Passim

Mandamus decisions / Northern District of California

Intel Corporation v. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services

Northern District of CaliforniaP. Casey PittsDecided July 10, 2024No. 5:22-cv-07596

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
USCIS is a federal agency under DHS responsible for administering H–1B visas pursuant to the INA and for overseeing USCIS service centers nationwide.
Form or filing I-129 (worker petition) Read by a model
USCIS also complied with the INA and its implementing regulations when it rejected the five submissions at issue. The regulations require that an H–1B cap-subject petition
What the suit asked for Not recorded Read by a model
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, the Court grants USCIS’s motion for summary judgment and denies Intel’s cross-motion for summary judgment.
Motion decided Summary judgment Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, the Court grants USCIS’s motion for summary judgment and denies Intel’s cross-motion for summary judgment.
Whose motion Cross-motions Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, the Court grants USCIS’s motion for summary judgment and denies Intel’s cross-motion for summary judgment.
Disposition Granted in the government's favor The principal motion was granted in full: summary judgment for either side, an injunction or TRO, a writ or order to act, fees. A motion to dismiss granted in full counts as Dismissed; a transfer is listed apart. Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, the Court grants USCIS’s motion for summary judgment and denies Intel’s cross-motion for summary judgment.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, the Court grants USCIS’s motion for summary judgment and denies Intel’s cross-motion for summary judgment.
The other claims Relief denied Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, the Court grants USCIS’s motion for summary judgment and denies Intel’s cross-motion for summary judgment.
Months pending 3.6 months from the application to the suit; 22.8 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
Around August 2022, approximately six months after the FY2022 H–1B visa filing window had closed, Intel attempted to file petitions
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. 5:22-cv-07596
Filed
December 2, 2022
Ended
July 10, 2024
Suit's filing to its end
586 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 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.