Skip to content
Asylum BeaconU.S. immigration court data

Judge Cole, Samuel B.

CHICAGO — IMMIGRATION COURT

Hearing cases: hearings are scheduled

Last hearing
May 29, 2026
Next hearing
September 25, 2026 · 5 scheduled in all
Last decision
December 15, 2025
Courts worked at: 4

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.

47%

Asylum grant rate

of 629 decisions · FY2000–FY2026

95% interval: 43%51%

granted:
296
denied:
333
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 judge47% (629)
  • 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 (4): at that sample size the percentage is noise. They remain in the table.

Show as a table
Grant rate by fiscal year
Perioddecisionsgranted95% interval
FY2026partial10%0%79%
FY20251822%9%45%
FY20243811%4%24%
FY20233424%12%40%
FY20222814%6%31%
FY20215217%9%30%
FY20206441%29%53%
FY201921073%66%78%
FY20189358%48%68%
FY20177135%25%47%
FY20161656%33%77%
FY201510%0%79%
FY201420%0%66%
FY200610%0%79%

By applicant nationality

Grant rate by nationality, largest volumes first
Nationalitydecisionsgranted95% interval
CUBA16091%85%94%
MEXICO8813%7%21%
HONDURAS5223%14%36%
GUATEMALA343%1%15%
VENEZUELA3060%42%75%
NICARAGUA2370%49%84%
CAMEROON1573%48%89%
EL SALVADOR1414%4%40%
CHINA1258%32%81%
NIGERIA1020%6%51%
GHANA967%35%88%
HAITI922%6%55%
SOMALIA944%19%73%
JAMAICA90%0%30%
DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF CONGO838%14%69%

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.

4 mo

median

half of cases: 2—10 mo

based on 629 cases

NTA-to-decision duration by fiscal year
Decided inCasesmedianhalf of cases, mo
FY2024387 mo417
FY2023348 mo530
FY20215213 mo441
FY2020644 mo38
FY20192102 mo13
FY2018934 mo36
FY2017717 mo519

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.

3
cases waiting
41 mo
already waited, median
  • Half have waited between 38 mo and 64 mo.
  • 1 (33%) 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 Decision190
Remand78
Denied26
Sustain23
Withdrawal of Appeal21
Summary Affirmance14
Lacks Jurisdiction - BIA10
Moot Bond9
ROP Returned to Court to correct deficiency7
Dismissed (Voluntary Departure Granted)7
Grant with no Remand6
Background Check Remand6
Summary Dismissal (G) untimely or waived appeal5
Summary Dismissal (e) no brief4
Summarily Dismiss3
Termination3
Final Denial of EOIR 42B/402
Withdrawal-DHS PD2

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.