Passim

Mandamus decisions / Southern District of Florida

Silebi De Donado v. Swacina

Southern District of FloridaMorenoDecided May 14, 2007

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
Consequently, the USCIS has yet to render a decision on Plaintiffs application.
Form or filing N-400 (naturalization) Read by a model
Plaintiff filed an application for naturalization, Form N-400, with the USCIS on October 28, 2005.
What the suit asked for Naturalization hearing or remand (1447(b)) Read by a model
seeks a hearing on her naturalization application pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1447(b)
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS AND GRANTING DEFENDANT'S ALTERNATIVE MOTION TO REMAND TO USCIS
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction; Remand under 1447(b) Read by a model
Defendants move to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under Fed. R.Civ.P. 12(b)(1), or in the alternative, to remand the matter to USCIS for completion of the administrative process.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Defendants move to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under Fed. R.Civ.P. 12(b)(1), or in the alternative, to remand the matter to USCIS for completion of the administrative process.
Disposition Remanded to the agency Sent back to the agency, with or without instructions. Read by a model
Therefore, the Court remands this matter to the USCIS and orders Defendants to make a determination on Plaintiffs application for naturalization within 120 days from the date of this Order.
Prevailing party Applicant Read by a model
Therefore, the Court remands this matter to the USCIS and orders Defendants to make a determination on Plaintiffs application for naturalization within 120 days from the date of this Order.
The delay claim Remanded to the agency Read by a model
Therefore, the Court remands this matter to the USCIS and orders Defendants to make a determination on Plaintiffs application for naturalization within 120 days from the date of this Order.
Months pending 18.5 months from the application to the court's decision A section 1447(b) suit: these months run from the naturalization application. The statute's 120 days run from the interview, which they do not measure. Read by a model
Plaintiff filed an application for naturalization, Form N-400, with the USCIS on October 28, 2005.
Months since the naturalization interview 13.8 months from the interview (2006-03-20) Read by a model
The USCIS interviewed her in connection with her application on March 20, 2006.
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings None Read by a model
Nationality Colombia Read by a model
Plaintiff Eidy Labibe Silebi De Donado is a citizen of Colombia.

How the case ended

This decision is not linked to a docket in the docket record yet, so how the case ended is not shown.

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.