Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Columbia

Khoshrou v. United States Department of State

District of ColumbiaColleen Kollar-KotellyDecided August 2, 2023No. 1:22-cv-02859

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
It is unclear what relief DHS or the Secretary of Homeland Security could provide in the present case given that Mr. Khoshrou’s visa application is with U.S. Embassy officials in Yerevan.
Form or filing 221(g) (consular refusal); DS-160 (nonimmigrant visa) Read by a model
Mr. Khoshrou completed the DS- In an exercise of its discretion, the Court finds that holding oral argument in this action would not be of assistance in rendering a decision. See LCvR 7(f). 160 application form
What the suit asked for Finish 221(g) processing Read by a model
At the interview, the consular officer reviewing Mr. Khoshrou’s documents informed him that his application was “refused under section 221(g) of the U.S. Immigration and Nationality Act” because it was “undergoing administr ative processing.”
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
GRANT Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss as to Plaintiff Babak Khoshrou; and DISMISS Plaintiffs’ [1] Complaint in its entirety.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction; Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim Read by a model
Now pending before the Court is Defendants’ [12] Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Complaint under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6).
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Now pending before the Court is Defendants’ [12] Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Complaint under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6).
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
GRANT Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss as to Plaintiff Babak Khoshrou; and DISMISS Plaintiffs’ [1] Complaint in its entirety.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
GRANT Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss as to Plaintiff Babak Khoshrou; and DISMISS Plaintiffs’ [1] Complaint in its entirety.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
GRANT Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss as to Plaintiff Babak Khoshrou; and DISMISS Plaintiffs’ [1] Complaint in its entirety.
Months pending 7.3 months from the application to the suit 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
160 application form and attended an interview at the U.S. Embassy in Yerevan, Armenia on February 4, 2022 .
TRAC factors The court weighed the TRAC factors
  • 1. Rule of reasonfavors the government
  • 2. Congressional timetablefavors the government
  • 3. Human health and welfareneutral
  • 4. Competing prioritiesfavors the government
  • 5. Interests prejudicedneutral
  • 6. No impropriety neededneutral
Read by a model
In sum, the Court finds that the first and second TRAC factors do not lend credence to Plaintiff Khoshrou’s claim.
The government's delay arguments First-in, first-out processing accepted; Line-jumping accepted Read by a model
The Court agrees; the fact that others were interviewed after but adjudicated before Mr. Khoshrou does not, without other information, mean that De fendants are not adhering to the first -in, first -out rule, as different applications may require different time and attention.
Threshold rulings Consular nonreviewability rejected; Held moot Read by a model
Accordingly, the Court holds that the consular non -reviewability doctrine does not bar judicial review of Mr. Khoshrou’s claims.
Nationality Iran Read by a model
Plaintiff Babak Khoshrou is a citizen of Iran

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:22-cv-02859
Filed
September 20, 2022
Ended
August 2, 2023
Suit's filing to its end
316 days
How it ended
Dismissed, ground not recorded
From the record
idb disp 14 (dismissed: other)

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.