Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Columbia

Qadeer v. Schofer

District of ColumbiaLoren L. AliKhanDecided August 15, 2024No. 1:23-cv-02268

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
Saad Qadeer, a Pakistani national, seeks to compel Defendants—Andrew Schofer, in his official capacity as Deputy Chief of Mission for the U.S. Embassy in Pakistan, and Antony J. Blinken, in his official capacity as Secretary of State—to adjudicate his immigrant visa application.
Form or filing 221(g) (consular refusal); DS-160 (nonimmigrant visa) Read by a model
Mr. Qadeer applied for an H-1B visa in 2021 and his application was granted in February 2022. ECF No. 1 ¶¶ 2, 11. His visa expired in January 2023, prompting Mr. Qadeer’s current renewal application.
What the suit asked for Finish 221(g) processing Read by a model
Mr. Qadeer seeks final processing of his visa application, which remains in “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, ECF No. 7.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction; Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim Read by a model
Defendants have moved to dismiss under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and (b)(6). ECF No. 7. For the reasons explained below, the court will dismiss the case under Rule 12(b)(6).
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Defendants have moved to dismiss under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and (b)(6).
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, ECF No. 7.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, the court will grant Defendants’ motion to dismiss, ECF No. 7.
Months pending 4 months from the application to the suit; 16 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
Mr. Qadeer left the United States and traveled to the U.S. Embassy in Pakistan for his visa interview in April 2023.
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 Mr. Qadeer 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
Mr. Qadeer’s visa application remains in administrative processing. ECF No. 1 ¶ 2. Thus, the doctrine does not apply.
Nationality Pakistan Read by a model
Saad Qadeer, a Pakistani national

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:23-cv-02268
Filed
August 7, 2023
Ended
August 15, 2024
Suit's filing to its end
374 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.