459 F.Supp.3d 69
D.D.C.2020Background
- Plaintiffs Sina Keshtkar Jafari (U.S. permanent resident) and his wife Golriz Akhyani (Iranian citizen living in Canada) sued federal officials, alleging unreasonable delay in adjudicating Akhyani’s waiver request following a visa denial under Presidential Proclamation 9645.
- Mr. Jafari filed an I-130 in 2016; Akhyani’s visa was denied on October 29, 2018 under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(f) / Proclamation 9645, and she applied for a case-by-case waiver.
- The waiver application remains in “administrative processing” amid thousands of pending waiver requests requiring extensive national‑security checks.
- Plaintiffs sought relief under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and mandamus compelling a final decision; defendants moved to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction and failure to state a claim.
- The Court held the consular denial of the underlying visa is nonreviewable; it also held plaintiffs failed to state a cognizable claim (or show a nondiscretionary duty) with respect to the waiver adjudication, and dismissed the case with prejudice.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Court may review the consular denial of the underlying visa | Jafari: denial is part of an ongoing visa process because waiver remains pending, so review is permissible | Defs: consular visa denials are insulated by doctrine of consular nonreviewability | Court: Visa denial is a final consular decision and nonreviewable under consular nonreviewability |
| Whether the waiver adjudication (administrative processing) is judicially reviewable under the APA for unreasonable delay | Jafari: APA (and TRAC factors) permit review and show unreasonable delay in adjudicating the waiver | Defs: waiver process is committed to executive discretion by the Proclamation and national‑security concerns; no judicially manageable standard | Court: Consular nonreviewability does not bar review of nonfinal waiver decisions, but the Proclamation and statutory scheme commit waiver adjudication to agency discretion and provide no judicially manageable standard; APA relief unavailable |
| Whether mandamus can compel adjudication of the waiver | Jafari: extraordinary relief warranted to force a decision | Defs: no clear, nondiscretionary legal duty to decide waiver within any set time or order | Court: Mandamus unavailable—no clear nondiscretionary duty; relief denied |
| Whether underlying visa claims are moot given the final denial | Jafari: treats visa and waiver as a single ongoing process | Defs: denial was final; waiver is a separate process | Court: Underlying visa denial is final and any claim about it is moot/nonreviewable; only waiver remained but failed on merits/jurisdictional reviewability grounds |
Key Cases Cited
- Trump v. Hawaii, 138 S. Ct. 2392 (Supreme Court upholding Presidential authority under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(f))
- Saavedra Bruno v. Albright, 197 F.3d 1153 (D.C. Cir. doctrine of consular nonreviewability)
- Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., 511 U.S. 375 (limited federal jurisdiction principles)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (federal pleading standard)
- Telecommunications Research & Action Ctr. v. FCC, 750 F.2d 70 (D.C. Cir. TRAC factors for unreasonable delay)
- Heckler v. Chaney, 470 U.S. 821 (agency action committed to agency discretion by law)
- In re Cheney, 406 F.3d 723 (D.C. Cir. mandamus requires clear nondiscretionary duty)
- Block v. Community Nutrition Inst., 467 U.S. 340 (APA review precluded where statutory scheme indicates Congress intended to preclude review)
- Mostofi v. Napolitano, 841 F. Supp. 2d 208 (D.D.C. dismissal of similar consular/waiver challenge)