Passim

Mandamus decisions / Eastern District of California

Yith v. Wolf

Eastern District of CaliforniaLawrence J. O'NeillDecided December 6, 2019No. 1:14-cv-01875

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
The matter is before the Court pursuant to 8 U.S.C § 1447(b) due to United States Citizenship and Immigration Services’ (“USCIS”) failure to make a determination on Plaintiffs’ naturalization applications within 120 days after the Plaintiffs’ examination.
Form or filing N-400 (naturalization) Read by a model
The trial asks the Court to make a determination on whether Plaintiffs have met the requirements for naturalization such that their naturalization applications should be granted.
What the suit asked for Naturalization hearing or remand (1447(b)) Read by a model
The matter is before the Court pursuant to 8 U.S.C § 1447(b) due to United States Citizenship and Immigration Services’ (“USCIS”) failure to make a determination on Plaintiffs’ naturalization applications within 120 days after the Plaintiffs’ examination.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiffs’ motions in limine, ECF No. 120, are denied as setforth herein.
Motion decided None Read by a model
Whose motion The plaintiff's motion Read by a model
On November 13, 2019, Plaintiffs Seanlim Yith and Seak Leang Yith (“Plaintiffs”) filed three substantively related motions in limine.
Disposition Denied in the government's favor The principal motion was denied in full: relief the plaintiff asked for denied on the merits, such as summary judgment, an injunction or fees. The government's motion denied so the case goes on is listed apart. Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiffs’ motions in limine, ECF No. 120, are denied as setforth herein.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiffs’ motions in limine, ECF No. 120, are denied as setforth herein.
The delay claim Not decided here Read by a model
The trial asks the Court to make a determination on whether Plaintiffs have met the requirements for naturalization such that their naturalization applications should be granted.
Months pending Not stated A section 1447(b) suit: these months run from the naturalization application. The statute's 120 days run from the interview, which they do not measure. 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
Nationality Cambodia Read by a model
citizens of Cambodia and entered the United States in 2006 as children ages 14 and 11 at the time.

Other orders in this case

The group holds 4 decisions from this suit, oldest first. Outcome counts on these pages count the case once, by its latest decision. How decisions are grouped into cases.

DecisionDecidedJudgeDisposition
Yith v. Johnson January 8, 2016 Lawrence, Neill Dismissed
Yith v. Nielsen October 26, 2018 Lawrence, Neill Denied, each side in part
Yith v. WolfThis decision December 6, 2019 Lawrence J. O'Neill Denied in the government's favor
Yith v. WolfThe case's latest decision: its outcome is the one counted November 24, 2021 Denied in the government's favor

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:14-cv-01875
Filed
November 25, 2014
Ended
November 29, 2021
Suit's filing to its end
1,390 days
How it ended
Dismissed on jurisdiction or the merits
From the record
idb disp 9 (judgment: court 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.