Passim

Mandamus decisions / Southern District of Ohio

Derwish v. Deputy Chief of Mission, U.S. Embassy in Djibouti

Southern District of OhioDouglas R. ColeDecided August 15, 2025No. 1:24-cv-00709

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
The consular officer assigned to Ahmed’s case refused Ahmed’s visa application.
Form or filing 221(g) (consular refusal); DS-260 (immigrant visa) Read by a model
the Embassy had “refused” Ahmed’s application and, as Derwish characterizes it, “placed” Ahmed’s case in “administrative processing [under] the Immigration and Nationality Act [] § 221(g).”
What the suit asked for Finish 221(g) processing Read by a model
Based on that, she asks the Court either to compel Defendants to adjudicate Ahmed’s visa application under APA § 706(1) or to mandate the same under the Mandamus Act.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For the reasons discussed above, the Court GRANTS Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 9).
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction Read by a model
Defendants move to dismiss both for lack of jurisdiction under Rule 12(b)(1) and for failure to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6).
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Defendants now move to dismiss Derwish’s Complaint under Rules 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6).
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
The Court thus DISMISSES Derwish’s Complaint (Doc. 1) WITHOUT PREJUDICE for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
For the reasons discussed above, the Court GRANTS Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 9).
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
The Court thus DISMISSES Derwish’s Complaint (Doc. 1) WITHOUT PREJUDICE for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.
The other claims Dismissed Read by a model
The Court thus DISMISSES Derwish’s Complaint (Doc. 1) WITHOUT PREJUDICE for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.
Months pending 18.3 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
Because Ahmed was in Djibouti, the next step was for a consular officer at the United States Embassy in Djibouti to interview him. (Id.). That occurred on February 4, 2024. (Id.).
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings No duty to re-adjudicate a 221(g) refusal Read by a model
So when the consular officer responsible for Ahmed’s case refused the visa application, (Doc. 1, #5; see also Doc. 10-1, #104), which everyone here agrees the officer did, that fully discharged the government’s mandatory, nondiscretionary duty to adjudicate Ahmed’s case.
I-130 category Immediate relative Read by a model
In the hopes of having her husband join her in the United States, Derwish (who is a United States citizen)

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:24-cv-00709
Filed
December 11, 2024
Ended
August 15, 2025
Suit's filing to its end
247 days
How it ended
Dismissed on jurisdiction or the merits
From the record
idb disp 3 (dismissed: lack of jurisdiction)

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 14, 2026. Check the current status before relying on one.