Mandamus decisions / Southern District of Florida

MOINI et al v. Antony J. Blinken et al.,

Southern District of FloridaPanayotta D. Augustin-BirchDecided July 15, 2025No. 0:24-cv-62160

2,996 written decisions from 2,731 cases in the whole mandamus and agency-delay group, the group's newest decided November 12, 2026. Updated November 14, 2026 at 1:17 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 1,617 public decisions since January 1, 2025 that a CourtListener and GovInfo search for mandamus and agency delay finds, Passim holds 1,406 (87%), 1,039 of them in this group, measured November 14, 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 In sum, consular officers issued or refused Plaintiffs visas as the INA and its implementing regulations require.
Form or filing	221(g) (consular refusal); DS-260 (immigrant visa) Read by a model The remaining ten Plaintiffs are individuals who have applied for EB-1A or EB-2 immigrant visas as principal or derivative applicants, and they ask that Defendants be ordered to adjudicate their visa applications.
What the suit asked for	Finish 221(g) processing Read by a model Plaintiffs have not pointed to any provision of the INA or its implementing regulations requiring additional adjudication of a visa application that has been refused and placed in administrative processing.
Kind of order	A magistrate judge's recommendation Read by a model REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS
Motion decided	Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim Read by a model Defendants move to dismiss the Amended Complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1), (3), and (6) for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, improper venue, and failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
Whose motion	The government's motion Read by a model This matter comes before the Court on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Amended Complaint and Sever Claims.
Disposition	Magistrate judge's recommendation A magistrate judge's report and recommendation. The district judge decides whether to adopt it, so it is not counted as either side's win. Read by a model REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS
Prevailing party	Neither side Read by a model REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS
The delay claim	Dismissed Read by a model The Court recommends granting Defendants’ request for the Amended Complaint to be dismissed and dismissing the Amended Complaint [DE 6].
Months pending	Not stated Read by a model
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 doctrine of consular non-reviewability does not bar Plaintiffs’ request to compel decisions to be made on their visa applications.
Nationality	Iran Read by a model Plaintiff Sajad Afsharian is a national of Iran who applied for an EB-1A visa, was assigned case number ANK2022822002, and completed an interview.

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. How decisions are grouped into cases.

Decision	Decided	Judge	Disposition
MOINI et al v. Antony J. Blinken et al.,This decision	July 15, 2025	Panayotta D. Augustin-Birch	Magistrate judge's recommendation
MOINI et al v. Antony J. Blinken et al.,The case's latest decision: its outcome is the one counted	August 21, 2025	David S. Leibowitz	Dismissed

How the case ended

Docket: No. 0:24-cv-62160
Filed: November 14, 2024
Ended: August 21, 2025
Suit's filing to its end: 280 days
How it ended: Dismissed, ground not recorded
From the record: idb disp 14 (dismissed: other)

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 Eleventh 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 14, 2026. Check the current status before relying on one.

Department of State v. Muñoz, 602 U.S. 899

Supreme Court, June 21, 2024. A U.S. citizen has no fundamental liberty interest in a noncitizen spouse's admission, so marriage alone entitles the citizen neither to Mandel review of the consular refusal nor to an explanation beyond the statutory citation.

ImmCite: treatment available, history exists, not clearance
Trump v. Hawaii, 585 U.S. 667

Supreme Court, June 26, 2018. Mandel's facially-legitimate-and-bona-fide standard governs constitutional challenges to entry restrictions, and a citation to a valid statutory ground ordinarily satisfies it.

ImmCite: treatment available, history exists, not clearance
Kleindienst v. Mandel, 408 U.S. 753

Supreme Court, June 29, 1972. When a visa refusal burdens a U.S. citizen's own constitutional rights, courts ask only whether the Executive gave a facially legitimate and bona fide reason and do not look behind it.

ImmCite: treatment available, history exists, not clearance
Norton v. Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, 542 U.S. 55

Supreme Court, June 14, 2004. Section 706(1) and mandamus reach only a discrete agency action that the agency is legally required to take, so a court cannot compel programmatic improvements or action the law leaves to agency discretion.

ImmCite: treatment available, history exists, not clearance
Del Valle v. Secretary of State, 16 F.4th 832

Eleventh Circuit, October 26, 2021. Consular nonreviewability is not jurisdictional, but a refusal citing specific inadmissibility provisions is facially legitimate and bona fide, and in camera review of the underlying evidence is foreclosed absent plausibly alleged bad faith.

ImmCite: treatment available, history exists, not clearance. ImmCite has read all 3 published decisions citing this case, as of 2026-11-13; none treats it adversely. That describes those decisions; it is not a determination that the case is good law.
Kanapuram v. Director, USCIS, 131 F.4th 1302

Eleventh Circuit, March 20, 2025. Section 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii) strips district courts of jurisdiction over APA unreasonable-delay claims about pending adjustment applications where the delay is part of the discretionary adjudication process, including retrogression holds.

ImmCite: treatment available, history exists, not clearance. ImmCite has read all 2 published decisions citing this case, as of 2026-11-09; none treats it adversely. That describes those decisions; it is not a determination that the case is good law.