Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Columbia

Khan v. Bitter

District of ColumbiaAmit P. MehtaDecided August 20, 2024No. 1:23-cv-03046

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
Following the interview, the consular officer must either issue or refuse the visa.
Form or filing DS-260 (immigrant visa) Read by a model
Plaintiff Mansoor Khan seeks to compel Defendants, who are various federal officials sued in their official capacities, to adjudicate his immediate-family visa application, which he filed in February 2022.
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
Plaintiff Mansoor Khan seeks to compel Defendants, who are various federal officials sued in their official capacities, to adjudicate his immediate-family visa application, which he filed in February 2022.
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. 6, is granted.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim Read by a model
Defendants move to dismiss the case for, among other grounds, failure to state a claim. Defendants’ motion is granted on that basis.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 6, 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, ECF No. 6, is granted.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 6, is granted.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
After weighing the TRAC factors, the court concludes that Plaintiff has failed to state a claim that the now 18-month delay in processing his visa application is unreasonable.
The other claims Dismissed Read by a model
The court likewise dismisses Plaintiff’s claims under the Mandamus Act and for breach of contract.
Months pending 19.9 months from the application to the suit; 30.1 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
In February 2022, Plaintiff’s wife, Humaira Ansar Khan, filed a visa application with USCIS on his behalf.
TRAC factors The court weighed the TRAC factors
  • 1. Rule of reasonneutral
  • 2. Congressional timetableneutral
  • 3. Human health and welfarefavors the government
  • 4. Competing prioritiesfavors the government
  • 5. Interests prejudicedfavors the government
  • 6. No impropriety neededneutral
Read by a model
Thus, the approximately 18-month delay between February 2023, when NVC notified Plaintiff that his case was “Documentarily Qualified,” Compl. ¶ 22, and the date of this opinion is, at best, neutral.
The government's delay arguments Line-jumping accepted Read by a model
Granting Plaintiff the relief he seeks simply would move him “ahead of longer-pending petitions” with no overall gain in administrative processing.
Threshold rulings APA adequate-remedy bar applied (mandamus claim fails) Read by a model
The Mandamus Act claim fails because the APA provides an adequate remedy at law.
Nationality Pakistan Read by a model
Plaintiff is a citizen of Pakistan, and he is the spouse of a U.S. citizen.
I-130 category Immediate relative Read by a model
Plaintiff is a citizen of Pakistan, and he is the spouse of a U.S. citizen.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:23-cv-03046
Filed
October 13, 2023
Ended
August 20, 2024
Suit's filing to its end
312 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.