Skip to content
Asylum BeaconU.S. immigration court data

Judge Achtsam, Howard E.

LOS FRESNOS — IMMIGRATION COURT

Not hearing cases: nothing for over two years

Last hearing
January 12, 2024
Next hearing
none scheduled
Last decision
August 28, 2024
Courts worked at: 5

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.

28%

Asylum grant rate

of 1,457 decisions · FY1985–FY2023

95% interval: 25%30%

granted:
402
denied:
1,055
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 FY1985–FY2023 — 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 judge28% (1,457)
  • The whole court — LOS FRESNOS — IMMIGRATION COURT20% (7,208)
  • 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%198719952001200720152022

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

Years with fewer than 10 decisions are not plotted (5): at that sample size the percentage is noise. They remain in the table.

Show as a table
Grant rate by fiscal year
Perioddecisionsgranted95% interval
FY202310%0%79%
FY20221010%2%40%
FY20211090%60%98%
FY20202520%9%39%
FY2019516%2%16%
FY20183711%4%25%
FY2017520%4%62%
FY20164035%22%50%
FY20158217%10%27%
FY20145522%13%34%
FY20133642%27%58%
FY20125934%23%47%
FY20113540%26%56%
FY201050%0%43%
FY2009729%8%64%
FY20082114%5%35%
FY20073228%16%45%
FY20062627%14%46%
FY20051911%3%31%
FY20042528%14%48%
FY20031323%8%50%
FY20021145%21%72%
FY20011020%6%51%
FY20001718%6%41%
FY19992245%27%65%
FY19981822%9%45%
FY19972924%12%42%
FY1996539%4%20%
FY19955941%29%53%
FY19946716%9%27%
FY199310734%25%43%
FY19927128%19%40%
FY19918927%19%37%
FY199013633%26%41%
FY198912945%37%54%
FY19882612%4%29%
FY1987150%0%20%
FY198640%0%49%

By applicant nationality

Grant rate by nationality, largest volumes first
Nationalitydecisionsgranted95% interval
NICARAGUA27547%41%53%
HONDURAS20010%6%14%
EL SALVADOR18610%6%15%
MEXICO1204%2%9%
GUATEMALA1088%4%15%
CHINA9136%27%47%
CUBA6554%42%65%
ERITREA6480%68%88%
INDIA582%0%9%
SOMALIA4450%36%64%
ETHIOPIA3863%47%77%
JAMAICA140%0%22%
COLOMBIA1315%4%42%
BANGLADESH138%1%33%
PERU1225%9%53%

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.

5 mo

median

half of cases: 3—10 mo

based on 1,458 cases

NTA-to-decision duration by fiscal year
Decided inCasesmedianhalf of cases, mo
FY20195151 mo3466
FY20183736 mo2955
FY20164017 mo720
FY2015823 mo25
FY2014555 mo37
FY2013365 mo47
FY2012605 mo36
FY20113510 mo614
FY2007326 mo58
FY1996535 mo35

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 Decision1,583
Remand496
Denied339
Summary Affirmance224
Withdrawal of Appeal177
Other125
Granted120
Temporary Protected Status108
Dismissed (Grant V/D 30 days)100
Lacks Jurisdiction - BIA87
Termination67
Sustain46
Summarily Dismiss34
Moot Bond23
Background Check Remand17
Dismiss Soriano15
Terminate-DHS PD15
Dismiss as Untimely15
Continued14
Dismissed (Voluntary Departure Granted)14
SUMMARY AFFIRMANCE/VD12
Summary Dismissal (e) no brief12
American Baptist Church Settlement11
Rejection9
Grant with no Remand5
Summary Dismissal (G) untimely or waived appeal5
Denied Soriano4
AFD3
ROP Returned to Court to correct deficiency2
Coercive Population Control2
SUMMARY DISMISSAL - BOTH (a) & (e)2
Other Soriano2
REV1
SPECIAL NACARA CONTINUATION1
Granted Soriano1
Administrative Return1
Summary Dismissal (a) inad reason on appeal1

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.