Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Columbia

Eljalabi v. Blinken

District of ColumbiaRudolph ContrerasDecided July 14, 2022No. 1:21-cv-01730

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 National Visa Center Read by a model
As of the publication of this Opinion, Mr. Eljalabi’s petition is on hold for further processing by NVC.
Form or filing DS-260 (immigrant visa) Read by a model
Mr. Eljalabi provides two main reasons why Defendants’ delay in adjudicating Ms. Ali’s immigrant visa application is unlawful and would require this Court to compel Defendants to act.
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
Mr. Eljalabi filed the instant petition “to compel the Defendants to take action on and adjudicate” Ms. Ali’s visa application.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, Defendants’ motion to dismiss (ECF No. 5) is GRANTED and Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 8) is DENIED.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim; Summary judgment Read by a model
Now before the Court are Defendants’ motion to dismiss and Mr. Eljalabi’s motion for summary judgment. Defendants move to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6)
Whose motion Cross-motions Read by a model
Now before the Court are Defendants’ motion to dismiss and Mr. Eljalabi’s motion for summary judgment.
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
Nevertheless, application of the TRAC factors to this case demonstrates that the Plaintiff has failed to state a claim at this time, and therefore, this action is dismissed pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6).
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, Defendants’ motion to dismiss (ECF No. 5) is GRANTED and Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 8) is DENIED.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
Nevertheless, application of the TRAC factors to this case demonstrates that the Plaintiff has failed to state a claim at this time, and therefore, this action is dismissed pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6).
The other claims Dismissed Read by a model
For the reasons set forth below, the Court holds that Mr. Eljalabi has failed to state a claim with respect to both CARRP and the unreasonableness of delay. As a result, the Court grants Defendants’ motion to dismiss and denies Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment.
Months pending 40.9 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
In February 2019, Mr. Eljalabi, a lawful permanent resident of the United States, filed an I-130 visa petition with USCIS on behalf of his wife, Razaz Mukhier Altaher Ali, a Sudanese national.
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 applicant
  • 4. Competing prioritiesfavors the government
  • 5. Interests prejudicedfavors the applicant
  • 6. No impropriety neededneutral
Read by a model
The first and second TRAC factors, on balance, lean in the favor of Defendants.
The government's delay arguments Line-jumping accepted Read by a model
he has failed to include any facts to support a reasonable inference that moving his case ahead of other applicants facing similar or longer delays would produce “net gain” or remain equitable to those other applicants awaiting adjudication.
Threshold rulings None Read by a model
Nationality Sudan Read by a model
In February 2019, Mr. Eljalabi, a lawful permanent resident of the United States, filed an I-130 visa petition with USCIS on behalf of his wife, Razaz Mukhier Altaher Ali, a Sudanese national.
I-130 category Family preference Read by a model
In February 2019, Mr. Eljalabi, a lawful permanent resident of the United States, filed an I-130 visa petition with USCIS on behalf of his wife, Razaz Mukhier Altaher Ali, a Sudanese national.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:21-cv-01730
Filed
June 29, 2021
Ended
July 15, 2022
Suit's filing to its end
381 days
How it ended
Dismissed on jurisdiction or the merits
From the record
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 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.