Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Columbia

Rezvani v. Blinken

District of ColumbiaCarl J. NicholsDecided May 5, 2025No. 1:24-cv-03381

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
“Similarly, to the extent that the State Department’s collection of fees under 22 C.F.R. § 41.107 creates a duty to complete the corresponding service, the consular officer did so by issuing the refusal decision.”
Form or filing 221(g) (consular refusal); DS-160 (nonimmigrant visa) Read by a model
Plaintiffs are eight Iranian nationals whose applications for nonimmigrant visas were refused pursuant to INA Section 221(g) and then placed into “administrative processing.”
What the suit asked for Finish 221(g) processing Read by a model
the government has unreasonably delayed in conclusively adjudicating their visa applications, and so seek an order compelling such an adjudication.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
ORDERED that the government’s Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 9, is GRANTED;
Motion decided Other motion to dismiss Read by a model
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that the government’s Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 9, is GRANTED;
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
ORDERED that the government’s Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 9, is GRANTED;
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
ORDERED that the claims of the remaining plaintiffs are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
ORDERED that the claims of the remaining plaintiffs are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
It will instead dismiss this suit because, as discussed above, plaintiffs have not demonstrated that defendants have a duty to take any further action with respect to their visa applications.
The other claims Dismissed Read by a model
ORDERED that the claims of the remaining plaintiffs are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
Months pending Not stated at filing The agency acted before this decision, so the months up to the decision are not a delay and are not shown. Read by a model
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings Held moot; No duty to re-adjudicate a 221(g) refusal Read by a model
The Court will thus dismiss Jahanbakhshi’s claims as moot.
Nationality Iran Read by a model
Plaintiffs are eight Iranian nationals

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:24-cv-03381
Filed
December 4, 2024
Ended
May 5, 2025
Suit's filing to its end
152 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.