Judges / Southern District of California
Janis Lynn Sammartino
Written decisions in the mandamus and agency-delay group that Judge Janis Lynn Sammartino signed, every one listed below, and the agency-delay suits that name the judge.
3,016 written decisions from 2,750 cases in the whole mandamus and agency-delay group, the group's newest decided November 13, 2026. Updated November 14, 2026 at 3:54 p.m. CT. Of the 1,617 public decisions since January 1, 2025 that a CourtListener and GovInfo search for agency delay finds, Passim holds 1,406 (87%), 1,039 of them in this group, measured November 14, 2026. 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 instead.
Read these counts as a record of past decisions, not a rate at which this judge rules for either side and not a prediction. Each decision turned on its own facts, its posture and what the parties asked for; the suits that reach a written decision are the contested minority. Read the decisions before drawing anything from them.
How the decisions came out
This page counts 5 of the group's written decisions, from 5 cases; the newest of them was decided November 10, 2026. The line at the top counts the whole group.
Each case counts once in these outcome counts, by its latest decision here. A motion to dismiss denied and a later judgment for the government count as the judgment.
Months from the application to the suit
Fewer than five cases state it (0); no distribution is shown.
Months from the application to the court's decision, or to the agency's action where it acted first
Fewer than five decisions state it (2); no distribution is shown.
Leaves out the 1 decision holding that the agency had acted where no reading dates that action: its months to the decision are not a delay.
What the suits asked for, by case
- Finish 221(g) processing2
- Some other action1
- Not recorded2
Decisions by year
TRAC rulings
Decisions in which the judge weighed the TRAC factors, newest first, with how the judge found each factor. Factors the decision did not reach are left blank.
| Decision | Decided | 1. Rule of reason | 2. Congressional timetable | 3. Human health and welfare | 4. Competing priorities | 5. Interests prejudiced | 6. No impropriety needed | Disposition |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jarrahi v. Rubio | February 9, 2026 | favors the government | favors the applicant | favors the applicant | favors the government | favors the applicant | favors the government | Dismissed |
| Infracost Inc v. Blinken | April 30, 2024 | favors the government | favors the applicant | favors the applicant | favors the government | favors the applicant | neutral | Dismissed |
Rulings on the government's threshold defenses
How many of the judge's decisions in the group applied each defense (the defense held) and how many rejected it. A decision counts where it rules on the defense, so most count under none or one. Each count opens those decisions in the list. Whether a defense is raised depends on the suit, so these are counts of past rulings, not a rate.
| Defense | Applied | Rejected |
|---|---|---|
| Section 1252(a)(2)(B) jurisdiction bar | 0 | 0 |
| Consular nonreviewability | 0 | 0 |
| No duty to re-adjudicate a 221(g) refusal | 0 | 0 |
| Mootness (the agency acted) | 1 | 0 |
| APA adequate-remedy bar to mandamus | 0 | 0 |
The decisions behind those counts, newest first. A defense the decision did not rule on is left blank.
| Decision | Decided | Section 1252(a)(2)(B) jurisdiction bar | Consular nonreviewability | No duty to re-adjudicate a 221(g) refusal | Mootness (the agency acted) | APA adequate-remedy bar to mandamus | Disposition |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Stepanyan v. U.S. Attorney General | November 10, 2026 | Applied | Dismissed as moot |
Every decision, by case
All 5 of the judge's decisions in the group, in 5 cases, newest first. Each case's latest decision comes first and is the one the counts above count; the case's other orders follow it.
| Decision | Decided | Agency | Form | Disposition | Prevailing party |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Stepanyan v. U.S. Attorney General | November 10, 2026 | CBP | Dismissed as moot | Neither side | |
| Jarrahi v. Rubio | February 9, 2026 | Department of State | 221(g), DS-260 | Dismissed | Government |
| Hairani v. Blinken | September 26, 2024 | Department of State | DS-160 | Not recorded | Not recorded |
| Infracost Inc v. Blinken | April 30, 2024 | Department of State | 221(g), DS-160 | Dismissed | Government |
| Davila v. Cohan | February 21, 2024 | Department of State | DS-260, 221(g) | Not recorded | Not recorded |
How agency-delay suits ended
Most suits end without a written decision: the agency acts and the parties dismiss. These counts come from the docket record (the federal courts' Integrated Database and CourtListener) and count every mandamus, APA and section 1447(b) suit against any immigration agency, whatever year it was filed, among the dockets that name this judge. Check a delay counts fewer: a court's suits of the last three years against the form's agency.
How the ended suits ended
- Ended once the agency actedThe plaintiff dismissed, the parties stipulated to dismissal, or the court dismissed as moot: how suits end once the agency decides. The docket rarely says why, or whether the agency approved or denied.7
- Dismissed on jurisdiction or the meritsDismissed for want of jurisdiction or on the TRAC factors, or judgment for the government.4
- Ended, outcome not recordedThe record shows the suit ended but not how.1
Days from the suit's filing to its end
133.5 days at the median; half fall between 111.5 and 191.2. 12 dockets state it.
Days from the suit's filing to its end, when it ended once the agency acted
120 days at the median; half fall between 105 and 185. 7 dockets state it.
8 of these suits have a written decision in the group.