Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Columbia

PARS EQUITY CENTER v. BLINKEN

District of ColumbiaPaul L. FriedmanDecided June 12, 2026No. 1:24-cv-03169

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
Mr. Sadati executed his immigrant visa application during an interview with a consular officer at the U.S. Embassy in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, on May 15, 2023.
Form or filing 221(g) (consular refusal); DS-260 (immigrant visa) Read by a model
In connection with Mr. Sadati’s immigrant visa application, he was interviewed by a consular officer, and thereafter his application was refused and placed in “administrative processing.”
What the suit asked for Finish 221(g) processing Read by a model
In Counts Two to Five, the plaintiffs challenge the government’s alleged failure to timely adjudicate Mr. Sadati’s visa application, and they ask the Court to compel the government to decide the application promptly.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
the Court granted the government’s motion and dismissed the plaintiffs’ complaint by Order on September 30, 2025 [Dkt. No. 44]. This Opinion explains the reasoning behind that Order.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction; Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim Read by a model
On December 10, 2024, the government filed a motion to dismiss pursuant to Rules 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
On December 10, 2024, the government filed a motion to dismiss pursuant to Rules 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
Upon careful consideration of the parties’ written submissions and the relevant authorities, the Court granted the government’s motion and dismissed the plaintiffs’ complaint by Order on September 30, 2025 [Dkt. No. 44].
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
Upon careful consideration of the parties’ written submissions and the relevant authorities, the Court granted the government’s motion and dismissed the plaintiffs’ complaint by Order on September 30, 2025 [Dkt. No. 44].
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
the Court granted the government’s motion and dismissed the plaintiffs’ complaint by Order on September 30, 2025 [Dkt. No. 44].
The other claims Not decided here Read by a model
On November 5, 2024, Judge Susan Illston dismissed the plaintiffs’ challenge to the timing of the form collection (Count One).
Months pending 7.6 months from the application to the suit; 36.9 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
Mr. Sadati executed his immigrant visa application during an interview with a consular officer at the U.S. Embassy in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, on May 15, 2023.
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings No duty to re-adjudicate a 221(g) refusal Read by a model
The plaintiffs have not identified a discrete, nondiscretionary duty that requires the government to act further on Mr. Sadati’s visa application.
Nationality Iran Read by a model
plaintiff Seyed Ghasem Sadati, an Iranian national.
I-130 category Immediate relative Read by a model
Plaintiff Mona Sadat Sadati, a United States citizen, submitted a Form I-130 Petition for Alien Relative on behalf of her father, plaintiff Seyed Ghasem Sadati, an Iranian national.

Other orders in this case

The group holds 2 decisions from this suit, oldest first. Outcome counts on these pages count the case once, by its latest decision, this one. How decisions are grouped into cases.

DecisionDecidedJudgeDisposition
Pars Equity Center v. Blinken September 30, 2025 Paul L. Friedman Dismissed
PARS EQUITY CENTER v. BLINKENThis decisionThe case's latest decision: its outcome is the one counted June 12, 2026 Paul L. Friedman Dismissed

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:24-cv-03169
Filed
November 12, 2024
Ended
September 30, 2025
Suit's filing to its end
322 days
How it ended
Dismissed on jurisdiction or the merits
From the record
order 2025-09-30 dismisses for want of jurisdiction; 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.