Passim

Mandamus decisions / Northern District of California

Kohistani v. Scott

Northern District of CaliforniaKandis A. WestmoreDecided July 29, 2026No. 4:25-cv-04315

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 July 22, 2024, USCIS responded via email relating to Silsila’s petition stating that it was received and that it would accommodate Plaintiff’s request for expedited processing.
Form or filing I-730 (refugee or asylee relative petition) Read by a model
On February 1, 2024, Plaintiff submitted I-730 Petitions for Asylee Relatives for his spouse and children who remained in Afghanistan.
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
asks that the Court compel Defendants to adjudicate Plaintiff’s I-730 Refugee Asylee Relative Petition for his spouse and minor children.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
the Court DENIES Defendants’ motion for summary judgment and GRANTS Plaintiff’s cross-motion for summary judgment on both the APA and Mandamus claims.
Motion decided Summary judgment Read by a model
For the reasons set forth above, the Court DENIES Defendants’ motion for summary judgment and GRANTS Plaintiff’s cross-motion for summary judgment on both the APA and Mandamus claims.
Whose motion Cross-motions Read by a model
On March 16, 2026, Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment. (Defs.’ Mot., Dkt. No. 27.) On April 23, 2026, Plaintiff filed an opposition and cross-motion for summary judgment.
Disposition Granted in the applicant's favor The principal motion was granted in full: summary judgment for either side, an injunction or TRO, a writ or order to act, fees. A motion to dismiss granted in full counts as Dismissed; a transfer is listed apart. Read by a model
For the reasons set forth above, the Court DENIES Defendants’ motion for summary judgment and GRANTS Plaintiff’s cross-motion for summary judgment on both the APA and Mandamus claims.
Prevailing party Applicant Read by a model
For the reasons set forth above, the Court DENIES Defendants’ motion for summary judgment and GRANTS Plaintiff’s cross-motion for summary judgment on both the APA and Mandamus claims.
The delay claim Relief ordered Read by a model
the Court DENIES Defendants’ motion for summary judgment and GRANTS Plaintiff’s cross-motion for summary judgment on both the APA and Mandamus claims.
Months pending 15.6 months from the application to the suit; 29.9 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
On February 1, 2024, Plaintiff submitted I-730 Petitions for Asylee Relatives for his spouse and children who remained in Afghanistan.
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings Section 1252(a)(2)(B) bar rejected Read by a model
Accordingly, the Court has subject matter jurisdiction to review pace of adjudication claims, and Defendants are not entitled to summary judgment on this basis.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 4:25-cv-04315
Filed
May 20, 2025
Ended
August 13, 2026
Suit's filing to its end
450 days
How it ended
Ended, outcome not recorded
From the record
terminated; no disposition recorded

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.