Judge Zerbe, Craig M.

Not hearing cases: nothing for over two years

Last hearing: September 4, 2018
Next hearing: none scheduled
Last decision: July 15, 2015

Courts worked at: 12

Worked here before

CHICAGO — IMMIGRATION COURT1974—2016 · 52,660 hearings
KANSAS CITY — IMMIGRATION COURT1988—2011 · 4,966 hearings
TUCSON — IMMIGRATION COURT2005—2008 · 103 hearings
OMAHA — IMMIGRATION COURT1976—2007 · 5,670 hearings
DETROIT — IMMIGRATION COURT1973—2004 · 1,966 hearings
ELIZABETH — IMMIGRATION COURT2002—2002 · 54 hearings
MEMPHIS — IMMIGRATION COURT1988—1994 · 598 hearings
PHILADELPHIA — IMMIGRATION COURT1986—1993 · 57 hearings
MIAMI — IMMIGRATION COURT1990—1991 · 172 hearings
NEWARK — IMMIGRATION COURT1987—1989 · 359 hearings
HARLINGEN — IMMIGRATION COURT1986—1989 · 235 hearings
LOS FRESNOS — IMMIGRATION COURT1988—1988 · 51 hearings

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.

41%

Asylum grant rate

of 3,112 decisions · FY1971–FY2015

95% interval: 39% — 42%

granted:: 1,265
denied:: 1,847

The period has closed

This judge no longer hears cases, so the figure describes FY1971–FY2015 — 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 judge41% (3,112)
The whole court — CHICAGO — IMMIGRATION COURT42% (35,363)
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

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

Years with fewer than 10 decisions are not plotted (3): at that sample size the percentage is noise. They remain in the table.

Show as a table

Grant rate by fiscal year
Period	decisions	granted	95% interval
FY2014	38	53%	37% — 68%
FY2013	88	47%	37% — 57%
FY2012	90	41%	32% — 51%
FY2011	90	37%	27% — 47%
FY2010	81	49%	39% — 60%
FY2009	99	62%	52% — 71%
FY2008	123	62%	53% — 70%
FY2007	132	57%	48% — 65%
FY2006	120	62%	53% — 70%
FY2005	183	37%	30% — 44%
FY2004	151	36%	29% — 44%
FY2003	163	39%	32% — 47%
FY2002	119	45%	37% — 54%
FY2001	111	46%	37% — 55%
FY2000	174	47%	39% — 54%
FY1999	175	38%	31% — 46%
FY1998	142	51%	43% — 59%
FY1997	103	43%	34% — 52%
FY1996	123	41%	32% — 49%
FY1995	108	20%	14% — 29%
FY1994	95	23%	16% — 33%
FY1993	68	21%	13% — 32%
FY1992	38	32%	19% — 47%
FY1991	64	48%	37% — 60%
FY1990	99	28%	20% — 38%
FY1989	83	18%	11% — 28%
FY1988	85	28%	20% — 39%
FY1987	109	28%	21% — 38%
FY1986	47	6%	2% — 17%
FY1985	2	0%	0% — 66%
FY1983	8	0%	0% — 32%
FY1980	1	0%	0% — 79%

By applicant nationality

Grant rate by nationality, largest volumes first
Nationality	decisions	granted	95% interval
CHINA	314	45%	39% — 50%
GUATEMALA	217	28%	22% — 34%
ALBANIA	146	51%	43% — 59%
POLAND	126	8%	4% — 14%
PAKISTAN	124	28%	21% — 37%
EL SALVADOR	122	20%	14% — 29%
BULGARIA	108	34%	26% — 44%
Former Countries	100	25%	18% — 34%
ROMANIA	95	19%	12% — 28%
IRAN	84	40%	31% — 51%
INDIA	80	14%	8% — 23%
IRAQ	78	64%	53% — 74%
NICARAGUA	72	50%	39% — 61%
COLOMBIA	66	55%	43% — 66%
RUSSIA	64	56%	44% — 68%

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.

15 mo

median

half of cases: 9—27 mo

based on 3,112 cases

NTA-to-decision duration by fiscal year
Decided in	Cases	median	half of cases, mo
FY2014	38	38 mo	32—53
FY2013	88	32 mo	20—49
FY2012	90	26 mo	5—35
FY2011	90	21 mo	4—36
FY2010	81	26 mo	9—56
FY2009	99	34 mo	17—46
FY2008	123	32 mo	22—54
FY2007	132	33 mo	22—45
FY2006	120	31 mo	16—42
FY2005	183	26 mo	19—42

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 decision	Appeals
Dismiss Appeal/Affirm IJ's Decision	1,204
Remand	895
Denied	557
Dismissed (Grant V/D 30 days)	433
Withdrawal of Appeal	248
Summary Affirmance	248
Dismissed (Voluntary Departure Granted)	166
Granted	162
Other	146
SUMMARY AFFIRMANCE/VD	145
Continued	142
Termination	109
Sustain	93
Temporary Protected Status	62
Background Check Remand	50
Summarily Dismiss	48
Lacks Jurisdiction - BIA	47
Dismiss as Untimely	43
Dismiss Soriano	34
American Baptist Church Settlement	28
Grant with no Remand	16
Administratively Closed-DHS PD	15
Administratively Closed	14
Rejection	7
Moot Bond	7
Summary Dismissal (e) no brief	7
Coercive Population Control	6
Granted Soriano	5
Deferred Enforced Departure	5
Terminate-DHS PD	4
SUMMARY DISMISSAL - BOTH (a) & (e)	3
SPECIAL NACARA CONTINUATION	3
Other Soriano	2
Summary Dismissal (a) inad reason on appeal	2
Denied Soriano	2

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.