Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Columbia

Kirwa v. United States Department of Defense

District of ColumbiaEllen Segal HuvelleDecided January 11, 2018

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 Not recorded Read by a model
Form or filing N-426 Read by a model
Although the three named plaintiffs have received Form N-426s as a result of this Court’s preliminary injunction, the Court has granted plaintiffs’ counsel leave to substitute new named plaintiffs who have yet to receive a completed Form N-426.
What the suit asked for Some other action Read by a model
Plaintiffs filed a complaint on September 1, 2017, challenging DOD’s refusal to complete their N-426 Forms and to certify their honorable service in the Selected Reserve as unlawfully imposing extra-statutory requirements in violation of § 1440.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
The Court grants defendants’ motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ constitutional substantive-due-process claim, but otherwise denies defendants’ motion
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim; Summary judgment Read by a model
Before the Court is defendants’ motion to dismiss, or in the alternative, for summary judgment.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Before the Court is defendants’ motion to dismiss, or in the alternative, for summary judgment.
Disposition Dismissed in part; some claims go on The government's motion to dismiss was granted in part: some claims were dismissed and others go on. Read by a model
The Court grants defendants’ motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ constitutional substantive-due-process claim, but otherwise denies defendants’ motion to dismiss with
Prevailing party Each side in part Read by a model
The Court grants defendants’ motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ constitutional substantive-due-process claim, but otherwise denies defendants’ motion to dismiss with
The delay claim The delay claim goes on Read by a model
The Court grants defendants’ motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ constitutional substantive-due-process claim, but otherwise denies defendants’ motion to dismiss with
The other claims Some dismissed, some go on Read by a model
The Court finds that plaintiffs have stated facially plausible constitutional claims under the Naturalization Clause, and under the Due Process Clause for procedural due process, but it dismisses plaintiffs’ claim for violating substantive due process.
Months pending Not stated Read by a model
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings APA adequate-remedy bar rejected Read by a model
it would be premature to dismiss a cause of action on the ground that an adequate alternative remedy exists before determining the contours of that remedy and plaintiffs’ entitlement to that remedy.

Other orders in this case

The group holds 2 decisions from this suit, oldest first. Outcome counts on these pages count the case once, by its latest decision, this one. How decisions are grouped into cases.

DecisionDecidedJudgeDisposition
Kirwa v. United States Department of Defense October 25, 2017 Ellen S. Huvelle Granted in the applicant's favor
Kirwa v. United States Department of DefenseThis decisionThe case's latest decision: its outcome is the one counted January 11, 2018 Ellen Segal Huvelle Dismissed in part; some claims go on

How the case ended

This decision is not linked to a docket in the docket record yet, so how the case ended is not shown.

Supreme Court and D.C. 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.