Passim

Mandamus decisions / Middle District of Tennessee

Dominy v. Mayorkas

Middle District of TennesseeEli J. RichardsonDecided February 24, 2023No. 3:22-cv-00393

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 ICE Read by a model
Mr. Dominy alleges that he reported Baluya’s violations to the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) and subsequently made complaints to USCIS and the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“USICE”) but that no actions were taken against Baluya.
Form or filing I-864 Read by a model
As part of the I-485 application process, Mr. Dominy executed a Form I-864 Affidavit of Support on behalf of Baluya.
What the suit asked for Some other action Read by a model
Plaintiffs ask the Court to either (1) release Mr. Dominy from the Affidavit of Support and from any obligation to financially sponsor Baluya or (2) direct that Baluya be deported to the Philippines because of her violations of the immigration laws.
Kind of order A magistrate judge's recommendation Read by a model
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction; Summary judgment Read by a model
Defendants argue that this Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over the case because (1) the Court has no jurisdictional authority to direct that removal proceedings be initiated to deport Baluya
Whose motion Cross-motions Read by a model
the undersigned respectfully recommends that Defendants’ motion to dismiss be granted, that Plaintiffs’ motions be denied, and that this case be dismissed.
Disposition Magistrate judge's recommendation A magistrate judge's report and recommendation. The district judge decides whether to adopt it, so it is not counted as either side's win. Read by a model
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Prevailing party Neither side Read by a model
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
The other claims Dismissed Read by a model
(3) this action be DISMISSED in its entirety.
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

How the case ended

Docket
No. 3:22-cv-00393
Filed
May 27, 2022
Ended
April 11, 2023
Suit's filing to its end
319 days
How it ended
Dismissed on jurisdiction or the merits
From the record
order 2023-04-11 for the defendants, ground not stated; idb disp 14 (dismissed: other)

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.