Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Columbia

Xie v. Kerry

District of ColumbiaDecided March 5, 2014No. 1:13-cv-00606

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
This case involves a challenge to the Department of State’s ("DC)S") allocation of the limited number of U.S. entry visas granted to individuals in specific immigration categories.
Form or filing DS-260 (immigrant visa) Read by a model
Plaintiff brings this case seeking a writ of mandamus compelling DOS to adjust the cut-off date for China EW immigration visa applicants to match the cut-off dates applied to other EB-3 sub-categories.
What the suit asked for Some other action Read by a model
Plaintiff brings this case seeking a writ of mandamus compelling DOS to adjust the cut-off date for China EW immigration visa applicants to match the cut-off dates applied to other EB-3 sub-categories.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
the defendant’s Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED and plaintiff’s Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim; Summary judgment Read by a model
the defendant’s Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED and plaintiff’s Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED.
Whose motion Cross-motions Read by a model
the defendant’s Motion to Dismiss, or, in the Alternative, Moti0n for Summary Judgment [Dkt. #6] and the plaintiffs Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment [Dkt. #9].
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
the defendant’s Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED and plaintiff’s Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
the defendant’s Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED and plaintiff’s Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
the defendant’s Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED and plaintiff’s Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED.
The other claims Dismissed Read by a model
the defendant’s Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED and plaintiff’s Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED.
Months pending 85.6 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
Plaintiff has an EW priority date of January l7, 2007.
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings None Read by a model
Nationality China Read by a model
Xie, a native of China,

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:13-cv-00606
Filed
April 30, 2013
Ended
June 16, 2017
Suit's filing to its end
751 days
How it ended
Dismissed on jurisdiction or the merits
From the record
idb disp 3 (dismissed: lack of jurisdiction)

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 14, 2026. Check the current status before relying on one.