Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Massachusetts

Taha v. Blinken

District of MassachusettsNathaniel M. GortonDecided February 25, 2025No. 1:24-cv-11257

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
Two weeks later, the consulate informed Sanan that his application remained under administrative processing.
Form or filing 221(g) (consular refusal); DS-260 (immigrant visa) Read by a model
In October, 2023, Sanan submitted a DS-260 visa application.
What the suit asked for Finish 221(g) processing Read by a model
seeking a declaratory judgment and writ of mandamus to compel the adjudication of a visa application for her husband, Mostafa Sanan (“Sanan”).
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For the following reasons, defendants’ motion will be allowed.
Motion decided Other motion to dismiss Read by a model
Defendants now move to dismiss the complaint.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Pending before the Court is the motion to dismiss of defendants, Anthony J. Blinken,
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
Accordingly, the Court finds that a visa application subject to administrative processing cannot form the basis of an unreasonable delay claim and plaintiff’s APA claim will therefore be dismissed.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
For the following reasons, defendants’ motion will be allowed.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
Accordingly, the Court finds that a visa application subject to administrative processing cannot form the basis of an unreasonable delay claim and plaintiff’s APA claim will therefore be dismissed.
The other claims Dismissed Read by a model
her complaint fails to state a plausible due process claim and will be dismissed.
Months pending 8.5 months from the application to the suit; 16.4 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
In October, 2023, Sanan submitted a DS-260 visa application.
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings Consular nonreviewability rejected; No duty to re-adjudicate a 221(g) refusal Read by a model
The Court therefore declines to dismiss plaintiff’s claims on those grounds alone.
Nationality Canada Read by a model
Her husband, Sanan, is a dual citizen of Canada
I-130 category Immediate relative Read by a model
Plaintiff is a United States citizen who resides in Massachusetts. Her husband, Sanan, is a dual citizen of Canada

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:24-cv-11257
Filed
May 10, 2024
Ended
February 25, 2025
Suit's filing to its end
291 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 First 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.