Passim

Mandamus decisions / Southern District of Florida

Guillaume v. Noem

Southern District of FloridaAileen M. CannonDecided March 31, 2026No. 9:25-cv-80563

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 USCIS Read by a model
On October 6, 2021, Plaintiff submitted to the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) a Form I-130, Petition for Alien Relative (the “Petition”), on behalf of Plaintiff’s unmarried adult daughter (the “Beneficiary”) [ECF No. 1].
Form or filing I-130 (relative petition) Read by a model
a Form I-130, Petition for Alien Relative (the “Petition”)
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
to compel Defendants to adjudicate her Petition “without further delay”
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss [ECF No. 12] is GRANTED.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction Read by a model
Following review, Defendants’ Motion is GRANTED, and Plaintiff’s Complaint is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss [ECF No. 12] is GRANTED.
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
Counts I, II, and III are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for lack of jurisdiction.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
Following review, Defendants’ Motion is GRANTED, and Plaintiff’s Complaint is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
Counts I, II, and III are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for lack of jurisdiction.
Months pending 43 months from the application to the suit; 53.8 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
On October 6, 2021, Plaintiff submitted to the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) a Form I-130, Petition for Alien Relative
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings APA adequate-remedy bar applied (mandamus claim fails) Read by a model
Plaintiff has not established a basis to issue mandamus relief for the simple reason that she can seek relief under the Administrative Procedure Act. That alone forecloses a grant of a writ of mandamus.
I-130 category Family preference Read by a model
on behalf of Plaintiff’s unmarried adult daughter (the “Beneficiary”)

How the case ended

Docket
No. 9:25-cv-80563
On the docket
This ruling (ECF 15)
Filed
May 8, 2025
Ended
March 31, 2026
Suit's filing to its end
327 days
How it ended
Dismissed on jurisdiction or the merits
From the record
idb disp 3 (dismissed: lack 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.

The ruling's entry is the docket's one order or judgment entered the day of the decision. 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.