Skip to content
Asylum BeaconU.S. immigration court data

Judge Walsh, John F.

LOS ANGELES — IMMIGRATION COURT

Not hearing cases: nothing for over two years

Last hearing
December 17, 2021
Next hearing
none scheduled
Last decision
April 29, 2021
Courts worked at: 7

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.

30%

Asylum grant rate

of 3,339 decisions · FY1984–FY2020

95% interval: 29%32%

granted:
1,014
denied:
2,325

The period has closed

This judge no longer hears cases, so the figure describes FY1984–FY2020 — 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 judge30% (3,339)
  • The whole court — LOS ANGELES — IMMIGRATION COURT20% (15,835)
  • 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%199720022006201020142018

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

Years with fewer than 10 decisions are not plotted (9): at that sample size the percentage is noise. They remain in the table.

Show as a table
Grant rate by fiscal year
Perioddecisionsgranted95% interval
FY2020250%9%91%
FY2019875%41%93%
FY201813842%34%50%
FY201722429%23%35%
FY201620339%32%46%
FY20156422%14%33%
FY2014580%0%6%
FY20131022%1%7%
FY2012737%3%15%
FY201112020%14%28%
FY201015453%45%60%
FY200911450%41%59%
FY200810238%29%48%
FY200712340%32%49%
FY200611967%58%75%
FY20058436%26%46%
FY200419237%30%44%
FY200332624%20%29%
FY200232224%20%29%
FY200121621%16%27%
FY200019121%16%27%
FY199915631%24%38%
FY199816627%20%34%
FY19976229%19%41%
FY199650%0%43%
FY199520%0%66%
FY199120%0%66%
FY199030%0%56%
FY198940%0%49%
FY198830%0%56%
FY198710%0%79%

By applicant nationality

Grant rate by nationality, largest volumes first
Nationalitydecisionsgranted95% interval
MEXICO7528%6%10%
CHINA52149%45%53%
GUATEMALA28016%13%21%
EL SALVADOR2639%6%13%
ARMENIA24937%32%44%
ALBANIA11035%26%44%
INDONESIA10341%32%50%
INDIA8955%45%65%
IRAQ7353%42%64%
IRAN6352%40%64%
HONDURAS5711%5%21%
Former Countries5520%12%32%
RUSSIA5048%35%61%
LEBANON4129%18%44%
UKRAINE3661%45%75%

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.

18 mo

median

half of cases: 7—30 mo

based on 3,339 cases

NTA-to-decision duration by fiscal year
Decided inCasesmedianhalf of cases, mo
FY201813834 mo3042
FY201722427 mo2332
FY201620317 mo1323
FY20156411 mo623
FY2014585 mo47
FY20131024 mo28
FY2012733 mo28
FY20111203 mo247
FY201015449 mo2870
FY200911431 mo2056

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 Decision1,181
Denied1,033
Remand954
SUMMARY AFFIRMANCE/VD401
Dismissed (Voluntary Departure Granted)330
Summary Affirmance284
Dismissed (Grant V/D 30 days)210
Lacks Jurisdiction - BIA147
Withdrawal of Appeal108
Termination106
Sustain81
Background Check Remand67
Other61
Summarily Dismiss52
Moot Bond47
Dismiss as Untimely43
Granted41
Administratively Closed-DHS PD26
Temporary Protected Status23
Grant with no Remand14
Dismiss Soriano11
Continued9
Terminate-DHS PD8
Coercive Population Control5
Administratively Closed5
Dismissed as Moot5
SUMMARY DISMISSAL - BOTH (a) & (e)4
ROP Returned to Court to correct deficiency4
Summary Dismissal (a) inad reason on appeal3
Rejection3
Summary Dismissal (e) no brief1
American Baptist Church Settlement1
Deferred Enforced Departure1

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.