Mandamus decisions / Southern District of Ohio
Mukiawah v. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services
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
This case arises out of USCIS’s 2018 denial of a Form I-130 Petition for Alien Relative filed by Lashawna White Mukiawah on behalf of Leonard Mukiawah. |
|---|---|
| Form or filing |
I-130 (relative petition)
Read by a model
This case arises out of USCIS’s 2018 denial of a Form I-130 Petition for Alien Relative filed by Lashawna White Mukiawah on behalf of Leonard Mukiawah. |
| 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
For the reasons stated above, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 25) is GRANTED. |
| Motion decided |
Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction; Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim
Read by a model
This matter is before the Court on the Motion to Dismiss filed by Defendants United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), et al. (ECF No. 25.) |
| Whose motion |
The government's motion
Read by a model
This matter is before the Court on the Motion to Dismiss filed by Defendants United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), et al. |
| Disposition |
Dismissed
The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness.
Read by a model
For the reasons stated above, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 25) is GRANTED. The Clerk is DIRECTED to TERMINATE this case from the docket of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio. |
| Prevailing party |
Government
Read by a model
Accordingly, Plaintiffs fail to state a claim under the APA and the Court GRANTS Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss. |
| The other claims |
Dismissed
Read by a model
For the reasons stated above, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 25) is GRANTED. The Clerk is DIRECTED to TERMINATE this case from the docket of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio. |
| 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 |
Cameroon
Read by a model
Mr. Mukiawah is a native citizen of Cameroon; |
| I-130 category |
Immediate relative
Read by a model
Mrs. Mukiawah then filed three I-130 Petitions with the USCIS to classify Mr. Mukiawah as the spouse of a U.S. citizen. |
How the case ended
- Docket
- No. 2:21-cv-03540
- Filed
- June 11, 2021
- Ended
- June 1, 2022
- Suit's filing to its end
- 355 days
- How it ended
- Dismissed on jurisdiction or the merits
- From the record
- order 2022-06-01 dismisses for want of jurisdiction; 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. Other suits in this court.
Supreme Court and Sixth 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
-
Barrios Garcia v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security, 25 F.4th 430
Sixth Circuit, February 10, 2022. Courts may review and compel unreasonably delayed U-visa waitlist placement and bona fide determinations under TRAC, though not discretionary pre-waitlist work authorization, disagreeing in part with the Fourth Circuit's Gonzalez.
ImmCite: unchecked, treatment not confirmed yet, not evidence either way. No verified adverse treatment has been found so far. All 2 precedential decisions citing this case have been reviewed as of 2026-10-29.