Mandamus decisions / Western District of New York

Salem v. Mukasey

Western District of New YorkDavid G. LarimerDecided February 3, 2010

Read the decision Original 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 Petitioner Abdul N. Salem ("petitioner"), a United States citizen, brings this action seeking a writ of mandamus compelling the United States Department of State to approve an Application for Immigrant Visa and Alien Registration for his minor step-daughter, Enitsar A. Yehia.
Form or filing	221(g) (consular refusal); DS-260 (immigrant visa) Read by a model an Application for Immigrant Visa and Alien Registration
What the suit asked for	Finish 221(g) processing Read by a model Through this action, he seeks to compel respondents to issue an immigrant visa to his step-daughter, or else to order that the application for redetermination be reopened.
Kind of order	A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model For the reasons set forth below, the government's motion is granted, and the complaint is dismissed.
Motion decided	Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction Read by a model a motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 12(b)(1)
Whose motion	Cross-motions Read by a model the respondents' motion to dismiss (Dkt. # 6) is granted, petitioner's motion for a writ of mandamus (Dkt. # 1) is denied
Disposition	Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model For the reasons set forth below, the government's motion is granted, and the complaint is dismissed.
Prevailing party	Government Read by a model For the reasons set forth below, the government's motion is granted, and the complaint is dismissed.
The other claims	Dismissed Read by a model the respondents' motion to dismiss (Dkt. # 6) is granted, petitioner's motion for a writ of mandamus (Dkt. # 1) is denied, and the complaint is dismissed, with prejudice.
Months pending	Not stated Read by a model
TRAC factors	The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings	Consular nonreviewability applied Read by a model Furthermore, this Court has no jurisdiction to otherwise interfere with the visa-issuing process, such as by ordering a visa application to be re-opened, as petitioner requests.
I-130 category	Immediate relative Read by a model a United States citizen, brings this action seeking a writ of mandamus compelling the United States Department of State to approve an Application for Immigrant Visa and Alien Registration for his minor step-daughter

How the case ended

This decision is not linked to a docket in the docket record yet, so how the case ended is not shown.

Supreme Court and Second 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.

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
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
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
American Academy of Religion v. Napolitano, 573 F.3d 115

Second Circuit, July 17, 2009. Where a visa refusal implicates U.S. citizens' First Amendment rights, Mandel review applies: the government must identify a properly construed statutory ground and the officer's reason to believe it applies, and the applicant must have a chance to rebut a knowing material-support charge.

ImmCite: treatment available, history exists, not clearance. ImmCite has read all 4 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.
Chen v. Rubio, 158 F.4th 393

Second Circuit, October 29, 2025. After Muñoz, consular nonreviewability insulates relatives' visa refusals from a citizen sponsor's challenge, and the claims were properly dismissed with prejudice.

ImmCite: unchecked, treatment not confirmed yet, not evidence either way. ImmCite has found no published decision citing this case as of 2026-11-13; it checks for new citing decisions daily. That is not a determination that the case is good law. The citation index lists 5 other decisions citing it, none a Supreme Court, BIA or Attorney General precedent or a published circuit opinion; ImmCite's status does not review them.