Passim

Mandamus decisions / Southern District of Texas

Khosravi v. United States Department of State

Southern District of TexasLee H RosenthalDecided April 2, 2025No. 4:24-cv-04221

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
Khosravi asks the court to compel the Department of State to readjudicate and grant his visa application within 60 days.
Form or filing 221(g) (consular refusal); DS-160 (nonimmigrant visa) Read by a model
He filed an E-2 Nonimmigrant Visa Application on October 25, 2023.
What the suit asked for Finish 221(g) processing Read by a model
Khosravi asks the court to compel the Department of State to readjudicate and grant his visa application within 60 days.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
The government’s motion to dismiss is granted.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction; Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim Read by a model
The defendants have moved to dismiss the complaint under Rule 12(b)(1) on the basis of mootness and under Rule 12(b)(6) on the basis that the complaint does not plead a plausible claim of unreasonable delay.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
The defendants have moved to dismiss the complaint under Rule 12(b)(1) on the basis of mootness and under Rule 12(b)(6) on the basis that the complaint does not plead a plausible claim of unreasonable delay.
Disposition Dismissed as moot Dismissed or denied as moot because the agency acted. Read by a model
The record in this case shows that the consular officer refused to issue the visa that Khosravi sought. (Docket Entry No. 1 §§ 5-6). This was an adjudication of Khosravi’s visa application.
Prevailing party Neither side Read by a model
This was an adjudication of Khosravi’s visa application.
The delay claim Moot: the agency acted Read by a model
The record in this case shows that the consular officer refused to issue the visa that Khosravi sought. (Docket Entry No. 1 §§ 5-6). This was an adjudication of Khosravi’s visa application.
Months pending 0.2 months from the application to the agency's action Read by a model
A consular official at the U.S. Consulate General in Calgary conducted a visa interview on October 31, 2023—a week later. (Id. ¶ 4). At the end of that interview, the officer refused the application, under Section 221(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act.
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings Held moot Read by a model
The record in this case shows that the consular officer refused to issue the visa that Khosravi sought. (Docket Entry No. 1 §§ 5-6). This was an adjudication of Khosravi’s visa application.
Nationality Iran Read by a model
Milad Khosravi, a dual citizen of Iran and Canada, currently resides in Canada.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 4:24-cv-04221
Filed
October 31, 2024
Ended
April 2, 2025
Suit's filing to its end
153 days
How it ended
Ended once the agency acted
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 Fifth 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.