Passim

Mandamus decisions / Northern District of Georgia

Pazirandeh v. Rubio

Northern District of GeorgiaTiffany R. JohnsonDecided April 20, 2026No. 1:25-cv-06725

Read the decisionOriginal on CourtListener

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
Here, Plaintiff’s claims became moot when the Immigrant Visa Unit at the U.S. Embassy in Abu Dhabi issued a decision refusing Plaintiff’s father’s IR-5 visa application.
Form or filing DS-260 (immigrant visa) Read by a model
Here, Plaintiff’s claims became moot when the Immigrant Visa Unit at the U.S. Embassy in Abu Dhabi issued a decision refusing Plaintiff’s father’s IR-5 visa application.
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
he filed this lawsuit to compel Defendants to adjudicate his father’s IR-5 visa application
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
Accordingly, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction (Doc. 7) is GRANTED, and this case is DISMISSED for lack of subject matter jurisdiction due to mootness.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction Read by a model
On March 27, 2026, Defendants filed a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction due to mootness.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
On March 27, 2026, Defendants filed a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction due to mootness.
Disposition Dismissed as moot Dismissed or denied as moot because the agency acted. Read by a model
Accordingly, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction (Doc. 7) is GRANTED, and this case is DISMISSED for lack of subject matter jurisdiction due to mootness.
Prevailing party Neither side Read by a model
Accordingly, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction (Doc. 7) is GRANTED, and this case is DISMISSED for lack of subject matter jurisdiction due to mootness.
The delay claim Moot: the agency acted Read by a model
Here, Plaintiff’s claims became moot when the Immigrant Visa Unit at the U.S. Embassy in Abu Dhabi issued a decision refusing Plaintiff’s father’s IR-5 visa application.
Months pending Not stated at filing The agency acted before this decision, so the months up to the decision are not a delay and are not shown. Read by a model
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings Held moot Read by a model
Here, Plaintiff’s claims became moot when the Immigrant Visa Unit at the U.S. Embassy in Abu Dhabi issued a decision refusing Plaintiff’s father’s IR-5 visa application.
I-130 category Immediate relative Read by a model
his father’s IR-5 visa application

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:25-cv-06725
Filed
November 24, 2025
Ended
April 20, 2026
Suit's filing to its end
147 days
How it ended
Ended once the agency acted
From the record
judgment 2026-04-20 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 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.