Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Nebraska

Ybarra v. Miller

District of NebraskaBrian C. BuescherDecided November 7, 2023No. 4:23-cv-03082

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
On March 25, 2021, Martinez filed an I-601A Application for Provisional Unlawful Presence Waiver which remains pending at USCIS’s Nebraska Service Center.
Form or filing DS-260 (immigrant visa); I-601A (provisional waiver) Read by a model
On March 25, 2021, Martinez filed an I-601A Application for Provisional Unlawful Presence Waiver which remains pending at USCIS’s Nebraska Service Center.
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
Specifically, “Plaintiffs ask this Court to compel Defendants to perform their duties and complete the background checks for, and adjudication of, Plaintiff-wife’s I-601A application and schedule and conduct Plaintiff-wife’s DS-260 immigrant visa interview.”
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
IT IS ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, Filing 21, 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 case is before the Court on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6).
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
This case is before the Court on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6).
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
IT IS ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, Filing 21, is granted, and the Complaint in this action is dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and failure to state a claim as set out above.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
IT IS ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, Filing 21, is granted, and the Complaint in this action is dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and failure to state a claim as set out above.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
the Complaint in this action is dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and failure to state a claim as set out above.
Months pending 25.1 months from the application to the suit; 31.4 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
On March 25, 2021, Martinez filed an I-601A Application for Provisional Unlawful Presence Waiver which remains pending at USCIS’s Nebraska Service Center.
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. 4:23-cv-03082
Filed
April 28, 2023
Ended
November 7, 2023
Suit's filing to its end
193 days
How it ended
Dismissed on jurisdiction or the merits
From the record
order 2023-11-07 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 Eighth 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.