Passim

Mandamus decisions / Northern District of California

Banukumar v. Mayorkas

Northern District of CaliforniaBeth Labson FreemanDecided December 5, 2023No. 5:23-cv-04104

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
USCIS is hereby ORDERED to adjudicate Mr. Banukumar's application for naturalization within fifteen days of this Order.
Form or filing N-400 (naturalization) Read by a model
Mr. Banukumar filed an application for naturalization with USCIS on March 25, 2022.
What the suit asked for Naturalization hearing or remand (1447(b)) Read by a model
On August 12, 2023, Plaintiff Satish Kumar Banukumar petitioned the Court for de novo review of his application for naturalization pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1447(b).
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For the reasons set forth below, Defendants’ Motion to Remand is GRANTED.
Motion decided Remand under 1447(b) Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, Defendants’ Motion to Remand is GRANTED.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
On October 30, 2023, Defendants filed a Motion to Remand the matter to USCIS
Disposition Remanded to the agency Sent back to the agency, with or without instructions. Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, Defendants’ Motion to Remand is GRANTED.
Prevailing party Applicant Read by a model
USCIS is hereby ORDERED to adjudicate Mr. Banukumar's application for naturalization within fifteen days of this Order.
The delay claim Remanded to the agency Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, Defendants’ Motion to Remand is GRANTED.
Months pending 16.6 months from the application to the suit; 20.4 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
Mr. Banukumar filed an application for naturalization with USCIS on March 25, 2022.
Months since the naturalization interview 12.4 months from the interview (2022-11-22) Read by a model
Over 120 days have passed since Mr. Banukumar’s naturalization interview on November 22, 2022.
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings None Read by a model
Nationality India Read by a model
Plaintiff Satish Kumar Banukumar is a male national of India and is not a citizen of the United States.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 5:23-cv-04104
Filed
August 12, 2023
Ended
December 5, 2023
Suit's filing to its end
115 days
How it ended
Remanded to the agency
From the record
remand order 2023-12-05; idb disp 18 (statistical closing)

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