Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Columbia

JAVAID v. BITTER

District of ColumbiaChristopher R. CooperDecided July 29, 2025No. 1:24-cv-02716

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
One year later, the State Department had yet to render a final decision.
Form or filing 221(g) (consular refusal); DS-260 (immigrant visa) Read by a model
Following the interview, Tahir received notice that his application had been refused and placed into administrative processing under § 221(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (“INA”).
What the suit asked for Finish 221(g) processing Read by a model
One year later, the State Department had yet to render a final decision. So Javaid filed this suit to compel a determination.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For these reasons, the Court will dismiss the complaint and the case in a separate order that accompanies this Opinion.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim Read by a model
Because Javaid has not identified a discrete agency action that the government is required to take, she has failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Defendants move to dismiss the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and failure to state a claim under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6).
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
For these reasons, the Court will dismiss the complaint and the case in a separate order that accompanies this Opinion.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
the Court will grant the government’s motion and dismiss this case.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
Because Javaid has not identified a discrete agency action that the government is required to take, she has failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Accordingly, the Court will dismiss Javaid’s complaint.
The other claims Dismissed Read by a model
Accordingly, the Court will dismiss Javaid’s complaint.
Months pending 12 months from the application to the suit; 22.4 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
In September 2023, a consular officer interviewed Tahir at the U.S. Embassy in Islamabad.
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings No duty to re-adjudicate a 221(g) refusal Read by a model
Having concluded that APA § 555(b) creates no non-discretionary duty to act on Javaid’s application
Nationality Pakistan Read by a model
Maham Javaid, an American citizen, married Muhammad Waqas Tahir, a Pakistani citizen, in December 2019.
I-130 category Immediate relative Read by a model
Maham Javaid, an American citizen, filed a visa petition to allow her Pakistani husband to live with her in the United States.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:24-cv-02716
Filed
September 23, 2024
Ended
July 30, 2025
Suit's filing to its end
310 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.