Majlesi v. Rubio

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of Columbia considers claims by Iranian nationals seeking to compel adjudication of immigrant visa applications allegedly delayed during Section 221(g) administrative processing. The court rejects dismissal based on consular nonreviewability and concludes that plaintiffs sufficiently alleged a nondiscretionary duty to adjudicate their applications. Applying the TRAC factors, however, the court holds that plaintiffs have not plausibly alleged unreasonable delay and grants defendants’ Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss.

Holdings

1. The doctrine of consular nonreviewability did not bar plaintiffs' claims because the complaint plausibly alleged that the § 221(g) refusals were interim actions and that plaintiffs sought to compel adjudication rather than overturn a final visa decision.
2. At the pleading stage, plaintiffs sufficiently alleged a nondiscretionary duty to fully adjudicate their visa applications.
3. Plaintiffs failed to plausibly allege that the delay in adjudicating their visa applications was unreasonable under the TRAC factors.
4. The complaint was dismissed for failure to state a plausible claim for unreasonable delay.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the doctrine of consular nonreviewability barred judicial review of plaintiffs' claims seeking adjudication of visa applications placed in administrative processing under INA § 221(g).
2. Whether the APA, federal regulations, or other cited legal authorities imposed a nondiscretionary duty to fully adjudicate plaintiffs' visa applications.
3. Whether plaintiffs plausibly alleged unreasonable delay under the six TRAC factors.
4. Whether dismissal was appropriate under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6).

Disposition

dismissed