Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Columbia

GJOCI v. DEPARTMENT OF STATE

District of ColumbiaRoyce C. LamberthDecided September 1, 2021No. 1:21-cv-00294

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
In their filings responding to plaintiffs’ initial complaint, defendants explain that the State Department “resumed processing of DV applications as local COVID-19 conditions permit and in accordance with the Department’s current prioritization guidelines which are not the subject of this lawsuit.”
Form or filing DS-260 (immigrant visa) Read by a model
(2) Order Defendants to adjudicate promptly Plaintiffs’ Pending DS260 applications without reference to the challenged policies[;]
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
(2) Order Defendants to adjudicate promptly Plaintiffs’ Pending DS260 applications without reference to the challenged policies[;]
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
Upon consideration of the parties’ filings and the underlying record, the Court will deny plaintiffs’ second motion for a preliminary injunction.
Motion decided Preliminary injunction or TRO Read by a model
Upon consideration of the parties’ filings and the underlying record, the Court will deny plaintiffs’ second motion for a preliminary injunction.
Whose motion The plaintiff's motion Read by a model
Upon consideration of the parties’ filings and the underlying record, the Court will deny plaintiffs’ second motion for a preliminary injunction.
Disposition Denied in the government's favor The principal motion was denied in full: a motion to dismiss denied so the case goes on, or relief denied on the merits. Read by a model
Upon consideration of the parties’ filings and the underlying record, the Court will deny plaintiffs’ second motion for a preliminary injunction.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
Upon consideration of the parties’ filings and the underlying record, the Court will deny plaintiffs’ second motion for a preliminary injunction.
The delay claim Relief denied Read by a model
Based on the foregoing, the Court will deny plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction by separate order.
The other claims Relief denied Read by a model
Based on the foregoing, the Court will deny plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction by separate order.
Months pending Not stated Read by a model
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings None Read by a model

Other orders in this case

The group holds 2 decisions from this suit, oldest first. Outcome counts on these pages count the case once, by its latest decision. How decisions are grouped into cases.

DecisionDecidedJudgeDisposition
GJOCI v. DEPARTMENT OF STATEThis decision September 1, 2021 Royce C. Lamberth Denied in the government's favor
Gjoci v. Department of StateThe case's latest decision: its outcome is the one counted September 23, 2024 Royce C. Lamberth Dismissed

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:21-cv-00294
Filed
February 1, 2021
Ended
September 24, 2024
Suit's filing to its end
1,331 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.

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.