Mandamus decisions / District of Maryland

Malla v. Rubio

District of MarylandJulie Rebecca RubinDecided March 16, 2026No. 1:25-cv-00379

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	National Visa Center Read by a model The National Visa Center has yet to schedule Plaintiff-Husband’s immigrant visa interview at the U.S. Embassy in Dhaka, Bangladesh.
Form or filing	DS-260 (immigrant visa) Read by a model Plaintiff-Husband then completed his DS-260 Immigrant Visa Electronic Application and paid the requisite fees on August 14, 2024.
What the suit asked for	Schedule an interview Read by a model bring the instant mandamus action regarding the delay in scheduling Plaintiff-Husband’s immigrant visa interview.
Kind of order	A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model For the reasons that follow, by accompanying order, the Motion, construed as a motion to dismiss, will be granted.
Motion decided	Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction; Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim Read by a model Pending before the court is Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, for Summary Judgment.
Whose motion	The government's motion Read by a model Pending before the court is Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, for Summary Judgment.
Disposition	Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model The court will therefore grant the Motion and dismiss Plaintiffs’ Complaint.
Prevailing party	Government Read by a model The court will therefore grant the Motion and dismiss Plaintiffs’ Complaint.
The delay claim	Dismissed Read by a model The court will therefore grant the Motion and dismiss Plaintiffs’ Complaint.
Months pending	5.8 months from the application to the suit; 19 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model Plaintiff-Husband then completed his DS-260 Immigrant Visa Electronic Application and paid the requisite fees on August 14, 2024.
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, these factors weigh in Defendants’ favor.
The government's delay arguments	First-in, first-out processing accepted; Line-jumping accepted Read by a model Conclusion that the delay is not unreasonable is further supported where it is undisputed that Defendants utilize a first-in, first-out methodology for scheduling immigrant visa interviews, which has been recognized as a rule of reason.
Threshold rulings	None Read by a model
I-130 category	Immediate relative Read by a model This type of visa is a family-based immigrant visa for an immediate relative of the petitioner.

How the case ended

Docket: No. 1:25-cv-00379
Filed: February 6, 2025
Ended: March 16, 2026
Suit's filing to its end: 403 days
How it ended: Dismissed on jurisdiction or the merits
From the record: 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 Fourth 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.

Trump v. Hawaii, 585 U.S. 667

Supreme Court, June 26, 2018. Mandel's facially-legitimate-and-bona-fide standard governs constitutional challenges to entry restrictions, and a citation to a valid statutory ground ordinarily satisfies it.

ImmCite: treatment available, history exists, not clearance
Department of State v. Muñoz, 602 U.S. 899

Supreme Court, June 21, 2024. A U.S. citizen has no fundamental liberty interest in a noncitizen spouse's admission, so marriage alone entitles the citizen neither to Mandel review of the consular refusal nor to an explanation beyond the statutory citation.

ImmCite: treatment available, history exists, not clearance
Kleindienst v. Mandel, 408 U.S. 753

Supreme Court, June 29, 1972. When a visa refusal burdens a U.S. citizen's own constitutional rights, courts ask only whether the Executive gave a facially legitimate and bona fide reason and do not look behind it.

ImmCite: treatment available, history exists, not clearance
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
Sesay v. United States, 984 F.3d 312

Fourth Circuit, January 5, 2021. Consular nonreviewability bars review of a relative's visa refusal; under Din and Trump v. Hawaii a valid statutory citation satisfies Mandel, and the court will not look behind it absent a particularized showing of bad faith.

ImmCite: treatment available, history exists, not clearance. ImmCite has read all 4 published decisions citing this case, as of 2026-10-30; none treats it adversely. That describes those decisions; it is not a determination that the case is good law.
Gonzalez v. Cuccinelli, 985 F.3d 357

Fourth Circuit, January 14, 2021. Courts may review delay in placing U-visa petitioners on the waitlist under the TRAC factors and should not dismiss such claims at the pleading stage, but lack jurisdiction over delay in pre-waitlist work-permit requests, a point on which the Sixth Circuit disagrees.

ImmCite: caution, adverse or limiting treatment found. Rejected in the Sixth Circuit by Barrios Garcia v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security, 25 F.4th 430 (2022).
Lovo v. Miller, 107 F.4th 199

Fourth Circuit, July 3, 2024. The 'decision or action' language of § 1182(a)(9)(B)(v), which the court treated as coextensive with § 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii), does not reach USCIS inaction, so a district court may hear a claim that USCIS unreasonably delayed a provisional unlawful-presence waiver.

ImmCite: treatment available, history exists, not clearance. ImmCite has read all 5 published decisions citing this case, as of 2026-10-29; none treats it adversely. That describes those decisions; it is not a determination that the case is good law.