Passim

Mandamus decisions / Eastern District of Michigan

Ahmed v. US Secretary of State

Eastern District of MichiganLaurie J. MichelsonDecided September 12, 2024No. 2:23-cv-11860

Read the decisionOriginal on CourtListener

2,948 written decisions from 2,691 cases in the whole mandamus and agency-delay group, the group's newest decided November 10, 2026. Updated November 11, 2026 at 1:21 p.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 1,632 public decisions since January 1, 2025 that a CourtListener and GovInfo search for mandamus and agency delay finds, Passim holds 1,398 (86%), measured November 11, 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
Over four years passed without the State Department scheduling an immigrant visa interview for Any at the United States Embassy in Bangladesh—the necessary next step in the visa application process.
Form or filing DS-260 (immigrant visa) Read by a model
Over four years passed without the State Department scheduling an immigrant visa interview for Any at the United States Embassy in Bangladesh—the necessary next step in the visa application process.
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
Claiming unreasonable delay under the APA, Plaintiffs now seek Court intervention in the form of a writ of mandamus to compel the Defendants to adjudicate Any’s visa application.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS [4]
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction; Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim Read by a model
Defendants moved to dismiss the APA claim under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) and the mandamus request under Rule 12(b)(1).
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Before the Court is Defendants’ motion to dismiss all claims for failure to state a claim and lack of jurisdiction.
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
The Court dismisses Plaintiffs’ complaint WITHOUT PREJUDICE to refiling in the future.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
Accordingly, Defendants’ motion to dismiss (ECF No. 4) is GRANTED.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
Accordingly, Defendants’ motion to dismiss (ECF No. 4) is GRANTED. The Court dismisses Plaintiffs’ complaint WITHOUT PREJUDICE to refiling in the future.
Months pending 60 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
The Court is not unsympathetic to Plaintiffs’ plight—indeed, Defendants’ delay of almost five years approaches the upper limit of what courts have found reasonable.
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
So the Court finds the first two factors favor Defendants here.
The government's delay arguments First-in, first-out processing accepted; Line-jumping accepted Read by a model
The first factor “weighs heavily in favor of [Defendants] because the State Department employs a ‘first-in, first-out’ methodology for processing visa applications, and courts have uniformly concluded that this methodology satisfies the rule of reason.”
Threshold rulings APA adequate-remedy bar applied (mandamus claim fails) Read by a model
Accordingly, as Plaintiffs have an adequate remedy under the APA if they could establish unreasonable delay and seek the same relief under the APA and Mandamus Act claims, the Court will dismiss the mandamus claim for lack of jurisdiction.
Nationality Bangladesh Read by a model
Ahmed’s wife Mst Maisha Any is a Bengali national residing in Bangladesh.
I-130 category Family preference Read by a model
Muhin Ahmed is a permanent resident of the United States living in Detroit, Michigan. (ECF No. 1, PageID.4.) Ahmed’s wife Mst Maisha Any is a Bengali national residing in Bangladesh.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 2:23-cv-11860
Filed
August 1, 2023
Ended
September 12, 2024
Suit's filing to its end
408 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 Sixth 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 11, 2026. Check the current status before relying on one.