Passim

Mandamus decisions / Northern District of Illinois

Nasir v. United States Department of State

Northern District of IllinoisMaria ValdezDecided September 17, 2024No. 1:23-cv-15738

Read the decisionOriginal on CourtListener

2,996 written decisions from 2,731 cases in the whole mandamus and agency-delay group, the group's newest decided November 12, 2026. Updated November 14, 2026 at 1:17 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 1,617 public decisions since January 1, 2025 that a CourtListener and GovInfo search for mandamus and agency delay finds, Passim holds 1,406 (87%), 1,039 of them in this group, measured November 14, 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
Plaintiff brought the present mandamus action under the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”), 5 U.S.C. § 701 et seq., and the Mandamus Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1361, seeking to direct the United States Department of State to adjudicate her father’s visa application.
Form or filing 221(g) (consular refusal); DS-260 (immigrant visa) Read by a model
On October 19, 2020, Plaintiff applied for an immigrant visa to allow Uddin to enter the United States and obtain lawful permanent resident status.
What the suit asked for Finish 221(g) processing Read by a model
Plaintiff prays that the Court (1) issue a writ of mandamus compelling Defendants to promptly complete all administrative processing within sixty days;
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss [Doc. No. 11] is granted.
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 Plaintiff’s complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction as well as failure to state a claim.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
The matter is now before the Court on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss [Doc. No. 11].
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss [Doc. No. 11] is granted.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss [Doc. No. 11] is granted.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
The Court therefore holds that Plaintiff’s complaint is dismissed for lack of standing to the extent that it seeks an order compelling Defendants to complete administrative processing of Uddin’s visa, to adjudicate the visa, and to explain the delay.
The other claims Dismissed Read by a model
Furthermore, Plaintiff’s due process claim must fail, as she has no due process right to the prompt adjudication of her father’s visa.
Months pending 36.6 months from the application to the suit; 46.9 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
On October 19, 2020, Plaintiff applied for an immigrant visa to allow Uddin to enter the United States and obtain lawful permanent resident status.
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings Consular nonreviewability applied Read by a model
Plaintiff’s effort to force the State Department to approve the visa with the new information Uddin submitted is essentially “a substantive challenge to the Executive’s discretionary decisions,” and thus the claim is unreviewable.
Nationality Canada Read by a model
Her father, Mohammad Nasir Uddin, is a citizen of Canada.
I-130 category Immediate relative Read by a model
The type of visa Plaintiff seeks on behalf of Uddin is one for an Immediate Relative.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:23-cv-15738
Filed
November 7, 2023
Ended
September 17, 2024
Suit's filing to its end
315 days
How it ended
Dismissed, ground not recorded
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 Seventh 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 14, 2026. Check the current status before relying on one.