Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Columbia

Asgari v. Palmer

District of ColumbiaDabney L. FriedrichDecided March 25, 2026No. 1:25-cv-01292

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
The defendants, however, fulfilled this duty when the consular officer refused Asgari’s family’s visa applications.
Form or filing 221(g) (consular refusal); DS-260 (immigrant visa) Read by a model
Asgari and his family subsequently submitted DS-260 immigrant visa applications and accompanying documentation
What the suit asked for Finish 221(g) processing Read by a model
he asks this Court to order the defendants to “issue a final adjudication” on his family’s visa applications
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, the defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, Dkt. 6, is granted.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction; Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim Read by a model
claim is dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1), and the plaintiff’s Administrative Procedure Act claim is dismissed with prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6).
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Before the Court is the defendants’ 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 defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, Dkt. 6, is granted.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, the defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, Dkt. 6, is granted.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
The plaintiff’s Mandamus Act claim is dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1), and the plaintiff’s Administrative Procedure Act claim is dismissed with prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6).
Months pending 7.6 months from the application to the suit; 18.5 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
On September 9, 2024, Asgari and his family completed an interview with a consular officer at the U.S. Embassy in the United Kingdom.
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
As the Court agrees that Asgari has not identified a clear non-discretionary duty that the defendants must fulfill for an already-refused visa application
Nationality United Kingdom Read by a model
Asgari is a U.K. citizen

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:25-cv-01292
Filed
April 28, 2025
Ended
March 25, 2026
Suit's filing to its end
331 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 D.C. 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.