Passim

Mandamus decisions / Eastern District of California

Khan v. Blinken

Eastern District of CaliforniaCarolyn K. DelaneyDecided July 17, 2024No. 2:23-cv-02814

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 National Visa Center Read by a model
Although an interview is the only way plaintiffs can make formal visa applications, the NVC has not scheduled the remaining plaintiffs’ interviews.
Form or filing DS-260 (immigrant visa) Read by a model
The beneficiary plaintiffs submitted DS-260 Immigrant Visa Electronic Applications and all the required documents and applicable fees for immediate relative immigrant visas.
What the suit asked for Schedule an interview Read by a model
schedule beneficiary plaintiffs for immigrant visa interviews
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
Defendants’ alternate motion for summary judgment is granted as to the claims of the plaintiffs for whom defendants presented evidence.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim; Summary judgment Read by a model
The defendants seek to dismiss the complaint under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (ECF No. 9.) In the alternative, defendants seek summary judgment under Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
On February 2, 2024, defendants filed the motion presently before the court, seeking dismissal of the complaint, or, in the alternative, summary judgment, on all remaining claims.
Disposition Granted in the government's favor The principal motion was granted in full: summary judgment for either side, an injunction or TRO, a writ or order to act, fees. A motion to dismiss granted in full counts as Dismissed; a transfer is listed apart. Read by a model
Defendants’ alternate motion for summary judgment is granted as to the claims of the plaintiffs for whom defendants presented evidence.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
Defendants’ alternate motion for summary judgment is granted as to the claims of the plaintiffs for whom defendants presented evidence.
The delay claim The delay claim goes on Read by a model
Defendants’ alternate motion for summary judgment is granted as to the claims of the plaintiffs for whom defendants presented evidence. Counsel for the parties shall confer regarding the status of the claims of the remaining plaintiffs
Months pending 30 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
Considering all the TRAC factors, it is clear the delays of 30 months or less in scheduling plaintiffs’ consular interviews are not unreasonable.
TRAC factors The court weighed the TRAC factors
  • 1. Rule of reasonfavors the government
  • 2. Congressional timetablefavors the government
  • 3. Human health and welfareneutral
  • 4. Competing prioritiesfavors the government
  • 5. Interests prejudicedneutral
  • 6. No impropriety neededneutral
Read by a model
the first and second TRAC factors weigh in defendants’ favor.
The government's delay arguments Line-jumping accepted; Visa availability accepted Read by a model
The court finds this factor favors the defendants because expediting the adjudication of the plaintiffs’ applications would only cause other applicants to wait longer.
Threshold rulings APA adequate-remedy bar applied (mandamus claim fails) Read by a model
Because an adequate remedy exists under the APA, the court has analyzed plaintiff’s claim of delay under the APA only.
Nationality Pakistan Read by a model
Plaintiffs are several United States citizens or legal permanent residents (“sponsoring plaintiffs”) and their respective Pakistani national relatives (“beneficiary plaintiffs”) awaiting interviews at U.S. Embassy in Islamabad.
I-130 category Family preference Read by a model
There were 6,278 individuals who were documentarily complete before April 2022 in family preference categories ahead of plaintiff Sana Aziz in the queue

How the case ended

Docket
No. 2:23-cv-02814
Filed
December 4, 2023
Ended
August 13, 2024
Suit's filing to its end
253 days
How it ended
Ended once the agency acted
From the record
voluntary dismissal 2024-08-13; idb disp 12 (dismissed: voluntarily)

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 Ninth 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.