Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Columbia

Kahbasi v. Blinken

District of ColumbiaLoren L. AliKhanDecided June 27, 2024No. 1:23-cv-01667

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
The U.S. State Department’s online “Visa Status Check” system lists their applications as “refused.”
Form or filing 221(g) (consular refusal); DS-160 (nonimmigrant visa) Read by a model
Plaintiffs are four Iranian nationals who have applied for nonimmigrant visas to study or work in the United States.
What the suit asked for Finish 221(g) processing Read by a model
Second, Plaintiffs seek final processing of their visa applications, which are “in suspended administrative processing.”
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, the court will grant Defendants’ motion to dismiss.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction; Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim Read by a model
For the reasons explained below, the court will dismiss certain Defendants under Rule 12(b)(1) and the remainder of the case under Rule 12(b)(6).
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, the court will grant Defendants’ motion to dismiss.
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
Accordingly, the court will dismiss the complaint.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, the court will grant Defendants’ motion to dismiss.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
But after weighing the TRAC factors, the court concludes that Plaintiffs have not plausibly alleged that their delays are unreasonable. Accordingly, the court will dismiss the complaint.
Months pending 7.5 months from the application to the suit; 19.9 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
Mr. Kahbasi completed his interview on October 31, 2022.
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 neededneutral
Read by a model
Both factors favor Defendants.
The government's delay arguments Line-jumping accepted Read by a model
Such would be the case here, where moving Plaintiffs to the front of the visa adjudication line would merely reorder all applicants with no change in the overall timeline.
Threshold rulings Consular nonreviewability rejected; Duty to re-adjudicate a 221(g) refusal found Read by a model
Each of Plaintiffs’ visa applications remains in administrative processing. ECF No. 1 ¶ 37. The doctrine thus does not apply.
Nationality Iran Read by a model
Plaintiffs are four Iranian nationals who have applied for nonimmigrant visas to study or work in the United States.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:23-cv-01667
Filed
June 8, 2023
Ended
July 1, 2024
Suit's filing to its end
389 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 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.