Passim

Mandamus decisions / Western District of Washington

Nasiry v. Noem

Western District of WashingtonLauren KingDecided August 26, 2026No. 2:25-cv-02365

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
Instead, “USCIS is actively working to complete adjudication of [Nasiry’s] asylum application, and is requesting solely the amount of time needed to do so”; USCIS “needs additional time to complete background checks and vetting.”
Form or filing I-589 (asylum) Read by a model
seeking to compel Defendants to adjudicate his asylum application.
What the suit asked for Decide the asylum application Read by a model
seeking to compel Defendants to adjudicate his asylum application.
Kind of order A procedural order Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, the Court GRANTS Defendants’ Motion to Stay.
Motion decided None Read by a model
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
This matter comes before the Court on Defendants’ motion to stay proceedings for 60 days.
Disposition Procedural order A scheduling, briefing, stay, show-cause or other procedural order. Not counted as either side's win. Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, the Court GRANTS Defendants’ Motion to Stay.
Prevailing party Neither side Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, the Court GRANTS Defendants’ Motion to Stay.
The delay claim Not decided here Read by a model
The case is stayed until September 10, 2026.
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

How the case ended

Docket
No. 2:25-cv-02365
Filed
November 24, 2025
Status
Pending as of the last docket check

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 3, 2026. Check the current status before relying on one.