Passim

Mandamus decisions / Northern District of California

Tony N. v. U.S. Citizenship & Immigration Services

Northern District of CaliforniaMaxine M. ChesneyDecided March 2, 2022No. 3:21-cv-08742

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
On November 10, 2021, plaintiffs, five individuals who have applied for asylum, filed the above-titled action, alleging defendant United States Citizenship & Immigration Services ("USCIS") failed to timely rule on their applications for renewal of work permits.
Form or filing I-765 (EAD) Read by a model
the expiration date of an "Employment Authorization Document" issued by USCIS to an asylum seeker is extended by 180 days if certain conditions are met, including the applicant's submission of an application for renewal before the expiration date.
What the suit asked for Issue a work permit Read by a model
failed to timely rule on their applications for renewal of work permits.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction Read by a model
In light of the issuance of the above-referenced approvals, defendants argue the instant action is now moot and, consequently, should be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Before the Court is defendants' Motion to Dismiss, filed January 21, 2022.
Disposition Dismissed as moot Dismissed or denied as moot because the agency acted. Read by a model
the instant action is hereby DISMISSED without prejudice. See Newcomb v. United States, 98 F.2d 25, 27 (9th Cir. 1938) (holding, where case becomes moot, district court must "dismiss the [case] without prejudice").
Prevailing party Neither side Read by a model
Here, there is no dispute that a case or controversy no longer exists as to the applications that were pending on the date the action was filed.
The delay claim Moot: the agency acted Read by a model
the instant action is hereby DISMISSED without prejudice. See Newcomb v. United States, 98 F.2d 25, 27 (9th Cir. 1938) (holding, where case becomes moot, district court must "dismiss the [case] without prejudice").
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
Here, there is no dispute that a case or controversy no longer exists as to the applications that were pending on the date the action was filed.

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
Tony N. v. U.S. Citizenship & Immigration Services December 22, 2021 Maxine M. Chesney Denied in the government's favor
Tony N. v. U.S. Citizenship & Immigration ServicesThis decisionThe case's latest decision: its outcome is the one counted March 2, 2022 Maxine M. Chesney Dismissed as moot

How the case ended

Docket
No. 3:21-cv-08742
Filed
November 10, 2021
Ended
March 2, 2022
Suit's filing to its end
112 days
How it ended
Ended once the agency acted
From the record
idb disp 6 (judgment: motion before trial), judgment for defendant

A voluntary or stipulated dismissal is how most suits end once the agency acts; the docket rarely says why.

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.