Mandamus decisions / Middle District of Florida
Albino Arellano v. Warden, Baker Correctional Institution (Baker County)
Read the decisionOriginal on CourtListener
2,996 written decisions from 2,731 cases in the whole mandamus and agency-delay group, the group's newest decided November 12, 2026. Updated November 14, 2026 at 1:17 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 1,617 public decisions since January 1, 2025 that a CourtListener and GovInfo search for mandamus and agency delay finds, Passim holds 1,406 (87%), 1,039 of them in this group, measured November 14, 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 |
ICE
Read by a model
On October 5, 2025, ICE detained Petitioner following a traffic stop in which Petitioner was a passenger in the vehicle. |
|---|---|
| Form or filing | None named Read by a model |
| What the suit asked for | Not recorded Read by a model |
| Kind of order |
A ruling on a motion or the petition
Read by a model
The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1) is DENIED and this case is DISMISSED. |
| Motion decided |
Other motion to dismiss
Read by a model
Respondent Warden’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 13) is DENIED as moot. |
| Whose motion |
Cross-motions
Read by a model
1. The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1) is DENIED and this case is DISMISSED. 2. Respondent Warden’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 13) is DENIED as moot. |
| Disposition |
Dismissed
The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness.
Read by a model
The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1) is DENIED and this case is DISMISSED. |
| Prevailing party |
Government
Read by a model
The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1) is DENIED and this case is DISMISSED. |
| The other claims |
Relief denied
Read by a model
The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1) is DENIED and this case is DISMISSED. |
| 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 |
| Nationality |
Mexico
Read by a model
Petitioner is a citizen of Mexico |
How the case ended
- Docket
- No. 3:25-cv-01333
- Filed
- November 4, 2025
- Ended
- April 22, 2026
- Suit's filing to its end
- 169 days
- How it ended
- Dismissed on jurisdiction or the merits
- From the record
- idb disp 6 (judgment: motion before trial), 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 14, 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 2026-11-09; none treats it adversely. That describes those decisions; it is not a determination that the case is good law.