Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Columbia

Lotfizadeh Dehkordi v. Bitter

District of ColumbiaDecided August 31, 2023No. 1:22-cv-02470

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
Plaintiff alleges that the State Department, which received her mother's case from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services in April 2022, has unreasonably delayed in processing the application.
Form or filing DS-260 (immigrant visa) Read by a model
applicant must then submit additional information on a new Form DS-260.
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
seeking to compel the Government to adjudicate her mother's IR-5 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 [Dkt. #8] is GRANTED.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction; Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim Read by a model
Defendants have moved to dismiss, under Rule 12(b)(l) and (b)(6), on two alternative grounds.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, defendants' motion to dismiss [Dkt. #8] is GRANTED.
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, defendants' motion to dismiss [Dkt. #8] is GRANTED.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
As such, defendants' motion under Rule 12(b)(6) is GRANTED.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, defendants' motion to dismiss [Dkt. #8] is GRANTED.
Months pending 1.7 months from the application to the suit; 14.1 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
The following month, plaintiff and her mother were cleared to "begin the application process" with NVC, which required them to submit additional paperwork; they reportedly did so by June 28.
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 TRAC factor--often called the "most important," In re Core Commc'ns, Inc., 531 F.3d 849,855 (D.C. Cir. 2008)-weighs heavily in defendants' favor, as does the second.
The government's delay arguments First-in, first-out processing accepted; Line-jumping accepted Read by a model
But for one thing, the State Department website-which advises that visa interview spots are filled "on a first-in, first-out basis," State Department Information Page--convincingly "shows that the existence of a queue is a fact and not fiction."
Threshold rulings None Read by a model
Nationality Iran Read by a model
mother Zinat Kianidehkordi and father Mohammadhasan Lotfizadehdehkordi are both Iranian nationals.
I-130 category Immediate relative Read by a model
Plaintiff, a U.S. citizen, first began the immigration process on her mother's behalf in December 2019.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:22-cv-02470
Filed
August 18, 2022
Ended
August 31, 2023
Suit's filing to its end
378 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 14, 2026. Check the current status before relying on one.