Passim

Mandamus decisions / Western District of Washington

Roshandel v. Chertoff

Western District of WashingtonMarsha J. PechmanDecided April 25, 2008

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
Persons seeking naturalization must submit an application to USCIS, the agency responsible for adjudicating naturalization applications.
Form or filing N-400 (naturalization) Read by a model
This action involves delayed naturalization applications allegedly due to a pending "name check" with the Federal Bureau of Investigation ("FBI").
What the suit asked for Naturalization hearing or remand (1447(b)) Read by a model
Plaintiffs' request for section 1447(b) relief in the form of a class-wide remand to USCIS
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
The Plaintiffs' motion for class certification is GRANTED.
Motion decided None Read by a model
Whose motion The plaintiff's motion Read by a model
This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiffs' motion for class certification.
Disposition Granted in the applicant's favor The principal motion was granted in full: summary judgment for either side, an injunction or TRO, a writ or order to act, fees. A motion to dismiss granted in full counts as Dismissed; a transfer is listed apart. Read by a model
The Plaintiffs' motion for class certification is GRANTED.
Prevailing party Applicant Read by a model
The Plaintiffs' motion for class certification is GRANTED.
The delay claim Not decided here Read by a model
However, the reasonableness and legality of Defendants' policies and practices are not matters for the Court to consider on a motion for class certification.
The other claims Not decided here Read by a model
However, the reasonableness and legality of Defendants' policies and practices are not matters for the Court to consider on a motion for class certification.
Months pending 24 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
Each Plaintiffs application has been pending for at least two (2) years since passing his or her naturalization examination.
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
The government's delay arguments Line-jumping rejected Read by a model
An injunction would allow class members whose applications have been pending for shorter periods of time to "jump ahead" to the front of the line. But class treatment would not create antagonism among class members because all class members would be treated in exactly the same manner
Threshold rulings Mootness argument rejected Read by a model
Because three of the named plaintiffs' claims present live controversies, their claims are not moot, and the modification in class representation has n6 effect on the viability of the class as a whole.

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 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.