Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Columbia

ALAM v. BITTER

District of ColumbiaJohn D. BatesDecided July 23, 2024No. 1:23-cv-02557

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
He alleges that State’s delay in adjudicating his and his family’s visa applications is unreasonable.
Form or filing DS-260 (immigrant visa) Read by a model
In April 2019, the National Visa Center ( “NVC”) sent Alam a Notice of Immigrant Visa Case Creation.
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
to compel certain U.S. State Department officials (collectively, “State”) to adjudicate his and his family’s visa appli cations.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
ORDERED that [5] defendants’ motion to dismiss is GRANTED; and it is further ORDERED that plaintiff’s complaint is DISMISSED.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim Read by a model
To survive a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss, “a complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.’”
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Before the Court is State’s motion to dismiss.
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
ORDERED that [5] defendants’ motion to dismiss is GRANTED; and it is further ORDERED that plaintiff’s complaint is DISMISSED.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
ORDERED that [5] defendants’ motion to dismiss is GRANTED; and it is further ORDERED that plaintiff’s complaint is DISMISSED.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
ORDERED that [5] defendants’ motion to dismiss is GRANTED; and it is further ORDERED that plaintiff’s complaint is DISMISSED.
The other claims Dismissed Read by a model
In his briefing, Alam abandons his claims for breach of contract and tortious loss of consortium.
Months pending 34 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
Accordingly, Alam has thus far faced a delay of two years and ten months.
TRAC factors The court weighed the TRAC factors
  • 1. Rule of reasonfavors the government
  • 2. Congressional timetablefavors the applicant
  • 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
Because the delay of Alam’s administrative processing falls within the two-to-three-year period, and State uses a rule of reason to schedule visa interviews, the first factor strongly favors State.
The government's delay arguments First-in, first-out processing accepted; Line-jumping accepted Read by a model
Alam’s visa has followed this reasonable process. Alam’s brother filed the visa petition at issue in February 2006, Compl. ¶ 1, but because Alam was waiting in a first-in, first-out queue for F4 visas,
Threshold rulings None Read by a model
Nationality Bangladesh Read by a model
Khan is a U.S. citizen; Alam is a citizen of Bangladesh.
I-130 category Family preference Read by a model
brothers and sisters of adult U.S. citizens , such as Alam, fall into the lowest priority category (“F4”).

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:23-cv-02557
Filed
September 1, 2023
Ended
August 2, 2024
Suit's filing to its end
336 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 3, 2026. Check the current status before relying on one.