Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Columbia

Gorgadze v. Blinken

District of ColumbiaJohn D. BatesDecided July 12, 2022No. 1:21-cv-02421

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
Because the end of the fiscal year in which plaintiffs were selected has passed, no consular officer may issue DVs to plaintiffs.
Form or filing DS-260 (immigrant visa) Read by a model
Plaintiffs filed their complaint on September 14, 2021, alleging that defendants had unreasonably delayed processing their DV applications in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. § 701 et seq. (“APA”).
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
They sought a writ of mandamus compelling defendants to adjudicate their applications—and schedule and conduct their interview—before the statutory deadline,
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint is GRANTED.
Motion decided Other motion to dismiss Read by a model
Because plaintiffs lack standing to bring their claims for violation of the APA and because plaintiffs’ mandamus and visa-reservation claims are moot, it is hereby ORDERED that [11] defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint is GRANTED.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint is GRANTED.
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
Because plaintiffs lack standing to bring their claims for violation of the APA and because plaintiffs’ mandamus and visa-reservation claims are moot, it is hereby ORDERED that [11] defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint is GRANTED.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
Because plaintiffs lack standing to bring their claims for violation of the APA and because plaintiffs’ mandamus and visa-reservation claims are moot, it is hereby ORDERED that [11] defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint is GRANTED.
The delay claim Moot: the agency acted Read by a model
Accordingly, the claims seeking an order compelling defendants to act on plaintiffs’ now-expired DVs are moot.
The other claims Dismissed Read by a model
the Court concludes that plaintiffs lack standing as to their claim for declaratory judgment.
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 Read by a model
Accordingly, the claims seeking an order compelling defendants to act on plaintiffs’ now-expired DVs are moot.
Nationality Russia Read by a model
Plaintiffs Vladimir Gorgadze, his wife Elena Petukhova, and their son Mikhail Gorgadze are Russian nationals

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, this one. How decisions are grouped into cases.

DecisionDecidedJudgeDisposition
Gorgadze v. Blinken September 29, 2021 John D. Bates Denied in the government's favor
Gorgadze v. BlinkenThis decisionThe case's latest decision: its outcome is the one counted July 12, 2022 John D. Bates Dismissed

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:21-cv-02421
Filed
September 14, 2021
Ended
July 12, 2022
Suit's filing to its end
301 days
How it ended
Dismissed on jurisdiction or the merits
From the record
order 2022-07-12 for the defendants, ground not stated; 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.