Skip to content
Asylum BeaconU.S. immigration court data

Judge Pettinato, Barry J.

CHARLOTTE — IMMIGRATION COURT

Not hearing cases: nothing for over two years

Last hearing
August 6, 2020
Next hearing
none scheduled
Last decision
February 1, 2019
Courts worked at: 2

Worked here before

The periods overlap, and that is not an error: a judge hears cases at a new court while still closing out old ones at the previous one. Each row answers "when did this judge work here", not "from when to when did they serve here".

Status is derived from the court calendar: whether the judge has hearings scheduled after the release cutoff. The EOIR release carries no personnel data, so retirement, removal, elevation to the BIA and extended absence cannot be told apart — only what the data shows is stated here. Hearings are scheduled two to three years out, so an empty calendar for a working judge is rare; for judges who went quiet in the last few months it may still be an artifact of the cutoff, which lags by about a month. The lookup table's "active" flag is not used: it disagrees with the calendar for a third of judges.

12%

Asylum grant rate

of 1,079 decisions · FY2005–FY2019

95% interval: 10%14%

granted:
126
denied:
953

The period has closed

This judge no longer hears cases, so the figure describes FY2005–FY2019 — not what happens in the court today. Asylum rules and the mix of cases have changed since.

How this percentage is calculated
Grant rate = granted / (granted + denied). Administrative closures, withdrawals, abandonment and "not adjudicated" are excluded from the denominator. The unit of count is a decision per proceeding, not per application: applicants almost always file asylum, withholding and CAT protection together. Withholding and CAT grants are counted separately from asylum. U.S. fiscal year: October 1 – September 30.

How this compares

  • This judge12% (1,079)
  • The whole court — CHARLOTTE — IMMIGRATION COURT10% (14,025)
  • All U.S. courts33% (1,350,724)

This comparison does not adjust for which cases a judge was given: judges see different nationalities, different shares of detained respondents, and different rates of legal representation. A difference in percentages does not by itself mean identical cases were treated differently.

Trend by fiscal year

0%25%50%75%100%201020112013201520172019

U.S. fiscal year: October 1 – September 30.

Show as a table
Grant rate by fiscal year
Perioddecisionsgranted95% interval
FY2019565%2%15%
FY20182751%1%4%
FY201716217%12%23%
FY201616124%18%31%
FY2015858%4%16%
FY2014496%2%17%
FY20136522%13%33%
FY20127923%15%33%
FY2011875%2%11%
FY20106012%6%22%

By applicant nationality

Grant rate by nationality, largest volumes first
Nationalitydecisionsgranted95% interval
HONDURAS2798%6%12%
EL SALVADOR18710%6%15%
MEXICO1525%2%9%
GUATEMALA1508%5%13%
CHINA567%3%17%
COLOMBIA2914%5%31%
IVORY COAST (COTE D'IVOIRE)1421%8%48%
EGYPT1346%23%71%
VENEZUELA119%2%38%
RUSSIA1050%24%76%
PAKISTAN1050%24%76%
RWANDA863%31%86%
BRAZIL80%0%32%
INDIA70%0%35%
HAITI70%0%35%

How long a case takes

How long it took from service of the NTA to the decision on the application, for the cases this judge has already finished.

23 mo

median

half of cases: 16—29 mo

based on 1,079 cases

NTA-to-decision duration by fiscal year
Decided inCasesmedianhalf of cases, mo
FY20195628 mo2531
FY201827526 mo2430
FY201716221 mo1825
FY201616116 mo1419
FY20158513 mo1016
FY20144914 mo1018
FY20136522 mo1228
FY20127925 mo1743
FY20118728 mo2052
FY20106019 mo1430

Duration runs from the NTA date (charging document served) to the decision on the application. Median, not mean: the distribution has a long right tail. Cases decided this year may have begun a decade ago, so duration by year of decision is not a forecast for a case filed today.

The queue

Cases with no decision yet. A different figure from the duration of completed cases: quick cases leave the queue first, so the long ones accumulate among those still waiting.

No undecided cases in this release.

What became of appeals to the BIA

An immigration judge's decision can be appealed to the Board of Immigration Appeals. This is what the Board did with those appeals. A high share of reversals and remands tells a different story than a low grant rate alone.

What became of appeals to the BIA
BIA decisionAppeals
Dismiss Appeal/Affirm IJ's Decision932
Remand454
Denied246
Dismissed (Voluntary Departure Granted)181
Background Check Remand43
Summary Affirmance37
Withdrawal of Appeal35
Administratively Closed-DHS PD34
Other28
Termination28
Lacks Jurisdiction - BIA25
Terminate-DHS PD22
Summarily Dismiss20
SUMMARY AFFIRMANCE/VD12
Administratively Closed12
Moot Bond7
ROP Returned to Court to correct deficiency6
Summary Dismissal (e) no brief3
Grant with no Remand2

Data comes from the monthly EOIR Case Data release (U.S. DOJ FOIA Library). This service is not affiliated with the U.S. government and does not provide legal advice. The data lags by roughly a month; for current case status use ACIS and Respondent Access. The source is known to have missing records, including relief applications — absent data does not mean it is absent from your case.