Mandamus decisions / District of Minnesota
Abdi v. Flake
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 |
National Visa Center
Read by a model
Upon determination by the NVC that the Form DS-260 is complete, it will schedule a consular interview with the foreign relative at the appropriate embassy. |
|---|---|
| Form or filing |
DS-260 (immigrant visa)
Read by a model
On May 24, Abdi and Dadle submitted a Form DS-260 Immigrant Visa Application (Application) to USCIS. |
| What the suit asked for |
Schedule an interview
Read by a model
Because the Abdi alleges nothing more than that “seven (7) months have passed since all required documents and filing fees were submitted, [and] Plaintiff’s spouse has not been scheduled for an interview yet” (Compl. ¶ 15) |
| Kind of order |
A ruling on a motion or the petition
Read by a model
For the reasons explained below, the Court will grant Defendants’ motion and will dismiss this action. |
| Motion decided |
Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim
Read by a model
On a motion to dismiss brought under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), courts consider all facts alleged in the complaint to be true |
| Whose motion |
The government's motion
Read by a model
Defendants now move to dismiss the Complaint in its entirety. |
| Disposition |
Dismissed
The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness.
Read by a model
Plaintiff Nurudiin Mohamud Abdi’s Complaint (Doc. No. 1) is dismissed in its entirety, without prejudice. |
| Prevailing party |
Government
Read by a model
Defendants Jeffry Flake’s and Antony J. Blinken’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 5) is GRANTED; |
| The delay claim |
Dismissed
Read by a model
For the reasons explained below, the Court will grant Defendants’ motion and will dismiss this action. |
| Months pending |
16.3 months from the application to the court's decision
Read by a model
USCIS approved it on May 2, 2023. (Id.) On May 24, Abdi and Dadle submitted a Form DS-260 Immigrant Visa Application (Application) to USCIS. |
| TRAC factors |
The court weighed the TRAC factors
Absent any allegation that NVC has deviated from this rule of reason, the Court concludes the Complaint has not alleged “enough fact[s] to raise a reasonable expectation that discovery will reveal evidence of [the claim].” |
| The government's delay arguments |
First-in, first-out processing accepted; Line-jumping accepted
Read by a model
Given these cases, and because Abdi did not direct this Court to any contrary authority, USCIS’s decision to process applications and interviews in the order received complies with a rule of reason. |
| Threshold rulings | None Read by a model |
| Nationality |
Somalia
Read by a model
Abdi’s wife, Faiza Abdirahman Mohamed Dadle, is a citizen of Somalia. |
| I-130 category |
Immediate relative
Read by a model
Abdi is a U.S. citizen. (Doc. No. 1 [hereinafter, “Compl.”] ¶¶ 4, 10.) Abdi’s wife, Faiza Abdirahman Mohamed Dadle, is a citizen of Somalia. |
How the case ended
- Docket
- No. 0:24-cv-00532
- On the docket
- This ruling (ECF 13), deciding the motion (ECF 5)
- Filed
- February 20, 2024
- Ended
- October 2, 2024
- Suit's filing to its end
- 225 days
- How it ended
- Dismissed, ground not recorded
- From the record
- idb disp 2 (dismissed: want of prosecution)
A voluntary or stipulated dismissal is how most suits end once the agency acts; the docket rarely says why. Other suits in this court.
The ruling's entry is the docket's one order or judgment entered the day of the decision, and the motion number is read from that entry's text. Both come from CourtListener's copy of the docket; check them there.
Supreme Court and Eighth 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.
-
Trump v. Hawaii, 585 U.S. 667
Supreme Court, June 26, 2018. Mandel's facially-legitimate-and-bona-fide standard governs constitutional challenges to entry restrictions, and a citation to a valid statutory ground ordinarily satisfies it.
ImmCite: treatment available, history exists, not clearance
-
Department of State v. Muñoz, 602 U.S. 899
Supreme Court, June 21, 2024. A U.S. citizen has no fundamental liberty interest in a noncitizen spouse's admission, so marriage alone entitles the citizen neither to Mandel review of the consular refusal nor to an explanation beyond the statutory citation.
ImmCite: treatment available, history exists, not clearance
-
Kleindienst v. Mandel, 408 U.S. 753
Supreme Court, June 29, 1972. When a visa refusal burdens a U.S. citizen's own constitutional rights, courts ask only whether the Executive gave a facially legitimate and bona fide reason and do not look behind it.
ImmCite: treatment available, history exists, not clearance
-
Norton v. Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, 542 U.S. 55
Supreme Court, June 14, 2004. Section 706(1) and mandamus reach only a discrete agency action that the agency is legally required to take, so a court cannot compel programmatic improvements or action the law leaves to agency discretion.
ImmCite: treatment available, history exists, not clearance
-
Doan v. INS, 160 F.3d 508
Eighth Circuit, February 5, 1999. Decisions excluding noncitizens abroad are not reviewable without a clear statutory grant, and an overseas INS director deciding admissibility is the functional equivalent of a consular officer.
ImmCite: treatment available, history exists, not clearance. ImmCite has read all 2 published decisions citing this case, as of 2026-11-13; none treats it adversely. That describes those decisions; it is not a determination that the case is good law.
-
Thigulla v. Jaddou, 94 F.4th 770
Eighth Circuit, March 5, 2024. Section 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii) and § 1255(a) bar review of USCIS's decision to delay adjudicating adjustment applications under its adjudication hold policy, so the district court lacked jurisdiction.
ImmCite: treatment available, history exists, not clearance. ImmCite has read all 7 published decisions citing this case, as of 2026-11-13; none treats it adversely. That describes those decisions; it is not a determination that the case is good law.
-
Eighth Circuit, December 21, 2018. The Eighth Circuit applies the TRAC factors to a petition to compel delayed agency action.
ImmCite: unchecked, treatment not confirmed yet, not evidence either way. ImmCite has not finished reviewing this published circuit decision, so it shows no signal yet. Its review began with circuit decisions in immigration cases and is being extended to the other published circuit decisions that immigration precedent relies on. Read the decisions…