Passim

Mandamus decisions / Middle District of Tennessee

Ebrahimi v. Bitter

Middle District of TennesseeAleta A. TraugerDecided June 6, 2023No. 3:22-cv-00788

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 plaintiff asks the court to enter an order compelling the State Department to adjudicate his wife’s pending visa application under either the Administrative Procedures Act or the Mandamus Act.
Form or filing DS-260 (immigrant visa) Read by a model
Regulations require that a beneficiary then complete a Form DS-260 Electronic Application for Immigrant Visa and Alien Registration and appear before a consular officer abroad for the execution of the application and an interview.
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
The plaintiff asks the court to enter an order compelling the State Department to adjudicate his wife’s pending visa application under either the Administrative Procedures Act or the Mandamus Act.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For the reasons set forth herein, the defendant’s Motion to Dismiss, construed as a summary judgment motion, will be granted, and this case will be dismissed.
Motion decided Summary judgment Read by a model
For the reasons set forth herein, the defendant’s Motion to Dismiss, construed as a summary judgment motion, will be granted, and this case will be dismissed.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
the defendant’s Motion to Dismiss, construed as a summary judgment motion, will be granted
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 herein, the defendant’s Motion to Dismiss, construed as a summary judgment motion, will be granted, and this case will be dismissed.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
Because the plaintiff cannot show that the delay at issue here was unreasonable, the defendant is entitled to judgment on the APA claim.
The delay claim Relief denied Read by a model
Because the plaintiff cannot show that the delay at issue here was unreasonable, the defendant is entitled to judgment on the APA claim. Because the APA claim fails, the mandamus action alleging unreasonable delay necessarily fails as well.
Months pending 18 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
just under eighteen months (dating from December 14, 2021) to date
TRAC factors The court weighed the TRAC factors
  • 1. Rule of reasonfavors the government
  • 2. Congressional timetableneutral
  • 3. Human health and welfarefavors the applicant
  • 4. Competing prioritiesfavors the government
  • 5. Interests prejudicedfavors the applicant
  • 6. No impropriety neededneutral
Read by a model
The first-in, first-out rationale satisfies the rule of reason, and the plaintiff does not allege any facts suggesting that that rule is not being applied to Malekzadeh’s application.
The government's delay arguments First-in, first-out processing accepted; Line-jumping accepted Read by a model
The first-in, first-out rationale satisfies the rule of reason, and the plaintiff does not allege any facts suggesting that that rule is not being applied to Malekzadeh’s application.
Threshold rulings None Read by a model
I-130 category Immediate relative Read by a model
Ebrahimi is a United States citizen who lives in Tennessee. (Doc. No. 20-1, Ebrahimi Decl. ¶¶ 2–3.) His wife, Mahdiyeh Malekzadeh, lives in Iran.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 3:22-cv-00788
Filed
October 5, 2022
Ended
June 6, 2023
Suit's filing to its end
244 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 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.