Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Columbia

DANESHVARKASHKOOLI v. BLINKEN

District of ColumbiaRichard J. LeonDecided March 25, 2024No. 1:23-cv-01225

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
Further, the U.S. Consulate in Dubai has retained plaintiffs’ passports.
Form or filing 221(g) (consular refusal); DS-160 (nonimmigrant visa) Read by a model
All six plaintiffs submitted their DS-160 application forms and subsequently completed the required consular interviews at the U.S. Consulate in Dubai, United Arab Emirates (“U.A.E.”), between March 28, 2022 and October 25, 2022.
What the suit asked for Finish 221(g) processing Read by a model
Plaintiffs allege that defendants have unreasonably delayed the adjudication of their applications for F-1 visas, which have remained in administrative processing for a period ranging from 17 to 24 months.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
Defendants’ Second Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6).
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction; Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim Read by a model
Defendants moved to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1), or, in the alternative, for failure to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6).
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Defendants moved to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1), or, in the alternative, for failure to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6).
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, Defendants’ Second Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6).
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, Defendants’ Second Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6).
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
Defendants’ Second Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6).
Months pending 23.9 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
completed the required consular interviews at the U.S. Consulate in Dubai, United Arab Emirates (“U.A.E.”), between March 28, 2022 and October 25, 2022.
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
Accordingly, the first two TRAC factors favor defendants.
The government's delay arguments Line-jumping accepted Read by a model
However, consular “[p]rocessing capacity is presently a zero-sum game,” so expediting review of plaintiffs’ applications “would necessarily mean additional delays for other applicants.”
Threshold rulings Consular nonreviewability rejected; Duty to re-adjudicate a 221(g) refusal found Read by a model
The denial was therefore provisional, and the consular non-reviewability doctrine does not apply.
Nationality Iran Read by a model
Plaintiffs are six Iranian nationals

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:23-cv-01225
Filed
May 2, 2023
Ended
March 26, 2024
Suit's filing to its end
329 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 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.