Passim

Mandamus decisions / Western District of Washington

Mora Flores v. Garland

Western District of WashingtonRicardo S. MartinezDecided October 17, 2024No. 2:24-cv-01692

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 ICE Read by a model
She was told by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”) agents on October 26 7th, 2024, at a regularly scheduled appointment, that ICE intends to deport her and her daughter to Guatemala on October 11, 2024.
Form or filing None named Read by a model
What the suit asked for Some other action Read by a model
Plaintiffs move the Court to stay their deportation from the United States pending the Board of 20 Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) adjudication of their filed Motion to Reopen.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
ORDERS that Plaintiffs’ Motion for Temporary Restraining Order, Dkt #2, is DENIED.
Motion decided Preliminary injunction or TRO Read by a model
Plaintiffs’ Motion for Temporary Restraining Order, Dkt #2, is DENIED.
Whose motion The plaintiff's motion Read by a model
ORDERS that Plaintiffs’ Motion for Temporary Restraining Order, Dkt #2, is DENIED.
Disposition Denied in the government's favor The principal motion was denied in full: a motion to dismiss denied so the case goes on, or relief denied on the merits. Read by a model
Plaintiffs’ Motion for Temporary Restraining Order, Dkt #2, is DENIED.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
Plaintiffs’ Motion for Temporary Restraining Order, Dkt #2, is DENIED.
The delay claim Not decided here Read by a model
ORDERS that Plaintiffs’ Motion for Temporary Restraining Order, Dkt #2, is DENIED.
The other claims Relief denied Read by a model
ORDERS that Plaintiffs’ Motion for Temporary Restraining Order, Dkt #2, is DENIED.
Months pending Not stated 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

How the case ended

Docket
No. 2:24-cv-01692
Filed
October 16, 2024
Ended
December 5, 2024
Suit's filing to its end
50 days
How it ended
Ended once the agency acted
From the record
decided 2024-12-05 on a stipulated dismissal; idb disp 14 (dismissed: other)

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.