Passim

Mandamus decisions / Eastern District of New York

Zaranska v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Eastern District of New YorkBlockDecided November 10, 2005

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
While the petition was sub judice, the CIS denied Zaranska's application for naturalization.
Form or filing N-400 (naturalization) Read by a model
her application for naturalization
What the suit asked for Naturalization hearing or remand (1447(b)) Read by a model
filed a petition with the Court pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1447(b), requesting that the Court adjudicate her application for naturalization or remand the application to the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (the "CIS") for adjudication.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
Based upon its de novo review, the Court adopts Magistrate Judge Azrack's R & R, and denies respondents' motions to dismiss and for summary judgment.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction; Summary judgment Read by a model
Based upon its de novo review, the Court adopts Magistrate Judge Azrack's R & R, and denies respondents' motions to dismiss and for summary judgment.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
denies respondents' motions to dismiss and for summary judgment.
Disposition Government's motion denied; the case goes on The government's motion (to dismiss, or for summary judgment) was denied, so the case goes on. Counted as the applicant's ruling; a later decision in the case can still go either way. Read by a model
Based upon its de novo review, the Court adopts Magistrate Judge Azrack's R & R, and denies respondents' motions to dismiss and for summary judgment.
Prevailing party Applicant Read by a model
Based upon its de novo review, the Court adopts Magistrate Judge Azrack's R & R, and denies respondents' motions to dismiss and for summary judgment.
The delay claim The delay claim goes on Read by a model
Based upon its de novo review, the Court adopts Magistrate Judge Azrack's R & R, and denies respondents' motions to dismiss and for summary judgment.
Months pending 75.5 months from the application to the suit; 92.6 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
She filed an application with the then-Immigration and Naturalization Service ("INS"), now Department of Homeland Security Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services ("CIS") on February 23, 1998.
Months since the naturalization interview 51.6 months from the interview (2000-04-18) Read by a model
On April 18, 2000, petitioner appeared for an examination on her naturalization application.
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings Mootness argument rejected Read by a model
Because the Court concludes that the filing of a petition in district court pursuant to § 1447 strips the CIS of jurisdiction, a denial issued by the CIS after the petition is filed cannot have any effect
Nationality Poland Read by a model
Petitioner is a Polish national seeking naturalization.

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 Second 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.