Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Massachusetts

Kennedy v. U.S. Department of State

District of MassachusettsDenise J. CasperDecided February 28, 2025No. 1:24-cv-11556

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 National Visa Center Read by a model
Since then, the NVC has not provided his children with interview appointments.
Form or filing DS-160 (nonimmigrant visa); DS-260 (immigrant visa) Read by a model
for his children’s immigrant visa applications.1 D. 1-3 at 7. In addition, Kennedy also demands Defendants to provide a “clear explanation why [his] older son[‘s] visit visa was declined.”
What the suit asked for Schedule an interview Read by a model
Since then, the NVC has not provided his children with interview appointments.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, the Court ALLOWS the motion to dismiss. D. 6.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction; Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim Read by a model
complaint pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6).
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Defendants moved to dismiss the
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 ALLOWS the motion to dismiss.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, the Court ALLOWS the motion to dismiss.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, the Court ALLOWS the motion to dismiss. D. 6.
The other claims Dismissed Read by a model
For at least these reasons, dismissal of this request for relief is also warranted.
Months pending 12 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
Considering these conditions, Kennedy’s children are “not in a unique position in” experiencing delays of over a year “waiting for an interview.”
TRAC factors The court weighed the TRAC factors
  • 1. Rule of reasonfavors the government
  • 2. Congressional timetablefavors the government
  • 3. Human health and welfarefavors the government
  • 4. Competing prioritiesfavors the government
  • 5. Interests prejudicedfavors the government
  • 6. No impropriety neededfavors the government
Read by a model
Here, the first factor weighs in Defendants’ favor.
The government's delay arguments First-in, first-out processing accepted; Line-jumping accepted Read by a model
Here, the first factor weighs in Defendants’ favor. “In the context of adjudicating visa applications, courts have consistently found that the government follows a ‘rule of reason’ when petitions are processed, by and large, ‘in the order they were filed.’”
Threshold rulings Consular nonreviewability applied Read by a model
For at least these reasons, dismissal of this request for relief is also warranted.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:24-cv-11556
Filed
June 14, 2024
Ended
February 28, 2025
Suit's filing to its end
259 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.

Supreme Court and First 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.