Passim

Mandamus decisions / Southern District of California

Sharikov v. Mayorkas

Southern District of CaliforniaAndrew G. SchoplerDecided November 20, 2024No. 3:24-cv-01608

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 ICE Read by a model
Plaintiffs allege that the Parole Directive, implemented in 2009, “directs ICE to release asylum seekers, provided they establish their identity and show they are not a danger or flight risk.”
Form or filing None named Read by a model
What the suit asked for Some other action Read by a model
they seek a preliminary injunction requiring ICE “to put an end to their Russian Detention & Deterrence Scheme and immediately comply with their 2009 Parole Directive.”
Kind of order A discovery or record order Read by a model
The sole issue before this Court, however, is Plaintiffs’ motion for expedited discovery.
Motion decided None Read by a model
Whose motion The plaintiff's motion Read by a model
Presently before the Court is Plaintiffs’ Ex Parte Motion for Expedited Discovery.
Disposition Discovery or record order An order on discovery or the administrative record. It decides no claim, so it is not counted as either side's win. Read by a model
The sole issue before this Court, however, is Plaintiffs’ motion for expedited discovery.
Prevailing party Neither side Read by a model
The sole issue before this Court, however, is Plaintiffs’ motion for expedited discovery.
The other claims Not decided here Read by a model
The sole issue before this Court, however, is Plaintiffs’ motion for expedited discovery.
Months pending Not stated Read by a model
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings None Read by a model
Nationality Russia Read by a model
Plaintiffs in this suit are thirty (30) Russian asylum seekers

How the case ended

Docket
No. 3:24-cv-01608
Filed
September 9, 2024
Ended
December 13, 2024
Suit's filing to its end
95 days
How it ended
Ended once the agency acted
From the record
voluntary dismissal 2024-12-12; idb disp 12 (dismissed: voluntarily)

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.