Hani Salah Mohamed v. Marc D. Dillard, in official capacity as Chargé d’Affaires, U.S. Embassy in Kenya, et al.

Summary

The magistrate judge recommends granting Defendants’ motion to dismiss Hani Salah Mohamed’s mandamus action concerning the alleged delay in adjudicating her daughter’s immigrant visa application. The recommendation concludes that the action is moot because the visa application was refused under INA § 221(g), and alternatively that consular non-reviewability bars judicial review; the action should therefore be dismissed without prejudice for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.

Holdings

1. A mandamus or APA action seeking to compel adjudication of a visa application is moot when a consular officer has already adjudicated and refused the application, because the requested adjudicatory action has occurred and the court cannot compel an action that has already been taken.
2. The doctrine of consular non-reviewability bars judicial review of the consular officer's refusal of Amal's visa application because the INA does not expressly authorize judicial review of that decision.
3. Plaintiff's due-process claim was moot after the visa application was adjudicated, and the consular refusal did not establish a due-process violation based on a claimed interest in the adjudication of a relative's visa application.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the action seeking to compel adjudication of Amal's visa application was moot because a consular officer had already adjudicated and refused the application.
2. Whether the doctrine of consular non-reviewability independently barred judicial review of the consular visa-refusal decision.
3. Whether plaintiff's APA, Mandamus Act, and Fifth Amendment due-process claims could proceed after the visa application had been adjudicated and refused.

Disposition

dismissed