Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Columbia

Khan v. Blinken

District of ColumbiaTimothy J. KellyDecided June 7, 2024No. 1:23-cv-03474

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
Two years later, in November 2023, they sued, alleging that Defendant Antony J. Blinken, in his official capacity as U.S. Secretary of State, has unreasonably delayed resolving their visa applications, and seeking to compel him to complete that processing and issue a final decision.
Form or filing DS-260 (immigrant visa) Read by a model
Plaintiffs are Pakistani nationals who allege that their immigrant visa applications have been pending since October 2021, when their I-140 national interest waiver petition was approved.
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
They seek to compel Defendant to decide the visa application at issue in 21 days.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For all these reasons, the Court will grant Defendant’s motion and dismiss the case.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim Read by a model
Defendant moves to dismiss for failure to state a claim on several grounds.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Defendant moves to dismiss for failure to state a claim on several grounds.
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
For all these reasons, the Court will grant Defendant’s motion and dismiss the case.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
For all these reasons, the Court will grant Defendant’s motion and dismiss the case.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
For all these reasons, the Court will grant Defendant’s motion and dismiss the case.
Months pending 31.7 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
Plaintiffs are Pakistani nationals who allege that their immigrant visa applications have been pending since October 2021, when their I-140 national interest waiver petition was approved.
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
These circumstances further underscore why the first and second factors, taken together, weigh in Defendant’s favor.
The government's delay arguments First-in, first-out processing accepted; Line-jumping accepted Read by a model
Plaintiffs do not plausibly allege that Defendant has not followed this rule.4 And nothing about the length of the delay—considered a “rough yardstick” as to whether an agency is observing its rules—suggests otherwise.
Threshold rulings None Read by a model
Nationality Pakistan Read by a model
Plaintiffs are Pakistani nationals

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:23-cv-03474
Filed
November 19, 2023
Ended
June 7, 2024
Suit's filing to its end
201 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.