Passim

Mandamus decisions / Western District of Washington

Yang v. Mayorkas

Western District of WashingtonKymberly K. EvansonDecided September 5, 2024No. 2:24-cv-00066

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
On July 1, 2024, USCIS denied Plaintiffs’ I-485 applications.
Form or filing I-485 (adjustment of status); I-765 (EAD) Read by a model
to adjudicate Plaintiffs’ pending I-485 and I-765 applications.
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
to adjudicate Plaintiffs’ pending I-485 and I-765 applications.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For these reasons, the Court GRANTS Defendant’s motion to dismiss.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction Read by a model
Defendant moves to dismiss the case under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) because, since the claim has been mooted, the court lacks subject matter jurisdiction.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
For these reasons, the Court GRANTS Defendant’s motion to dismiss.
Disposition Dismissed as moot Dismissed or denied as moot because the agency acted. Read by a model
The Court agrees with Defendant that Plaintiffs’ alleged injury has been redressed through USCIS’s adjudication of the applications and the case is now moot.
Prevailing party Neither side Read by a model
The Court agrees with Defendant that Plaintiffs’ alleged injury has been redressed through USCIS’s adjudication of the applications and the case is now moot.
The delay claim Moot: the agency acted Read by a model
The Court agrees with Defendant that Plaintiffs’ alleged injury has been redressed through USCIS’s adjudication of the applications and the case is now moot.
Months pending 252.8 months from the application to the suit; 258.3 months from the application to the agency's action Read by a model
On July 1, 2024, USCIS denied Plaintiffs’ I-485 applications.
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings Held moot Read by a model
The Court agrees with Defendant that Plaintiffs’ alleged injury has been redressed through USCIS’s adjudication of the applications and the case is now moot.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 2:24-cv-00066
Filed
January 15, 2024
Ended
September 5, 2024
Suit's filing to its end
234 days
How it ended
Ended once the agency acted
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 3, 2026. Check the current status before relying on one.