Mandamus decisions / Southern District of Florida

Echeverri v. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services

Southern District of FloridaRodolfo A. Ruiz, IIDecided August 21, 2023No. 1:23-cv-21711

Read the decision Original 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 Echeverri’s Form I-601A has been pending with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) since April 20, 2021.
Form or filing	I-601A (provisional waiver) Read by a model Plaintiff Yulieth Andrea Echeverri brings this action to compel Defendants to issue a decision on her pending Form I-601A.
What the suit asked for	Decide the application Read by a model Plaintiff Yulieth Andrea Echeverri brings this action to compel Defendants to issue a decision on her pending Form I-601A.
Kind of order	A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS
Motion decided	Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction; Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim Read by a model Defendants move to dismiss this case because (1) the Court does not have jurisdiction over Echeverri’s unreasonable delay and mandamus claims; and (2) Echeverri has failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
Whose motion	The government's motion Read by a model THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Complaint (“Motion”), [ECF No. 6].
Disposition	Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model Plaintiff's mandamus and unreasonable delay claims are DISMISSED for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
Prevailing party	Government Read by a model Defendants’ Motion, [ECF No. 6], is GRANTED.
The delay claim	Dismissed Read by a model Plaintiff's mandamus and unreasonable delay claims are DISMISSED for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
The other claims	Dismissed Read by a model Plaintiff's due process claims are DISMISSED with prejudice for failure to state a claim.
Months pending	24.5 months from the application to the suit; 28 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model Echeverri filed her Form I-601A, the relevant application to receive a provisional unlawful presence waiver, on April 20, 2021.
TRAC factors	The court weighed the TRAC factors 1. Rule of reasonfavors the government 2. Congressional timetablefavors the government 3. Human health and welfarefavors the applicant 4. Competing prioritiesfavors the government 5. Interests prejudicedfavors the applicant 6. No impropriety neededneutral Read by a model Accordingly, the first and most important TRAC factor weighs heavily against awarding relief in this action.
The government's delay arguments	First-in, first-out processing accepted; Line-jumping accepted Read by a model Courts have seemingly universally held USCIS’s first-in, first-out policy is a rule of reason.
Threshold rulings	APA adequate-remedy bar applied (mandamus claim fails) Read by a model Finally, while the Court concludes it does not have jurisdiction over Echeverri’s APA claim, in the event jurisdiction were to exist, Echeverri’s APA claim would provide adequate relief.
Nationality	Colombia Read by a model Echeverri is a citizen of Colombia

How the case ended

Docket: No. 1:23-cv-21711
Filed: May 5, 2023
Ended: May 8, 2023
Suit's filing to its end: 3 days
How it ended: Dismissed, ground not recorded
From the record: 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 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 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
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 2026-11-02; none treats it adversely. That describes those decisions; it is not a determination that the case is good law.