Mandamus decisions / Southern District of Florida

TIKHONOV v. MAYORKAS

Southern District of FloridaJoan A. LenardDecided March 12, 2024No. 1:23-cv-24572

Read the decision Original 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	USCIS Read by a model On April 7, 2020, Plaintiff filed a Form I-589, Application for Asylum and Withholding of Removal with United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”).
Form or filing	I-589 (asylum) Read by a model On April 7, 2020, Plaintiff filed a Form I-589, Application for Asylum and Withholding of Removal with United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”).
What the suit asked for	Decide the asylum application Read by a model Plaintiff thus requests that his Application be adjudicated “within a reasonable period of time.”
Kind of order	A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (D.E. 11) is DENIED.
Motion decided	Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim Read by a model Therefore, Defendants’ Motion under Rule 12(b)(6) is due to be denied.
Whose motion	The government's motion Read by a model Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (D.E. 11) is DENIED.
Disposition	Government's motion denied; the case goes on The government's motion (to dismiss, or for summary judgment) was denied, so the case goes on. Counted as the applicant's ruling; a later decision in the case can still go either way. Read by a model Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (D.E. 11) is DENIED.
Prevailing party	Applicant Read by a model Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (D.E. 11) is DENIED.
The delay claim	The delay claim goes on Read by a model Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (D.E. 11) is DENIED.
Months pending	41.4 months from the application to the suit; 47.1 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model On April 7, 2020, Plaintiff filed a Form I-589, Application for Asylum and Withholding of Removal with United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”).
TRAC factors	The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings	None Read by a model
Nationality	Russia Read by a model Plaintiff is a citizen of Russia.

Other orders in this case

The group holds 2 decisions from this suit, oldest first. Outcome counts on these pages count the case once, by its latest decision. How decisions are grouped into cases.

Decision	Decided	Judge	Disposition
TIKHONOV v. MAYORKASThis decision	March 12, 2024	Joan A. Lenard	Government's motion denied; the case goes on
TIKHONOV v. MAYORKASThe case's latest decision: its outcome is the one counted	November 6, 2024	Joan A. Lenard	Granted in the government's favor

How the case ended

Docket: No. 1:23-cv-24572
On the docket: This ruling (ECF 25), deciding the motion (ECF 11)
Filed: December 4, 2023
Ended: November 6, 2024
Suit's filing to its end: 338 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. Other suits in this court.

The ruling's entry is the docket's one order or judgment entered the day of the decision, and the motion number is read from that entry's text. Both come from CourtListener's copy of the docket; check them there.

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.