Passim

Mandamus decisions / Western District of Washington

Wasae v. Blinken

Western District of WashingtonKymberly K. EvansonDecided May 15, 2025No. 2:24-cv-01714

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 next day, at his visa interview at the U.S. Consulate 7 in Calgary, the consulate issued a 221(g) refusal notice.
Form or filing 221(g) (consular refusal); DS-160 (nonimmigrant visa) Read by a model
Wasae applied for an H-1B visa by submitting a form 5 DS-160 online.
What the suit asked for Finish 221(g) processing Read by a model
Plaintiff Abdul Wasae sues Defendants Marco Rubio and Consul General Holly Waeger 13 Monster to compel a decision on his pending H-1B nonimmigrant visa application.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
Defendants’ motion to dismiss is GRANTED.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim Read by a model
Defendants now move to dismiss the 21 complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6)
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Defendants’ motion to dismiss is GRANTED.
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
Defendants’ motion to dismiss is GRANTED. Dkt. No. 9. The case is dismissed without 19 prejudice.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
Defendants’ motion to dismiss is GRANTED. Dkt. No. 9. The case is dismissed without 19 prejudice.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
Defendants’ motion to dismiss is GRANTED. Dkt. No. 9. The case is dismissed without 19 prejudice.
Months pending 7.2 months from the application to the suit; 14.1 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
Then, on March 11, 2024, “Wasae traveled to Canada so he could obtain 6 an H-1B visa in his passport.” Id. ¶ 27. The next day, at his visa interview at the U.S. Consulate 7 in Calgary, the consulate issued a 221(g) refusal notice.
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 neededneutral
Read by a model
Together, the first 7 set of factors weighs in Defendants’ favor and does not demonstrate an unreasonable delay.
The government's delay arguments Line-jumping accepted Read by a model
at the motion to dismiss stage, the Court can assume that ordering Wasae’s relief would 19 “necessarily come at the expense of other similarly situated applicants.”
Threshold rulings Duty to re-adjudicate a 221(g) refusal found Read by a model
Thus, because Wasae’s visa application remains in processing limbo, Defendants have not 10 fulfilled their mandatory duty under the APA to “adjudicate” his application.
Nationality Pakistan Read by a model
Wasae is a citizen of Pakistan.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 2:24-cv-01714
Filed
October 17, 2024
Ended
May 15, 2025
Suit's filing to its end
210 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. Other suits in this court.

Supreme Court and Ninth 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.