Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Columbia

Gorgadze v. Blinken

District of ColumbiaJohn D. BatesDecided September 29, 2021No. 1:21-cv-02421

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
Even before the COVID-19 pandemic, the State Department’s overall capacity in Russia was severely curtailed over a number of years, impacting its ability to process and issue DVs to Russian nationals like plaintiffs.
Form or filing DS-260 (immigrant visa) Read by a model
He, his wife, Elena Petukhova, and their minor son, Mikhail Gorgadze, submitted DS-260 applications electronically to KCC on August 18, 2020.
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
Plaintiffs assert three causes of action to challenge defendants’ failure to adjudicate their DV applications.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, the Court will deny plaintiffs’ motion for a temporary restraining order and/or preliminary injunction.
Motion decided Preliminary injunction or TRO Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, the Court will deny plaintiffs’ motion for a temporary restraining order and/or preliminary injunction.
Whose motion The plaintiff's motion Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, the Court will deny plaintiffs’ motion for a temporary restraining order and/or preliminary injunction.
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
For the foregoing reasons, the Court will deny plaintiffs’ motion for a temporary restraining order and/or preliminary injunction.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, the Court will deny plaintiffs’ motion for a temporary restraining order and/or preliminary injunction.
The delay claim Relief denied Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, the Court will deny plaintiffs’ motion for a temporary restraining order and/or preliminary injunction.
The other claims Relief denied Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, the Court will deny plaintiffs’ motion for a temporary restraining order and/or preliminary injunction.
Months pending 12.9 months from the application to the suit; 13.4 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
He, his wife, Elena Petukhova, and their minor son, Mikhail Gorgadze, submitted DS-260 applications electronically to KCC on August 18, 2020.
TRAC factors The court weighed the TRAC factors
  • 1. Rule of reasonnot reached
  • 2. Congressional timetablenot reached
  • 3. Human health and welfarenot reached
  • 4. Competing prioritiesfavors the government
  • 5. Interests prejudicednot reached
  • 6. No impropriety needednot reached
Read by a model
Even assuming the remaining TRAC factors weigh in plaintiffs’ favor, factor four’s heavy weight against them all but precludes their unreasonable delay claims from succeeding on the merits.
The government's delay arguments Line-jumping accepted Read by a model
Even assuming the remaining TRAC factors weigh in plaintiffs’ favor, factor four’s heavy weight against them all but precludes their unreasonable delay claims from succeeding on the merits.
Threshold rulings None Read by a model
Nationality Russia Read by a model
Plaintiff Vladimir Gorgadze is a Russian 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. How decisions are grouped into cases.

DecisionDecidedJudgeDisposition
Gorgadze v. BlinkenThis decision September 29, 2021 John D. Bates Denied in the government's favor
Gorgadze v. BlinkenThe case's latest decision: its outcome is the one counted July 12, 2022 John D. Bates Dismissed

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:21-cv-02421
Filed
September 14, 2021
Ended
July 12, 2022
Suit's filing to its end
301 days
How it ended
Dismissed on jurisdiction or the merits
From the record
order 2022-07-12 for the defendants, ground not stated; 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 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.