Skip to content
Asylum BeaconU.S. immigration court data

Judge Rosche, Robin J.

CHICAGO — IMMIGRATION COURT

Hearing cases: hearings are scheduled

Last hearing
July 24, 2026
Next hearing
August 6, 2026 · 328 scheduled in all
Last decision
July 23, 2026
Courts worked at: 2

Hearings scheduled here

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.

54%

Asylum grant rate

of 809 decisions · FY1992–FY2026

95% interval: 50%57%

granted:
435
denied:
374
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 judge54% (809)
  • 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

0%25%50%75%100%201620172019202120232025

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
FY20251958%36%77%
FY20247371%60%80%
FY202314370%62%77%
FY20229454%44%64%
FY20217849%38%60%
FY20205834%24%47%
FY201918654%47%61%
FY20187047%36%59%
FY20176136%25%49%
FY20162040%22%61%
FY201310%0%79%
FY201010%0%79%
FY200710%0%79%
FY200410%0%79%
FY200330%0%56%

By applicant nationality

Grant rate by nationality, largest volumes first
Nationalitydecisionsgranted95% interval
CUBA12381%74%87%
MEXICO8817%11%26%
HONDURAS6620%12%31%
NIGERIA6290%80%95%
CHINA4777%63%86%
EL SALVADOR4719%10%33%
GUATEMALA3918%9%33%
INDIA3050%33%67%
NICARAGUA2446%28%65%
MOLDAVIA (MOLDOVA)2282%61%93%
VENEZUELA2085%64%95%
GHANA1275%47%91%
HAITI119%2%38%
ERITREA10100%72%100%
JORDAN1080%49%94%

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.

23 mo

median

half of cases: 5—56 mo

based on 809 cases

NTA-to-decision duration by fiscal year
Decided inCasesmedianhalf of cases, mo
FY20247354 mo3668
FY202314355 mo4665
FY20229454 mo3878
FY20217842 mo2191
FY2020585 mo38
FY20191863 mo25
FY2018705 mo47
FY2017616 mo511

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.

179
cases waiting
81 mo
already waited, median
  • Half have waited between 71 mo and 96 mo.
  • 0 (0%) have a hearing scheduled later than the date this data was collected. The rest have no upcoming event in the release.

The queue counts proceedings with no decision in the release. The figure runs from the NTA date to the release cutoff — it is how long people have already waited, not how much longer they will. Shown separately: how many have a hearing scheduled after the cutoff. The rest have no upcoming event in the release and should not be read alongside live cases.

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 Decision192
Remand28
Denied28
Summary Affirmance22
Withdrawal of Appeal16
Lacks Jurisdiction - BIA13
Moot Bond10
Termination8
Dismissed (Voluntary Departure Granted)7
Summary Dismissal (G) untimely or waived appeal6
Sustain4
Summarily Dismiss2
Administratively Closed2
ROP Returned to Court to correct deficiency1
Grant with no Remand1
Summary Dismissal (e) no brief1
Background Check Remand1

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.