Passim

Mandamus decisions / Eastern District of California

Yith v. Johnson

Eastern District of CaliforniaLawrence, NeillDecided January 8, 2016No. 1:14-cv-01875

Read the decisionOriginal on CourtListener

2,996 written decisions from 2,731 cases in the whole mandamus and agency-delay group, the group's newest decided November 12, 2026. Updated November 14, 2026 at 1:17 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 1,617 public decisions since January 1, 2025 that a CourtListener and GovInfo search for mandamus and agency delay finds, Passim holds 1,406 (87%), 1,039 of them in this group, measured November 14, 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
DHS houses a sub-agency, USCIS, which, inter alia, adjudicates naturalization applications.
Form or filing N-400 (naturalization) Read by a model
On or about February 4, 2011, Seanlim filed a Form N-400, Application for Naturalization with USCIS.
What the suit asked for Naturalization hearing or remand (1447(b)) Read by a model
Plaintiffs cited 8 U.S.C. § 1447(b), which authorizes naturalization applicants to apply to the relevant district court for a hearing if there is a failure to make a determination 120 days after a naturalization “examination” occurs.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS AND DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO AMEND.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction; Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim Read by a model
On September 9, 2015, Defendants filed the pending motion to dismiss, citing three grounds for dismissal.
Whose motion Cross-motions Read by a model
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS AND DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO AMEND.
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
the Court will GRANT Defendants’ motion and dismiss this case without prejudice, and will DENY Plaintiffs’ motion to amend.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
the Court will GRANT Defendants’ motion and dismiss this case without prejudice, and will DENY Plaintiffs’ motion to amend.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
the Court will GRANT Defendants’ motion and dismiss this case without prejudice, and will DENY Plaintiffs’ motion to amend.
Months pending 45.7 months from the application to the suit; 59.1 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
On or about February 4, 2011, Seanlim filed a Form N-400, Application for Naturalization with USCIS.
Months since the naturalization interview 10 months from the interview (2015-03-10) Read by a model
In this case, Defendants have already conceded that the 120-day adjudicatory period was triggered when USCIS interviewed Plaintiffs on March 10, 2015.
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings Mootness argument rejected Read by a model
The Court finds that this case involves a “concrete, ongoing controversy” between Plaintiffs and USCIS about the bona fides of the marriage between their father and Ms. Meas, which a USCIS official has acknowledged is the only barrier to their eligibility to naturalize.
Nationality Cambodia Read by a model
Plaintiffs are siblings and citizens of Cambodia.

Other orders in this case

The group holds 4 decisions from this suit, oldest first. Outcome counts on these pages count the case once, by its latest decision. How decisions are grouped into cases.

DecisionDecidedJudgeDisposition
Yith v. JohnsonThis decision January 8, 2016 Lawrence, Neill Dismissed
Yith v. Nielsen October 26, 2018 Lawrence, Neill Denied, each side in part
Yith v. Wolf December 6, 2019 Lawrence J. O'Neill Denied in the government's favor
Yith v. WolfThe case's latest decision: its outcome is the one counted November 24, 2021 Denied in the government's favor

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:14-cv-01875
Filed
November 25, 2014
Ended
November 29, 2021
Suit's filing to its end
1,390 days
How it ended
Dismissed on jurisdiction or the merits
From the record
idb disp 9 (judgment: court 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 14, 2026. Check the current status before relying on one.