Passim

Mandamus decisions / Eastern District of Michigan

Delavari v. US Secretary of State

Eastern District of MichiganLaurie Jill MichelsonDecided March 13, 2026

Read the decisionOriginal on CourtListener

2,948 written decisions from 2,691 cases in the whole mandamus and agency-delay group, the group's newest decided November 10, 2026. Updated November 11, 2026 at 1:21 p.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 1,632 public decisions since January 1, 2025 that a CourtListener and GovInfo search for mandamus and agency delay finds, Passim holds 1,398 (86%), measured November 11, 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 Department of State Read by a model
On November 16, 2023, Abdolkarim1 completed an immigration visa interview with a consular officer at the U.S. Embassy in Yerevan, Armenia.
Form or filing 221(g) (consular refusal); DS-260 (immigrant visa) Read by a model
Several years ago, Abdolkarim applied for an immigrant visa to come to the United States.
What the suit asked for Finish 221(g) processing Read by a model
So she filed this complaint alleging Defendants violated the Administrative Procedure Act through unreasonably delaying their administrative review of her father’s visa application and seeking a writ of mandamus compelling the Government to “make a final determination” on his application.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS [10]
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction Read by a model
On that basis, Defendants move to dismiss the complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6).
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
On that basis, Defendants move to dismiss the complaint under Federal Rule 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 follows that the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over the case, and the complaint must therefore be dismissed.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
For the reasons provided, Defendants’ motion to dismiss (ECF No. 10) is GRANTED.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
It follows that the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over the case, and the complaint must therefore be dismissed.
Months pending 18.2 months from the application to the suit; 27.9 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
On November 16, 2023, Abdolkarim1 completed an immigration visa interview with a consular officer at the U.S. Embassy in Yerevan, Armenia.
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings No duty to re-adjudicate a 221(g) refusal Read by a model
As such, the Court finds that Defendants discharged their non-discretionary duties to review Abdolkarim’s visa application when they issued their final refusal pursuant to § 1201(g) in November 2023.
Nationality Iran Read by a model
Her father, Abdolkarim, is an Iranian national living in Iran.
I-130 category Immediate relative Read by a model
Flora Delavari is a United States citizen residing in Michigan. Her father, Abdolkarim, is an Iranian national living in Iran.

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 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 11, 2026. Check the current status before relying on one.