Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Columbia

Mashaghzadehfard v. Blinken

District of ColumbiaRichard J. LeonDecided September 16, 2024No. 1:23-cv-03164

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
The Secretary of State can provide relief by directing consular officers to adjudicate pending visa applications “within a reasonable time,” 5 U.S.C. § 555(b).
Form or filing 221(g) (consular refusal); DS-260 (immigrant visa) Read by a model
Plaintiff paid his fees and submitted his Form DS-260 and all supporting documentation on March 18, 2022.
What the suit asked for Finish 221(g) processing Read by a model
Turning to the merits, plaintiff contends that the Government has unreasonably delayed the adjudication of his visa application, which has remained in administrative processing for approximately 19 months.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, defendant’s motion to dismiss is GRANTED pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) and plaintiff's motion to compel the administrative record is DENIED.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction; Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim Read by a model
On December 26, 2023, the Government moved to dismiss under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6).
Whose motion Cross-motions Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, defendant’s motion to dismiss is GRANTED pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) and plaintiff's motion to compel the administrative record is DENIED.
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, defendant’s motion to dismiss is GRANTED pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) and plaintiff's motion to compel the administrative record is DENIED.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, defendant’s motion to dismiss is GRANTED pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) and plaintiff's motion to compel the administrative record is DENIED.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
Thus, I will GRANT the government’s motion to dismiss plaintiffs unreasonable delay claims pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6).
Months pending 19.1 months from the application to the suit; 30 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
Plaintiff paid his fees and submitted his Form DS-260 and all supporting documentation on March 18, 2022.
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
Accordingly, this TRAC factor strongly favors the Government.
The government's delay arguments Line-jumping accepted Read by a model
But consular “[p]rocessing capacity is presently a zero-sum game,” so expediting review of plaintiffs application “would necessarily mean additional delays for other applicants—many of whom undoubtedly face hardships of their own.”
Threshold rulings Duty to re-adjudicate a 221(g) refusal found Read by a model
Thus, “[g]ranting or refusing a final visa application is a mandatory agency action,” and a failure to do so in a reasonable time is reviewable under the APA.
Nationality Iran Read by a model
Plaintiff Saman Mashaghzadehfard is an Iranian national living in Iran.
I-130 category Family preference Read by a model
His wife, Sepideh Ghavami, is a lawful permanent resident of the United States and lives here with their children.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:23-cv-03164
Filed
October 21, 2023
Ended
September 17, 2024
Suit's filing to its end
332 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.