Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Maryland

Begum v. United States Department of State

District of MarylandJ. Mark CoulsonDecided October 31, 2022No. 1:22-cv-00478

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
Since the case has been sent to the Embassy, the State Department has not conducted an interview nor issued a decision in this case.
Form or filing DS-260 (immigrant visa) Read by a model
adjudicate an immigrant visa application1
What the suit asked for Decide the application Read by a model
Plaintiff Mumtaz Begum filed this action asking the Court to issue a writ of mandamus compelling Defendants to adjudicate an immigrant visa application1 on behalf of Plaintiff’s son, daughter-in-law, grandson, and granddaughter.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For the reasons explained below, Defendants’ Motion, treated as a motion to dismiss, is GRANTED.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction; Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim Read by a model
Presently before the Court is the Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, for Summary Judgment.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Presently before the Court is the Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, for Summary Judgment.
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
For the reasons explained below, Defendants’ Motion, treated as a motion to dismiss, is GRANTED.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
For the reasons explained below, Defendants’ Motion, treated as a motion to dismiss, is GRANTED.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
GRANTED without prejudice as to Plaintiff’s claim for unreasonable delay
The other claims Dismissed Read by a model
GRANTED with prejudice as to Plaintiff’s due process claim and CARRP-related claim
Months pending 33 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
Even measuring until the date that this opinion is issued, only thirty-three months have passed since the visa number became current.
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 applicant
  • 4. Competing prioritiesfavors the government
  • 5. Interests prejudicedfavors the applicant
  • 6. No impropriety neededneutral
Read by a model
The first two TRAC factors weigh in favor of Defendants.
The government's delay arguments Line-jumping accepted Read by a model
Here, judicial intervention would create just the kind of reordering of the queue that should be avoided.
Threshold rulings None Read by a model
Nationality Pakistan Read by a model
Ahsan Ikram is a citizen of Pakistan and currently resides therein.
I-130 category Family preference Read by a model
However, because the beneficiary is not an immediate relative, the petition remained stalled until the visa number became current.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:22-cv-00478
Filed
February 28, 2022
Ended
October 31, 2022
Suit's filing to its end
245 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 Fourth 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.