Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Columbia

RAHIMZADEGAN v. MILLER

District of ColumbiaLoren L. AliKhanDecided July 31, 2026No. 1:25-cv-04378

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
This court continues to adhere to the view that consular officials have a non-discretionary duty to fully adjudicate a visa application.
Form or filing 221(g) (consular refusal); DS-160 (nonimmigrant visa) Read by a model
He initiated the J-1 visa application process by submitting his DS-160 Nonimmigrant Visa Application on January 8, 2025
What the suit asked for Finish 221(g) processing Read by a model
Rather, he argues only that Defendants must “conclude processing of [his] visa application within a reasonable time.”
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, the court will grant Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction; Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim Read by a model
Mindful of its obligation to consider jurisdiction sua sponte, the court will consider Defendants’ argument about the Mandamus Act under the Rule 12(b)(1) standard.
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Defendants have moved to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6).
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
Accordingly, the court will dismiss the complaint under Rule 12(b)(6).
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
For the foregoing reasons, the court will grant Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
Accordingly, the court will dismiss the complaint under Rule 12(b)(6).
Months pending 11.2 months from the application to the suit; 18.7 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
He initiated the J-1 visa application process by submitting his DS-160 Nonimmigrant Visa Application on January 8, 2025
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 neededfavors the government
Read by a model
Both factors favor Defendants.
The government's delay arguments Line-jumping accepted Read by a model
Such would be the case here, where moving Dr. Rahimzadegan to the front of the visa-adjudication queue would merely reorder all applicants with no change in the overall timeline.
Threshold rulings Consular nonreviewability rejected; Duty to re-adjudicate a 221(g) refusal found Read by a model
Accordingly, his case is not barred by the doctrine of consular nonreviewability.
Nationality Iran Read by a model
Plaintiff Aso Rahimzadegan, a dual citizen of Iran and Germany

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:25-cv-04378
Filed
December 17, 2025
Status
Pending as of the last docket check

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.