Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Columbia

Tetteh v. Blinken

District of ColumbiaAmit P. MehtaDecided September 26, 2022No. 1:22-cv-02208

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
She seeks injunctive relief on one primary ground: the State Department, acting through the U.S. Embassy in Accra, Ghana, has unreasonably delayed in scheduling her for an interview, in violation of 5 U.S.C. § 706(1).
Form or filing DS-260 (immigrant visa) Read by a model
Plaintiff Janet Akweley Tetteh, a 2022 diversity visa selectee, asks the court to enter a preliminary injunction requiring Defendant to schedule her for an interview with a consular officer before September 30, 2022, the end of the fiscal year.
What the suit asked for Schedule an interview Read by a model
Plaintiff Janet Akweley Tetteh, a 2022 diversity visa selectee, asks the court to enter a preliminary injunction requiring Defendant to schedule her for an interview with a consular officer before September 30, 2022, the end of the fiscal year.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction, ECF No. 4, is denied.
Motion decided Preliminary injunction or TRO Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction, ECF No. 4, is denied.
Whose motion Cross-motions Read by a model
Def.’s Mot. to Dismiss Pl.’s Compl., ECF No. 8, Def.’s Mem. of P. & A. in Support of Def.’s Mot., or in the Alternative, for Summ. J. in Part and Def’s Opp’n to Pl.’s Mot. for Prelim. Inj.
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, Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction, ECF No. 4, is denied.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction, ECF No. 4, is denied.
The delay claim Relief denied Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction, ECF No. 4, is denied.
Months pending Not stated Read by a model
TRAC factors The court weighed the TRAC factors
  • 1. Rule of reasonneutral
  • 2. Congressional timetableneutral
  • 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
Here, TRAC factors one and two are at most neutral when it comes to an individual diversity visa applicant.
The government's delay arguments Line-jumping accepted Read by a model
Granting Plaintiff the relief she seeks would move her ahead of others who have equally been prejudiced by the Embassy’s alleged delay.
Threshold rulings None Read by a model

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:22-cv-02208
Filed
July 26, 2022
Ended
October 4, 2022
Suit's filing to its end
70 days
How it ended
Ended once the agency acted
From the record
voluntary dismissal 2022-10-04; idb disp 12 (dismissed: voluntarily)

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.