Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Idaho

Camacho Ortiz v. US Department of State

District of IdahoDecided July 7, 2023No. 1:22-cv-00508

Read the decisionOriginal on CourtListener

2,996 written decisions from 2,731 cases in the whole mandamus and agency-delay group, the group's newest decided November 12, 2026. Updated November 14, 2026 at 1:17 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 1,617 public decisions since January 1, 2025 that a CourtListener and GovInfo search for mandamus and agency delay finds, Passim holds 1,406 (87%), 1,039 of them in this group, measured November 14, 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 NVC communicated to Plaintiffs that Camacho Ortiz’s visa interview would not be expedited because, “[t]o be fair to all applicants, the Department of State schedules immigrant visa interviews in the order that the cases complete processing at the NVC.”
Form or filing DS-260 (immigrant visa) Read by a model
submitting a Form DS-260 Immigrant Visa Application (application)
What the suit asked for Schedule an interview Read by a model
The crux of Plaintiffs’ allegations is that Defendants are required to expedite Camacho Ortiz’s visa interview with the U.S. Consulate to preserve her son’s status as a beneficiary of Mirella Camacho’s Form I-130 petition before he turns 21 years old.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
the Court grants Defendants’ motion to dismiss and denies Plaintiffs’ motions for summary judgment and injunctive relief.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction; Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim; Other motion to dismiss; Preliminary injunction or TRO; Summary judgment Read by a model
Pending before the Court is Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint (Dkt. 8); Plaintiffs’ Emergency Motion for Injunctive Relief (Dkt. 17); and Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 18).
Whose motion Cross-motions Read by a model
Pending before the Court is Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint (Dkt. 8); Plaintiffs’ Emergency Motion for Injunctive Relief (Dkt. 17); and Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 18).
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint (Dkt. 6) is DISMISSED without prejudice.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
the Court grants Defendants’ motion to dismiss and denies Plaintiffs’ motions for summary judgment and injunctive relief.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint (Dkt. 6) is DISMISSED without prejudice.
Months pending 4 months from the application to the suit; 10.7 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
In August 2022, Camacho Ortiz submitted her visa application and other required documents and fees to the NVC.
TRAC factors The court weighed the TRAC factors
  • 1. Rule of reasonfavors the government
  • 2. Congressional timetablefavors the government
  • 3. Human health and welfarefavors the applicant
  • 4. Competing prioritiesfavors the government
  • 5. Interests prejudicedfavors the applicant
  • 6. No impropriety neededfavors the government
Read by a model
Based on a review of the caselaw addressing unreasonable delay claims, Defendants’ delay in processing Camacho Ortiz’s application is not significant enough for the first two TRAC factors to weigh in Plaintiffs’ favor.
The government's delay arguments First-in, first-out processing accepted; Line-jumping accepted Read by a model
In other words, Defendants are scheduling visa interviews on a first come, first serve basis.
Threshold rulings None Read by a model
Nationality Mexico Read by a model
her son, who is also a Mexican foreign national, will turn 21 years old on October 1, 2023.
I-130 category Immediate relative Read by a model
Plaintiff Maria Mirella Camacho is an American citizen who submitted a visa petition on behalf of her mother, Plaintiff Martha Camacho Ortiz.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:22-cv-00508
Filed
December 16, 2022
Ended
July 7, 2023
Suit's filing to its end
203 days
How it ended
Dismissed, ground not recorded
From the record
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 Ninth 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 14, 2026. Check the current status before relying on one.