Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Columbia

ASIF v. BONDI

District of ColumbiaJohn D. BatesDecided April 8, 2026No. 1:25-cv-02629

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
About four months after Asif sued, the State Department finished post-refusal processing of his visa application, transferred his visa petition back to USCIS, and notified him of the transfer.
Form or filing DS-260 (immigrant visa) Read by a model
Hafiz Salman Asif, together with his spouse and stepson, have petitioned this Court for mandamus relief compelling adjudication of his immigrant visa application.
What the suit asked for Some other action Read by a model
But after he filed this suit, the State Department took the only action Asif requests—it completed post-refusal processing of his visa application and returned his visa petition to the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS).
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For these reasons, it is hereby ORDERED that [8] defendants’ motion to dismiss is granted and [1] the petition is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE as moot.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction Read by a model
Upon motion to dismiss a petition for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, the petitioner bears the burden of establishing the court’s jurisdiction to hear the case in the first instance.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
For these reasons, it is hereby ORDERED that [8] defendants’ motion to dismiss is granted and [1] the petition is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE as moot.
Disposition Dismissed as moot Dismissed or denied as moot because the agency acted. Read by a model
For these reasons, it is hereby ORDERED that [8] defendants’ motion to dismiss is granted and [1] the petition is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE as moot.
Prevailing party Neither side Read by a model
Asif has thus received all the relief he seeks, and this action is moot.
The delay claim Moot: the agency acted Read by a model
For these reasons, it is hereby ORDERED that [8] defendants’ motion to dismiss is granted and [1] the petition is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE as moot.
Months pending Not stated at filing The agency acted before this decision, so the months up to the decision are not a delay and are not shown. Read by a model
Five months then passed without further word from the State Department, despite Asif’s repeated inquiries.
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings Held moot Read by a model
As a result, this case is moot and the Court grants defendants’ motion to dismiss without prejudice.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:25-cv-02629
Filed
August 12, 2025
Ended
April 9, 2026
Suit's filing to its end
240 days
How it ended
Ended once the agency acted
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 D.C. 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.