Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Columbia

Niyomwungere v. Blinken

District of ColumbiaAmit P. MehtaDecided December 11, 2024No. 1:24-cv-01990

Read the decisionOriginal on CourtListener

2,917 written decisions from 2,664 cases in the whole mandamus and agency-delay group, the group's newest decided October 30, 2026. Updated November 3, 2026 at 7:07 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
Plaintiff Willy Niyomwungere, the husband of an American citizen, seeks to compel Secretary of State Antony Blinken and other State Department officials (“Defendants”) to adjudicate his I-130 immigrant visa application.
Form or filing DS-260 (immigrant visa) Read by a model
to adjudicate his I-130 immigrant visa application.
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
He asks this court to order Defendants to either adjudicate his visa application immediately or
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. 4, is granted.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim Read by a model
To survive a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6), the “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
For the foregoing reasons, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 4, 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. 4, is granted.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 4, is granted.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 4, is granted.
Months pending 25.9 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
In October 2022, Plaintiff’s spouse, an American citizen, submitted the requisite I-130 form.
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
This readily-identifiable rationale for the delay in scheduling Plaintiff’s interview supplies the government with a “rule of reason” by which it makes the decision (or lack of one) at issue.
The government's delay arguments First-in, first-out processing accepted; Line-jumping accepted Read by a model
This readily-identifiable rationale for the delay in scheduling Plaintiff’s interview supplies the government with a “rule of reason” by which it makes the decision (or lack of one) at issue.
Threshold rulings None Read by a model
Nationality Burundi Read by a model
Plaintiff is a citizen and resident of Burundi.
I-130 category Immediate relative Read by a model
Plaintiff Willy Niyomwungere, the husband of an American citizen

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:24-cv-01990
Filed
July 9, 2024
Ended
December 12, 2024
Suit's filing to its end
156 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.