Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Nebraska

Johnston v. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services

District of NebraskaBrian Craig BuescherDecided August 31, 2026No. 4:26-cv-03091

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
She alleges that USCIS’s delay is inconsistent with its processing times for similar applications, which typically conclude within six to eight months of receipt.
Form or filing I-601 (waiver) Read by a model
her I-601 Application for Waiver of Grounds for Inadmissibility
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
Jayme Elaine Johnston seeks an order compelling Defendants to immediately grant or deny her application for waiver of grounds of inadmissibility, with the case number: LIN2490133943.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For the reasons stated below, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss is granted.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction Read by a model
Defendants have filed a Motion to Dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1).
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Defendants have filed a Motion to Dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1).
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
IT IS ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, Filing 14, is granted, and Plaintiff Jayme Elaine Johnston’s Petition for Writ of Mandamus Under 28 U.S.C. § 1361, Filing 1, is dismissed in its entirety.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
IT IS ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, Filing 14, is granted, and Plaintiff Jayme Elaine Johnston’s Petition for Writ of Mandamus Under 28 U.S.C. § 1361, Filing 1, is dismissed in its entirety.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
IT IS ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, Filing 14, is granted, and Plaintiff Jayme Elaine Johnston’s Petition for Writ of Mandamus Under 28 U.S.C. § 1361, Filing 1, is dismissed in its entirety.
Months pending 22.6 months from the application to the suit; 28.1 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
She alleges that on April 29, 2024, she filed an I-601 Application for Waiver of Grounds of Inadmissibility
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
Section 1252(a)(2)(B) strips this Court of jurisdiction over her claims.
Nationality Canada Read by a model
Johnston alleges that she is a national of Canada

How the case ended

Docket
No. 4:26-cv-03091
Filed
March 17, 2026
Ended
August 31, 2026
Suit's filing to its end
167 days
How it ended
Dismissed on jurisdiction or the merits
From the record
order 2026-08-31 for the defendants, ground not stated

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 Eighth 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.