Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Columbia

Aslam v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security

District of ColumbiaAmy Berman JacksonDecided March 26, 2021

Read the decisionOriginal on CourtListener

2,917 written decisions from 2,664 cases in the whole mandamus and agency-delay group, the group's newest decided October 30, 2026. Updated November 3, 2026 at 7:07 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
On November 5, 2018, DOS conducted a visa interview with Muhammad.
Form or filing 221(g) (consular refusal); DS-260 (immigrant visa) Read by a model
On September 28, 2017, plaintiff, a United States citizen, filed for an immigrant visa for her spouse, Muhammad Zulqarnain (“Muhammad”), a citizen of Pakistan.
What the suit asked for Finish 221(g) processing Read by a model
Plaintiff asks the Court to issue a writ of mandamus ordering the issuance of an immigrant visa or, alternatively, to order defendants to complete all administrative proceedings within sixty days.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For these reasons, defendants’ motion to dismiss, [Dkt. # 14], will be GRANTED.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction; Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim Read by a model
Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6), defendants have moved to dismiss plaintiff’s claims for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
defendants have moved to dismiss plaintiff’s claims for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
Because plaintiff asks this Court to grant relief already obtained from all defendants – a decision on her spousal visa application – the case is moot.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
Because plaintiff asks this Court to grant relief already obtained from all defendants – a decision on her spousal visa application – the case is moot.
The delay claim Moot: the agency acted Read by a model
Because plaintiff asks this Court to grant relief already obtained from all defendants – a decision on her spousal visa application – the case is moot.
The other claims Dismissed Read by a model
and so plaintiff’s due process claims must be dismissed, and they do not offer relief from the doctrine of consular nonreviewability.
Months pending 21.6 months from the application to the suit; 13.2 months from the application to the agency's action Read by a model
On November 5, 2018, DOS conducted a visa interview with Muhammad. Compl. ¶ 21; see also Derentz Decl. ¶ 4. That same day, the consular officer refused Muhammad’s visa application and requested additional documents.
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings Consular nonreviewability applied; Held moot Read by a model
Even if plaintiff’s claims were not moot, the doctrine of consular nonreviewability would still shield the consular official’s determination – that Muhammad is inadmissible – from this Court’s review.
Nationality Pakistan Read by a model
Muhammad Zulqarnain (“Muhammad”), a citizen of Pakistan.
I-130 category Immediate relative Read by a model
On September 28, 2017, plaintiff, a United States citizen, filed for an immigrant visa for her spouse, Muhammad Zulqarnain (“Muhammad”), a citizen of Pakistan.

How the case ended

This decision is not linked to a docket in the docket record yet, so how the case ended is not shown.

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.