Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Columbia

SHAHEEN v. RUBIO

District of ColumbiaAmit P. MehtaDecided August 17, 2026No. 1:25-cv-01186

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
Following an interview with a consular officer on February 29, 2024, Waseem and all her children but Abbas received visas.
Form or filing 221(g) (consular refusal); DS-260 (immigrant visa) Read by a model
Plaintiff Abbas is one of Waseem’s children and a derivative applicant for the immigrant visa.
What the suit asked for Finish 221(g) processing Read by a model
Plaintiffs’ petition seeking to compel action on Plaintiff Uzair Abbas’s visa application, which was temporarily “refused” on or around February 29, 2024, and has remained in administrative processing ever since.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, Defendants’ Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings, ECF No. 14, is granted.
Motion decided Other motion to dismiss Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, Defendants’ Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings, ECF No. 14, is granted.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Defendants now move for judgment on the pleadings
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
The mandamus claim also is dismissed because the APA provides an adequate remedy at law.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, Defendants’ Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings, ECF No. 14, is granted.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
After weighing all the TRAC factors, the court finds that Plaintiffs have failed to state a claim for unreasonable delay under the APA.
Months pending 29.6 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
Following an interview with a consular officer on February 29, 2024, Waseem and all her children but Abbas received visas.
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 factors thus weigh in favor of Defendants.
The government's delay arguments Line-jumping accepted Read by a model
Even if processing does not proceed linearly, Plaintiffs’ requested relief would nonetheless require diverting resources from other applications
Threshold rulings APA adequate-remedy bar applied (mandamus claim fails) Read by a model
The mandamus claim also is dismissed because the APA provides an adequate remedy at law.
I-130 category Family preference Read by a model
Plaintiff Shaheen is a U.S. citizen and, in 2006, filed an I-130 petition on behalf of his sister, Plaintiff Waseem.

Other orders in this case

The group holds 2 decisions from this suit, oldest first. Outcome counts on these pages count the case once, by its latest decision, this one. How decisions are grouped into cases.

DecisionDecidedJudgeDisposition
SHAHEEN v. RUBIO October 30, 2025 Amit P. Mehta Denied in the applicant's favor
SHAHEEN v. RUBIOThis decisionThe case's latest decision: its outcome is the one counted August 17, 2026 Amit P. Mehta Dismissed

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:25-cv-01186
Filed
April 17, 2025
Ended
January 2, 2026
Suit's filing to its end
260 days
How it ended
Ended, outcome not recorded
From the record
terminated; no disposition recorded

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.