Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Columbia

Moradi v. Blinken

District of ColumbiaAmit P. MehtaDecided September 30, 2025No. 1:24-cv-02569

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
They also assert that 8 U.S.C. § 1202(e) and other sources of law3 require a consular officer to act on their applications.
Form or filing 221(g) (consular refusal); DS-160 (nonimmigrant visa) Read by a model
According to Plaintiffs, their F-1 or J-1 visa applications were properly filed but were refused and placed in administrative processing under the Immigration and National Act § 221(g) where they have been for over nine months with no action.
What the suit asked for Finish 221(g) processing Read by a model
Contending that Defendants’ failure to act constitutes a violation of law, id. ¶¶ 120–158, Plaintiffs ask the court to compel agency action pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and to issue a writ of mandamus.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 19, is denied.
Motion decided Other motion to dismiss Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 19, is denied.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 19, is denied.
Disposition Denied in the applicant's favor The principal motion was denied in full: a motion to dismiss denied so the case goes on, or relief denied on the merits. Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 19, is denied.
Prevailing party Applicant Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 19, is denied.
The delay claim The delay claim goes on Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 19, is denied.
Months pending 9 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
where they have been for over nine months with no action.
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings Consular nonreviewability rejected; Duty to re-adjudicate a 221(g) refusal found Read by a model
As to the defense of consular nonreviewability, courts in this District repeatedly have held that inaction on a visa application stuck in administrative processing under § 221(g) is not shielded from review under that doctrine.
Nationality Iran Read by a model
all citizens and residents of Iran

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:24-cv-02569
Filed
September 10, 2024
Status
Pending as of the last docket check

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.