Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Hawaii

Delgado v. Wilkinson

District of HawaiiDERRICK K. WATSONDecided January 25, 2021

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
USCIS has made a decision on Delgado’s request for a continuance.
Form or filing None named Read by a model
What the suit asked for Some other action Read by a model
Delgado requests that this Court order the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) to adjudicate his request for a continuance of a January 26, 2021 hearing before USCIS.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
Construed as such, the motion for temporary restraining order, Dkt. No. 1, is DENIED.
Motion decided Preliminary injunction or TRO Read by a model
Construed as such, the motion for temporary restraining order, Dkt. No. 1, is DENIED.
Whose motion The plaintiff's motion Read by a model
Plaintiff wishes to use his as-yet unserved Complaint as a vehicle to move for affirmative relief, the Court construes the Complaint as an ex parte motion for a temporary restraining order.
Disposition Dismissed as moot Dismissed or denied as moot because the agency acted. Read by a model
Therefore, the relief Delgado seeks by way of a temporary restraining order, and perhaps this entire case, is moot.
Prevailing party Neither side Read by a model
Therefore, the relief Delgado seeks by way of a temporary restraining order, and perhaps this entire case, is moot.
The delay claim Moot: the agency acted Read by a model
Therefore, the relief Delgado seeks by way of a temporary restraining order, and perhaps this entire case, is moot. The motion for a temporary restraining order is DENIED on that basis.
The other claims Not decided here Read by a model
Therefore, Plaintiff is ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE why this case should not be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and/or as moot.
Months pending Not stated at filing The agency acted before this decision, so the months up to the decision are not a delay and are not shown. Read by a model
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings Held moot Read by a model
Therefore, the relief Delgado seeks by way of a temporary restraining order, and perhaps this entire case, is moot.

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 14, 2026. Check the current status before relying on one.