Skip to content
Asylum BeaconU.S. immigration court data

Judge Barrett, Bruce M.

BALTIMORE — IMMIGRATION COURT

Not hearing cases: nothing for over two years

Last hearing
December 9, 2008
Next hearing
none scheduled
Last decision
July 23, 2025
Courts worked at: 8

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.

27%

Asylum grant rate

of 5,046 decisions · FY1985–FY2017

95% interval: 26%28%

granted:
1,360
denied:
3,686

The period has closed

This judge no longer hears cases, so the figure describes FY1985–FY2017 — 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 judge27% (5,046)
  • The whole court — BALTIMORE — IMMIGRATION COURT40% (36,574)
  • 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%198719921996200020042008

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

Years with fewer than 10 decisions are not plotted (4): at that sample size the percentage is noise. They remain in the table.

Show as a table
Grant rate by fiscal year
Perioddecisionsgranted95% interval
FY201710%0%79%
FY200960%0%39%
FY20088538%28%48%
FY200719529%23%36%
FY200625642%36%48%
FY200531733%28%38%
FY200432627%23%32%
FY200327831%26%37%
FY200223732%26%38%
FY200116944%37%51%
FY200019337%30%44%
FY199922122%17%28%
FY199824629%24%35%
FY199727137%32%43%
FY199620734%28%41%
FY199516130%23%37%
FY199412529%22%37%
FY19937930%21%41%
FY199213138%30%47%
FY199114419%13%26%
FY19903109%6%12%
FY19894136%4%9%
FY198841113%10%17%
FY198725632%26%38%
FY198660%0%39%
FY198520%0%66%

By applicant nationality

Grant rate by nationality, largest volumes first
Nationalitydecisionsgranted95% interval
EL SALVADOR1,3566%5%8%
ETHIOPIA54450%46%54%
CAMEROON45239%35%44%
GUATEMALA2286%3%10%
CHINA18521%16%28%
NICARAGUA17428%22%35%
TOGO13838%31%47%
IRAN12562%53%70%
SOMALIA11240%32%49%
CONGO8838%28%48%
LIBERIA8147%36%58%
PAKISTAN8046%36%57%
HAITI8010%5%19%
HONDURAS779%4%18%
SIERRA LEONE7716%9%25%

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.

12 mo

median

half of cases: 8—19 mo

based on 5,046 cases

NTA-to-decision duration by fiscal year
Decided inCasesmedianhalf of cases, mo
FY20088521 mo1434
FY200719523 mo1633
FY200625618 mo1225
FY200531714 mo1021
FY200432610 mo915
FY200327811 mo816
FY20022378 mo714
FY200116910 mo814
FY20001939 mo515
FY19992217 mo212

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 Decision1,062
Remand707
Denied682
Temporary Protected Status560
Dismissed (Grant V/D 30 days)368
Summary Affirmance219
Granted207
Withdrawal of Appeal196
Other123
Termination96
SUMMARY AFFIRMANCE/VD89
Lacks Jurisdiction - BIA66
Sustain53
Dismissed (Voluntary Departure Granted)41
Dismiss Soriano39
Summarily Dismiss29
Background Check Remand29
American Baptist Church Settlement25
Dismiss as Untimely18
Deferred Enforced Departure13
Grant with no Remand10
Continued9
Summary Dismissal (e) no brief6
Terminate-DHS PD6
Rejection5
Denied Soriano4
Moot Bond3
SPECIAL NACARA CONTINUATION2
Summary Dismissal (a) inad reason on appeal2
Dismissed as Moot1
SUMMARY DISMISSAL - BOTH (a) & (e)1
Coercive Population Control1
AFD1
Administratively Closed1
Granted Soriano1

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.