroon Read by a model
The plaintiff is a citizen of Cameroon

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:25-cv-00888
Filed
March 26, 2025
Ended
March 20, 2026
Suit's filing to its end
359 days
How it ended
Dismissed on jurisdiction or the merits
From the record
idb disp 6 (judgment: motion before trial), judgment for defendant

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 D.C. 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 3, 2026. Check the current status before relying on one.