Passim

Mandamus decisions / Western District of Washington

Rohani v. Blinken

Western District of WashingtonLauren KingDecided May 27, 2025No. 2:24-cv-00389

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
All of the Visa Applicants were denied a visa by consular officials based on a finding that they were inadmissible based on terrorism-related inadmissibility grounds (“TRIG”) pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(3)(B).
Form or filing None named Read by a model
What the suit asked for Not recorded Read by a model
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, the Court GRANTS Defendants’ motion to dismiss.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim; Other motion to dismiss Read by a model
This matter comes before the Court on Defendants’ Second Motion to Dismiss.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
This matter comes before the Court on Defendants’ Second Motion to Dismiss.
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, the Court GRANTS Defendants’ motion to dismiss.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, the Court GRANTS Defendants’ motion to dismiss.
The other claims Dismissed Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, the Court GRANTS Defendants’ motion to dismiss.
Months pending Not stated Read by a model
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings Consular nonreviewability applied Read by a model
The Court therefore dismisses the Visa Applicants and Relatives’ claims under the APA, the Accardi doctrine,6 and for mandamus under the doctrine of consular nonreviewability.
Nationality Canada Read by a model
The Canadian Applicants are citizens of, and reside in, Canada.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 2:24-cv-00389
Filed
March 21, 2024
Ended
October 23, 2025
Suit's filing to its end
581 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 3, 2026. Check the current status before relying on one.