Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Columbia

Fateh v. Blinken

District of ColumbiaRoyce C. LamberthDecided February 29, 2024No. 1:23-cv-01277

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
On July 26, 2023, the State Department completed processing her application and issued her a nonimmigrant visa.
Form or filing 221(g) (consular refusal); DS-160 (nonimmigrant visa) Read by a model
Each filed a nonimmigrant visa application with the State Department, participated in an interview at the U.S. Embassy in Yerevan, Armenia, and submitted subsequent questionnaires concerning employment, travel, and address history.
What the suit asked for Finish 221(g) processing Read by a model
Specifically, they asked the Court to compel defendants to complete the background checks for and processing of their visa applications.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
the Court will GRANT defendants’ Second Motion to Dismiss and DISMISS plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint in its entirety.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction Read by a model
Now before the Court is defendants’ motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6).
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Now before the Court is defendants’ motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6).
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
the Court will GRANT defendants’ Second Motion to Dismiss and DISMISS plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint in its entirety.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
the Court will GRANT defendants’ Second Motion to Dismiss and DISMISS plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint in its entirety.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
The Court will dismiss the claims of the remaining plaintiffs, because plaintiffs failed to respond to, and thus conceded, defendants’ arguments that they lack standing.
Months pending 17.3 months from the application to the suit 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
Plaintiff Kosar Fateh applied for an F-2 visa on December 4, 2021 and submitted to a visa interview on January 27, 2022.
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings Held moot Read by a model
The claims of two of the five plaintiffs are moot because the United States Department of State has issued their visas.
Nationality Iran Read by a model
Plaintiffs are five Iranian citizens who reside in Iran.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:23-cv-01277
Filed
May 5, 2023
Ended
February 29, 2024
Suit's filing to its end
300 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.