Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Columbia

Pushkar v. Blinken

District of ColumbiaColleen Kollar-KotellyDecided September 23, 2021No. 1:21-cv-02297

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
Beginning in March 2020, the State Department suspended routine visa processing services due to the COVID-19 pandemic, limiting embassies and consulates to processing visa cases deemed “emergency” or “mission critical.”
Form or filing DS-260 (immigrant visa) Read by a model
Plaintiff filed her immigrant visa application on June 20, 2020.
What the suit asked for Schedule an interview Read by a model
She seeks an emergency order compelling Defendants to “schedule a visa interview.”
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
Accordingly, the Court will DENY Plaintiff’s [11] Emergency Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order.
Motion decided Preliminary injunction or TRO Read by a model
Accordingly, the Court will DENY Plaintiff’s [11] Emergency Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order.
Whose motion The plaintiff's motion Read by a model
Accordingly, the Court will DENY Plaintiff’s [11] Emergency Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order.
Disposition Denied in the government's favor The principal motion was denied in full: a motion to dismiss denied so the case goes on, or relief denied on the merits. Read by a model
Accordingly, the Court will DENY Plaintiff’s [11] Emergency Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
Accordingly, the Court will DENY Plaintiff’s [11] Emergency Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order.
The delay claim Relief denied Read by a model
Accordingly, the Court will DENY Plaintiff’s [11] Emergency Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order.
Months pending 12.1 months from the application to the suit; 15.1 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
Plaintiff filed her immigrant visa application on June 20, 2020.
TRAC factors The court weighed the TRAC factors
  • 1. Rule of reasonfavors the government
  • 2. Congressional timetableneutral
  • 3. Human health and welfarefavors the government
  • 4. Competing prioritiesfavors the government
  • 5. Interests prejudicedfavors the applicant
  • 6. No impropriety needednot reached
Read by a model
In sum, Plaintiff has not demonstrated that she is likely to succeed on the merits of her unreasonable delay claim as to the first TRAC factor.
The government's delay arguments First-in, first-out processing accepted; Line-jumping accepted Read by a model
Plaintiff has provided no contrary arguments or facts to suggest that Defendants’ alleged “delay” in processing her visa application is contrary to a rule a reason.
Threshold rulings None Read by a model
Nationality Ukraine Read by a model
Plaintiff Liudmyla Pushkar is a native, citizen, and resident of Ukraine who was selected in the DV-2021 lottery.

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
Pushkar v. BlinkenThis decisionThe case's latest decision: its outcome is the one counted September 23, 2021 Colleen Kollar-Kotelly Denied in the government's favor
Pushkar v. Blinken November 2, 2021 Colleen Kollar-Kotelly Not recorded

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:21-cv-02297
Filed
August 31, 2021
Ended
November 2, 2021
Suit's filing to its end
63 days
How it ended
Dismissed on jurisdiction or the merits
From the record
idb disp 3 (dismissed: lack of jurisdiction)

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.