Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Columbia

DROKIN v. RUBIO

District of ColumbiaJia M. CobbDecided October 5, 2026No. 1:25-cv-01928

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 Department of State Read by a model
On December 17, 2024, Plaintiffs were interviewed by a consular officer at the U.S. Embassy in Belgrade, Serbia.
Form or filing 221(g) (consular refusal); DS-260 (immigrant visa) Read by a model
Plaintiffs contend that their applications, which remain in administrative processing, have been unreasonably delayed in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and the Mandamus Act.
What the suit asked for Finish 221(g) processing Read by a model
they wish to compel Defendants to make a decision on their applications that remain in administrative processing.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
Accordingly, the Court will GRANT Defendants’ motion to dismiss.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim Read by a model
Accordingly, the Court grants Defendants’ motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6).
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Defendants have moved to dismiss Plaintiffs’ claims on various grounds.
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
As a result, Plaintiffs’ complaint is DISMISSED.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, Defendants’ motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, ECF 5, is GRANTED.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, Defendants’ motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, ECF 5, is GRANTED. As a result, Plaintiffs’ complaint is DISMISSED.
Months pending 7 months from the application to the suit; 21.6 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
On December 17, 2024, Plaintiffs were interviewed by a consular officer at the U.S. Embassy in Belgrade, Serbia.
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 government
  • 4. Competing prioritiesfavors the government
  • 5. Interests prejudicedfavors the government
  • 6. No impropriety neededneutral
Read by a model
As a result, the first and second factors weigh in favor of Defendants.
The government's delay arguments Line-jumping accepted Read by a model
Here, Plaintiffs have not alleged any specific facts indicating that their applications are undergoing a form of administrative processing that does not operate under first-in-first-out principles
Threshold rulings Consular nonreviewability rejected; Duty to re-adjudicate a 221(g) refusal found Read by a model
The consular nonreviewability doctrine does not apply here because Plaintiffs do not seek judicial review of any consular officer’s final determination;

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:25-cv-01928
Filed
June 19, 2025
Status
Pending as of the last docket check

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 D.C. 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.