Passim

Mandamus decisions / Southern District of New York

Alawadi v. Bitter

Southern District of New YorkJ. Paul OetkenDecided June 16, 2023No. 1:22-cv-05256

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
Plaintiffs do not contest the factual claim, supported with citations to the record substantiated by documentary evidence, that the visa petition at issue in the mandamus petition has been adjudicated by the State Department as of September 28, 2022.
Form or filing None named Read by a model
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
seeking an order compelling the United States Department of State (“State Department”) to adjudicate a visa application.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
the Government’s Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED. This case is DISMISSED.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction Read by a model
moved to dismiss, inter alia, under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) “because the consular office has already adjudicated the visa application at issue” and, therefore, this “action is moot.”
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
the Government’s Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED.
Disposition Dismissed as moot Dismissed or denied as moot because the agency acted. Read by a model
which means “these claims are moot and must be dismissed.”
Prevailing party Neither side Read by a model
which means “these claims are moot and must be dismissed.”
The delay claim Moot: the agency acted Read by a model
these claims are moot and must be dismissed.
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
which means “these claims are moot and must be dismissed.”

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:22-cv-05256
Filed
June 22, 2022
Ended
June 16, 2023
Suit's filing to its end
359 days
How it ended
Ended once the agency acted
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 Second 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.