Passim

Mandamus decisions / Middle District of Florida

Tyson v. USCIS

Middle District of FloridaKathryn Kimball MizelleDecided September 26, 2026No. 8:26-cv-02676

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
The Tysons now seek an order from this Court compelling USCIS to resolve their I-130 petition ahead of the October 2 hearing.
Form or filing I-130 (relative petition) Read by a model
They seek an injunction and writ of mandamus compelling USCIS to adjudicate Jamie Tyson’s Form I-130, Petition for Alien Relative, ahead of Nicholette Tyson’s October 2, 2026 hearing before an immigration judge.
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
The Tysons now seek an order from this Court compelling USCIS to resolve their I-130 petition ahead of the October 2 hearing.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
This action is DISMISSED without prejudice for lack of subjectmatter jurisdiction.
Motion decided None Read by a model
Whose motion The court on its own Read by a model
I ordered the Tysons to show cause why this action should not be dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction in the light of the INA’s jurisdiction-stripping provisions.
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
This action is DISMISSED without prejudice for lack of subjectmatter jurisdiction.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
This action is DISMISSED without prejudice for lack of subjectmatter jurisdiction.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
This action is DISMISSED without prejudice for lack of subjectmatter jurisdiction.
The other claims Dismissed Read by a model
The Tysons cannot circumvent the APA’s bar on judicial review of actions committed to agency discretion by including a claim that the challenged conduct is arbitrary and capricious under 5 U.S.C. § 706(2).
Months pending 15.5 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
Then, on June 12, 2025, Jamie Tyson filed an I-130 petition on behalf of Nicholette Tyson.
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings Section 1252(a)(2)(B) bar applied Read by a model
Because I conclude that the APA, 8 U.S.C. § 1252, and Mandamus Act preclude review of the Tysons’ claims, I do not examine whether the complaint sufficiently alleges standing.
Nationality Jamaica Read by a model
Nicholette Tyson is a citizen of Jamaica who is in removal proceedings and has a hearing before an immigration judge on October 2, 2026.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 8:26-cv-02676
Filed
September 14, 2026
Ended
September 29, 2026
Suit's filing to its end
15 days
How it ended
Dismissed on jurisdiction or the merits
From the record
order 2026-09-26 dismisses for want of jurisdiction

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 Eleventh 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.