A U.S. District Judge dismissed Flora Delavari’s suit over her father’s immigrant visa, finding that his application had already received a final determination. Judge Laurie J. Michelson issued the ruling on March 12, 2026, in the Eastern District of Michigan, Southern Division.
The case, Flora Delavari v. Marco Rubio et al., Case No. 25-11524, ended with the court granting the government’s motion to dismiss. Michelson concluded that Flora lacked standing because the refusal had already supplied the decision she asked the court to compel.
Flora is a U.S. citizen living in Michigan. Her father, Abdolkarim, is an Iranian national living in Shiraz, Iran, who applied to immigrate to the United States.
At an interview on November 16, 2023, a consular officer at the U.S. Embassy in Yerevan, Armenia, refused his application under 8 U.S.C. § 1201(g). The provision sets out circumstances in which a visa application must be denied.
Flora’s suit challenged whether the refusal settled the application
Flora filed her complaint on May 23, 2025. She alleged that the defendants violated the Administrative Procedure Act by failing to decide her father’s application promptly. She also sought a writ of mandamus directing the government to “make a final determination.”
Her claim rested on the view that the refusal did not conclude the process. Flora argued that the application “remains pending” and that officials continued “administrative processing” for an unreasonably long time. She maintained that the government had “a nondiscretionary duty to adjudicate visa applications” even after a refusal under § 1201(g).
The government disagreed. It argued that the consular refusal was the final decision on Abdolkarim’s application. Any additional review, it said, was discretionary and could not be compelled through mandamus.
Agency records showed the application as refused
To support its dismissal request, the government submitted screenshots from the State Department’s Visa Status Check website. Those screens showed Abdolkarim’s status as “refused.”
The government also filed a declaration from Samual W. McDonald, an Attorney-Advisor for the Department of State. McDonald said internal department records showed a denial under 8 U.S.C. § 1201(g) on November 16, 2023, the date of Abdolkarim’s interview.
Flora submitted a declaration from Carson Wu, a State Department employee. Wu described screening and review procedures used by consular and agency staff handling visa applications. The record identifies the declaration and its subject; the court’s stated reasoning centers on the refusal and its effect.
The government moved under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6). Michelson granted that motion, writing: “The Court agrees. For the reasons that follow, Defendants' motion to dismiss (ECF No. 10) is granted.”
The court’s explanation tied standing to the completed refusal. It concluded that the government’s duty to review the application ended once the consular officer refused the visa, and that further administrative processing was not required.
“After Abdolkarim's visa was refused, their duty to review his visa application dissolved and no subsequent administrative processing was required.”
That conclusion resolved Flora’s request for a court-ordered decision. The judge accepted the government’s position that the existing refusal was the final determination, rather than treating the application as awaiting a decision.
The suit named the secretary, department and embassy officials
The defendants included Marco Rubio, identified as the U.S. Secretary of State, the U.S. Department of State, and “related embassy chiefs.” The case caption names Rubio and other defendants; the opinion refers to Flora and Abdolkarim by their first names to avoid confusing the two.
The order is titled “Opinion and Order Granting Defendants' Motion to Dismiss.” Issued March 12, 2026, it grants dismissal on the standing rationale and says no later administrative processing was required after the refusal.
This article provides general information and is not legal advice. Consult a qualified immigration attorney about your specific case.
