Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Columbia

Akrayi v. United States Department of State

District of ColumbiaChristopher R. CooperDecided March 9, 2023

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
Claiming unreasonable delay under the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”), he filed this suit to compel the State Department to do so.
Form or filing DS-260 (immigrant visa) Read by a model
He requests an order directing the government to process Jameel’s visa application within sixty days and issue her an immigrant visa, and seeks declaratory and injunctive relief as to CARRP.
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
He requests an order directing the government to process Jameel’s visa application within sixty days and issue her an immigrant visa, and seeks declaratory and injunctive relief as to CARRP.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For these reasons, the Court will grant the government’s motion to dismiss.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim Read by a model
The government moved to dismiss the complaint 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
The government moved to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6).
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
For these reasons, the Court will grant the government’s motion to dismiss.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
For these reasons, the Court will grant the government’s motion to dismiss.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
For these reasons, the Court will grant the government’s motion to dismiss.
The other claims Dismissed Read by a model
Because Akrayi has not met his burden to plausibly allege an unreasonable delay, a violation of his due process rights, or a concrete injury due to CARRP, the Court will grant the government’s motion to dismiss the complaint.
Months pending 36 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
Jameel’s application has been delayed for almost three years, and thus falls comfortably within the range of reasonableness.
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 neededfavors the government
Read by a model
The Court thus finds that the first two TRAC factors support the government.
The government's delay arguments Line-jumping accepted Read by a model
The fourth factor also favors the government. A “judicial order putting” Jameel’s application at the front of the line would necessarily “move[] all others back one space and produce[] no net gain.”
Threshold rulings Consular nonreviewability rejected Read by a model
As “nothing in Baan Rao even hints that it upends” caselaw holding that consular non-reviewability does not apply to unreasonable delay cases, review of Akrayi’s claim is not barred.
Nationality Iraq Read by a model
Mr. Akrayi filed an I-130 visa petition in April 2019 to obtain lawful permanent resident status for his wife, Zhala Ibrahim Jameel, an Iraqi citizen.
I-130 category Immediate relative Read by a model
Plaintiff Ari Akrayi, a United States citizen, has been waiting nearly three years for the government to adjudicate his Iraqi wife’s U.S. visa application.

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 3, 2026. Check the current status before relying on one.