Mandamus decisions / Western District of Washington

Hosseininejad v. Blinken

Western District of WashingtonThomas S. ZillyDecided November 21, 2024No. 2:24-cv-00794

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
requesting this Court compel Antony J. Blinken, U.S. 7 Secretary of State and Carson Wu, Acting Director of Screening, Analysis and 8 Coordination (together, “Defendants”) to adjudicate the immigration visa within 30 days
Form or filing 221(g) (consular refusal); DS-260 (immigrant visa) Read by a model
duty to adjudicate and provide a “final decision” on Tajaddini’s immigration visa.
What the suit asked for Finish 221(g) processing Read by a model
requesting this Court compel Antony J. Blinken, U.S. 7 Secretary of State and Carson Wu, Acting Director of Screening, Analysis and 8 Coordination (together, “Defendants”) to adjudicate the immigration visa within 30 days
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
The Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss pursuant to FRCP 12(b)(6), docket no. 10, is 14 GRANTED. Plaintiffs’ claims are DISMISSED with prejudice.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim Read by a model
The Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss pursuant to FRCP 12(b)(6), docket no. 10, is 14 GRANTED.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, docket no. 10.
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
Plaintiffs’ claims are DISMISSED with prejudice.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
The Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss pursuant to FRCP 12(b)(6), docket no. 10, is 14 GRANTED. Plaintiffs’ claims are DISMISSED with prejudice.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
The Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss pursuant to FRCP 12(b)(6), docket no. 10, is 14 GRANTED. Plaintiffs’ claims are DISMISSED with prejudice.
Months pending 7.8 months from the application to the suit; 13.3 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
On October 13, 1 2023, Tajaddini was interviewed by the Consular Section of the U.S. Embassy in 2 Yerevan, Armenia.
TRAC factors The court weighed the TRAC factors
  • 1. Rule of reasonnot reached
  • 2. Congressional timetablenot reached
  • 3. Human health and welfarenot reached
  • 4. Competing prioritiesnot reached
  • 5. Interests prejudicednot reached
  • 6. No impropriety needednot reached
Read by a model
Threshold rulings No duty to re-adjudicate a 221(g) refusal Read by a model
First, the visa application has 12 already been adjudicated when it was denied on or about October 13, 2023, and there is 13 no mandatory, nondiscretionary duty to readjudicate it.
Nationality Iran Read by a model
Iranian national Plaintiff Amirhossein Tajaddini
I-130 category Family preference Read by a model
filed a Form I-130 on behalf of her adult son

How the case ended

Docket
No. 2:24-cv-00794
Filed
June 5, 2024
Ended
November 21, 2024
Suit's filing to its end
169 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 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.