Mandamus decisions / Southern District of Florida
Lopez Otero v. Miami ICE Field Office Director
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
Petitioner seeks an injunction and a writ of mandamus requiring that the USCIS adjudicate his pending I-485 application for adjustment of status. |
|---|---|
| Form or filing |
I-485 (adjustment of status)
Read by a model
Petitioner seeks an injunction and a writ of mandamus requiring that the USCIS adjudicate his pending I-485 application for adjustment of status. |
| What the suit asked for |
Decide the application
Read by a model
Petitioner seeks an injunction and a writ of mandamus requiring that the USCIS adjudicate his pending I-485 application for adjustment of status. |
| Kind of order |
A ruling on a motion or the petition
Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Petitioner, Yuney Lorenzo Lopez Otero’s Verified Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus . . . [ECF No. 1] is DENIED. |
| Motion decided | None Read by a model |
| Whose motion |
The plaintiff's motion
Read by a model
THIS CAUSE came before the Court on Petitioner, Yuney Lorenzo Lopez Otero’s Verified Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus . . . [ECF No. 1], filed on January 27, 2026. |
| Disposition |
Dismissed
The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness.
Read by a model
Counts III and IV are dismissed without prejudice. |
| Prevailing party |
Government
Read by a model
Counts III and IV are dismissed without prejudice. |
| The delay claim |
Dismissed
Read by a model
Counts III and IV are dismissed without prejudice. |
| The other claims |
Relief denied
Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Petitioner, Yuney Lorenzo Lopez Otero’s Verified Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus . . . [ECF No. 1] is DENIED. |
| Months pending |
9.5 months from the application to the suit; 10.9 months from the application to the court's decision
Read by a model
On April 14, 2025, Petitioner applied for permanent residency under the Cuban Adjustment Act. |
| TRAC factors | The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model |
| Threshold rulings | None Read by a model |
| Nationality |
Cuba
Read by a model
Petitioner is a Cuban citizen |
How the case ended
- Docket
- No. 1:26-cv-20530
- Filed
- January 27, 2026
- Ended
- March 13, 2026
- Suit's filing to its end
- 45 days
- How it ended
- Dismissed on jurisdiction or the merits
- From the record
- idb disp 17 (judgment: other), 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 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.
-
Norton v. Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, 542 U.S. 55
Supreme Court, June 14, 2004. Section 706(1) and mandamus reach only a discrete agency action that the agency is legally required to take, so a court cannot compel programmatic improvements or action the law leaves to agency discretion.
ImmCite: treatment available, history exists, not clearance
-
Kanapuram v. Director, USCIS, 131 F.4th 1302
Eleventh Circuit, March 20, 2025. Section 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii) strips district courts of jurisdiction over APA unreasonable-delay claims about pending adjustment applications where the delay is part of the discretionary adjudication process, including retrogression holds.
ImmCite: treatment available, history exists, not clearance. ImmCite has read all 2 published decisions citing this case, as of 2026-11-02; none treats it adversely. That describes those decisions; it is not a determination that the case is good law.