Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Columbia

Khushnood v. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services

District of ColumbiaFlorence Y. PanDecided February 10, 2022

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
Rather, Khushnood seeks to compel the State Department to conduct his final interview, and any delay should be measured from the time when the interview could have been scheduled, i.e., when USCIS approved Khushnood’s petition and forwarded it to the NVC on February 4, 2020.
Form or filing DS-260 (immigrant visa) Read by a model
Although the U.S. Consulate in Montreal is processing visa petitions based on a tiered immigrant-prioritization system, Khushnood’s interview has not yet been scheduled, and his visa therefore cannot be approved.
What the suit asked for Schedule an interview Read by a model
Rather, Khushnood seeks to compel the State Department to conduct his final interview
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, the Court will grant Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim Read by a model
Defendants now move to dismiss for failure to state a claim under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6).
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, the Court will grant Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss.
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
The Court agrees that Khushnood fails to state a claim and will therefore grant Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
The Court agrees that Khushnood fails to state a claim and will therefore grant Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
Khushnood’s APA claim, therefore, must be dismissed.
The other claims Dismissed Read by a model
Khushnood thus fails to state a cognizable constitutional claim; and that claim must be dismissed.
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
In this case, the relevant period of delay is approximately eighteen months — calculated from the earliest possible time that Khushnood’s interview could have been scheduled.
TRAC factors The court weighed the TRAC factors
  • 1. Rule of reasonfavors the government
  • 2. Congressional timetablefavors the government
  • 3. Human health and welfarefavors the government
  • 4. Competing prioritiesfavors the government
  • 5. Interests prejudicedfavors the government
  • 6. No impropriety neededneutral
Read by a model
The first two TRAC factors — focusing on the reasonableness of the delay and whether Congress has set a timeline for completion of the action in question — favor Defendants.
The government's delay arguments Line-jumping accepted Read by a model
Indeed, other applicants in the queue may face even more significant hardships due to the State Department’s delays, and there is no net gain in prioritizing Khushnood at their expense.
Threshold rulings Held moot Read by a model
As a result, the claims against USCIS and its officials are moot and must be dismissed.
Nationality Pakistan Read by a model
Plaintiff Umair Khushnood is a citizen of Pakistan and resident of Vancouver, Canada.

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