Passim

Mandamus decisions / Western District of Washington

Ali v. Mukasey

Western District of WashingtonMarsha J. PechmanDecided February 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
Here, USCIS did not voluntarily adjudicate Mr. Ali's application, but was compelled to do so by the Court.
Form or filing N-400 (naturalization) Read by a model
On September 23, 2005, Mr. Ali filed an application for naturalization.
What the suit asked for Naturalization hearing or remand (1447(b)) Read by a model
When Mr. Ali brought this action under § 1447(b), the Court assumed exclusive jurisdiction and had two options for disposition of the matter: (1) to determine the matter on the merits; or (2) to remand the matter, with appropriate instructions, to USCIS to determine the matter.
Kind of order An order on fees Read by a model
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS' FEES AND COSTS
Motion decided Fees under EAJA Read by a model
This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiffs motion for attorneys' fees and costs pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act ("EAJA"), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d).
Whose motion The plaintiff's motion Read by a model
This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiffs motion for attorneys' fees and costs pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act ("EAJA"), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d).
Disposition Attorney's fees An order on attorney's fees or costs after the case, counted for the side that won the fee motion. Read by a model
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS' FEES AND COSTS
Prevailing party Applicant Read by a model
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS' FEES AND COSTS
The delay claim Not decided here Read by a model
Plaintiff now brings this motion for attorneys' fees and costs pursuant to the EAJA.
Months pending 17.2 months from the application to the suit; 22.3 months from the application to the agency's action 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 August 2, USCIS issued the oath and certificate of citizenship to Mr. Ali.
Months since the naturalization interview 18.7 months from the interview (2006-01-09) Read by a model
On January 9, 2006, the United States Citizen and Immigration Services (USCIS) interviewed Mr. Ali and Mr. Ali passed the English language, U.S. history, and government tests.
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings None Read by a model

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
Ali v. Mukasey February 19, 2008 Marsha J. Pechman Attorney's fees
Ali v. MukaseyThis decisionThe case's latest decision: its outcome is the one counted February 25, 2008 Marsha J. Pechman Attorney's fees

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.