Passim

Mandamus decisions / Southern District of California

Elias v. Pierre

Southern District of CaliforniaJinsook OhtaDecided November 16, 2022No. 3:22-cv-01012

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 the division of the 5 Department of Homeland Security that is responsible for adjudicating naturalization 6 || applications.
Form or filing N-400 (naturalization) Read by a model
adjudicate Plaintiff's N-400 application within thirty days of the date this Order is filed.
What the suit asked for Naturalization hearing or remand (1447(b)) Read by a model
Plaintiff filed this case seeking judicial review and adjudication of hi: 22 ||naturalization application under 8 U.S.C. § 1447(b).
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For the following reasons, the Court grants the 25 Defendants’ motion to remand to USCIS.
Motion decided Remand under 1447(b) Read by a model
Defendants moved to remand tc 23 ||USCIS on the ground that it is ready and able to adjudicate Plaintiffs naturalizatior 24 |; application within 30 days after remand.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Defendants’ motion to remand to USCIS.
Disposition Remanded to the agency Sent back to the agency, with or without instructions. Read by a model
For these reasons, the Court remands this case to USCIS and orders that USCIS 17 adjudicate Plaintiff's N-400 application within thirty days of the date this Order is filed.
Prevailing party Applicant Read by a model
For these reasons, the Court remands this case to USCIS and orders that USCIS 17 adjudicate Plaintiff's N-400 application within thirty days of the date this Order is filed.
The delay claim Remanded to the agency Read by a model
For these reasons, the Court remands this case to USCIS and orders that USCIS
Months pending 27.5 months from the application to the court's decision 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
On August 1, 2020, Plaintiff Fares Elias filed an application for naturalization
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. 3:22-cv-01012
On the docket
This ruling (ECF 13), deciding the motion (ECF 3)
Filed
July 12, 2022
Ended
November 16, 2022
Suit's filing to its end
127 days
How it ended
Remanded to the agency
From the record
remand order 2022-11-16; idb disp 11 (remanded to U.S. agency)

A voluntary or stipulated dismissal is how most suits end once the agency acts; the docket rarely says why. Other suits in this court.

The ruling's entry is the docket's one order or judgment entered the day of the decision, and the motion number is read from that entry's text. Both come from CourtListener's copy of the docket; check them there.

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.