Judge Livingston, Donn L.

Not hearing cases: nothing for over two years

Last hearing: May 20, 2021
Next hearing: none scheduled
Last decision: January 24, 2023

Courts worked at: 14

Worked here before

DENVER — IMMIGRATION COURT1985—2021 · 55,713 hearings
ELIZABETH — IMMIGRATION COURT1994—2017 · 314 hearings
NEW YORK — IMMIGRATION COURT1989—2017 · 6,245 hearings
OTERO — IMMIGRATION COURT2017—2017 · 69 hearings
AURORA — IMMIGRATION COURT1995—2017 · 15,184 hearings
LOS FRESNOS — IMMIGRATION COURT2015—2015 · 14 hearings
PEARSALL — IMMIGRATION COURT2015—2015 · 2,271 hearings
WEST VALLEY — IMMIGRATION COURT2001—2013 · 139 hearings
LAS VEGAS — IMMIGRATION COURT2011—2012 · 96 hearings
TACOMA — IMMIGRATION COURT2012—2012 · 74 hearings
NAPANOCH — IMMIGRATION COURT1994—2003 · 3,888 hearings
SAN FRANCISCO — IMMIGRATION COURT1996—2003 · 78 hearings
DETROIT — IMMIGRATION COURT1998—2002 · 21 hearings
NEWARK — IMMIGRATION COURT1996—1998 · 10 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.

43%

Asylum grant rate

of 2,510 decisions · FY1989–FY2018

95% interval: 41% — 45%

granted:: 1,069
denied:: 1,441
other protection: withholding and the Convention Against Torture:: 1

Withholding of removal and protection under the Convention Against Torture let a person stay, but grant no refugee status and no path to a green card. They are therefore excluded from the asylum grant rate and shown as a separate figure.

The period has closed

This judge no longer hears cases, so the figure describes FY1989–FY2018 — 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 judge43% (2,510)
The whole court — AURORA — IMMIGRATION COURT21% (4,024)
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 (2): 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
FY2018	39	41%	27% — 57%
FY2017	59	59%	47% — 71%
FY2016	67	27%	18% — 39%
FY2015	64	42%	31% — 54%
FY2014	33	33%	20% — 50%
FY2013	68	43%	32% — 54%
FY2012	100	33%	25% — 43%
FY2011	100	37%	28% — 47%
FY2010	70	39%	28% — 50%
FY2009	85	29%	21% — 40%
FY2008	58	40%	28% — 53%
FY2007	124	50%	41% — 59%
FY2006	183	45%	38% — 52%
FY2005	134	31%	24% — 40%
FY2004	121	45%	36% — 54%
FY2003	134	48%	39% — 56%
FY2002	103	35%	26% — 45%
FY2001	98	59%	49% — 68%
FY2000	133	53%	44% — 61%
FY1999	308	33%	28% — 38%
FY1998	293	58%	53% — 64%
FY1997	91	47%	37% — 57%
FY1996	9	22%	6% — 55%
FY1995	35	9%	3% — 22%
FY1989	1	0%	0% — 79%

By applicant nationality

Grant rate by nationality, largest volumes first
Nationality	decisions	granted	95% interval
CHINA	283	40%	34% — 46%
INDONESIA	173	11%	7% — 17%
EL SALVADOR	135	8%	5% — 14%
GUATEMALA	122	11%	6% — 17%
SOMALIA	104	86%	78% — 91%
MEXICO	104	18%	12% — 27%
NEPAL	97	53%	43% — 62%
SRI LANKA	97	89%	81% — 94%
RUSSIA	95	78%	69% — 85%
ETHIOPIA	91	81%	72% — 88%
MAURITANIA	67	43%	32% — 55%
NIGERIA	67	36%	25% — 48%
PAKISTAN	56	55%	42% — 68%
INDIA	54	9%	4% — 20%
GHANA	50	16%	8% — 29%

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.

16 mo

median

half of cases: 4—32 mo

based on 2,511 cases

NTA-to-decision duration by fiscal year
Decided in	Cases	median	half of cases, mo
FY2018	39	67 mo	29—89
FY2017	59	46 mo	29—64
FY2016	67	4 mo	3—6
FY2015	65	5 mo	3—6
FY2014	33	4 mo	2—48
FY2013	68	42 mo	26—60
FY2012	100	38 mo	29—58
FY2011	100	43 mo	24—61
FY2010	70	34 mo	26—44
FY2009	85	32 mo	26—61

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	761
Remand	436
Denied	412
Dismissed (Voluntary Departure Granted)	321
Summary Affirmance	229
SUMMARY AFFIRMANCE/VD	129
Withdrawal of Appeal	128
Lacks Jurisdiction - BIA	74
Background Check Remand	60
Dismiss Soriano	59
Dismissed (Grant V/D 30 days)	57
Other	57
Termination	56
Sustain	53
Granted	38
Summarily Dismiss	34
Grant with no Remand	21
Administratively Closed-DHS PD	19
Moot Bond	19
Administratively Closed	10
Dismiss as Untimely	9
Summary Dismissal (e) no brief	7
Denied Soriano	5
Temporary Protected Status	5
Terminate-DHS PD	4
Coercive Population Control	3
Rejection	3
SUMMARY DISMISSAL - BOTH (a) & (e)	2
Granted Soriano	2
Other Soriano	2
Final Denial of EOIR 42B/40	1
Summary Dismissal (G) untimely or waived appeal	1
Summary Dismissal (a) inad reason on appeal	1

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.