Passim

Mandamus decisions / Eastern District of California

(PS) Iampolskaia v. USCIS

Eastern District of CaliforniaTroy L. NunleyDecided December 1, 2025No. 2:25-cv-01789

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
Here, Plaintiff acknowledges USCIS issued a Request for Evidence (“RFE”) in response to her Form I-485, Plaintiff responded to the RFE, and thereafter, USCIS issued its denial of Plaintiff’s Form I-485.
Form or filing I-485 (adjustment of status) Read by a model
In June 2022, Plaintiff filed a Form I-485,
What the suit asked for Not recorded Read by a model
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
Because Plaintiff’s claim fails on the merits, her motion for a TRO is DENIED.
Motion decided Preliminary injunction or TRO Read by a model
the Court construes Plaintiff’s pleading as a motion for a temporary restraining order.
Whose motion The plaintiff's motion Read by a model
Plaintiff Tatiana Iampolskaia’s (“Plaintiff”) Emergency 20 Motion to Stay.
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
Because Plaintiff’s claim fails on the merits, her motion for a TRO is DENIED.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
Because Plaintiff’s claim fails on the merits, her motion for a TRO is DENIED.
The delay claim Not decided here Read by a model
Plaintiff argues the denial: (1) was issued while Plaintiff’s mandamus action 2 remains pending;
The other claims Relief denied Read by a model
Because Plaintiff’s claim fails on the merits, her motion for a TRO is DENIED.
Months pending 40.7 months from the application to the agency's action Read by a model
November 5, 2025, USCIS denied Plaintiff’s Form I-485
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings Section 1252(a)(2)(B) bar applied Read by a model
because § 1252 (a)(2)(B)(i) precludes judicial review of the denial,
Nationality Russia Read by a model
Plaintiff is citizen of Russia.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 2:25-cv-01789
Filed
June 26, 2025
Ended
February 17, 2026
Suit's filing to its end
236 days
How it ended
Ended, outcome not recorded
From the record
terminated; no disposition recorded

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.