Skip to content
Asylum BeaconU.S. immigration court data

Judge Kleinfeld, Seymour R.

MIAMI — IMMIGRATION COURT

Not hearing cases: nothing for over two years

Last hearing
October 26, 2005
Next hearing
none scheduled
Last decision
October 25, 2011
Courts worked at: 2

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 1,703 decisions · FY1987–FY2006

95% interval: 26%30%

granted:
480
denied:
1,223

The period has closed

This judge no longer hears cases, so the figure describes FY1987–FY2006 — 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% (1,703)
  • The whole court — MIAMI — IMMIGRATION COURT19% (104,037)
  • 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%199519971999200120032005

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
FY20061100%21%100%
FY200520629%23%36%
FY200425516%12%22%
FY200325432%27%38%
FY200221240%34%47%
FY200115238%30%45%
FY200013728%22%37%
FY19998132%23%43%
FY19988519%12%28%
FY199715427%20%34%
FY199613323%16%30%
FY1995293%1%17%
FY199210%0%79%
FY199110%0%79%
FY198910%0%79%
FY198710%0%79%

By applicant nationality

Grant rate by nationality, largest volumes first
Nationalitydecisionsgranted95% interval
HAITI62818%16%22%
COLOMBIA45734%30%39%
GUATEMALA7520%13%30%
PERU7434%24%45%
CUBA6832%22%44%
NICARAGUA6120%12%31%
CHINA4459%44%72%
VENEZUELA4326%15%40%
EL SALVADOR4214%7%28%
HONDURAS2317%7%37%
MEXICO2114%5%35%
ARGENTINA160%0%19%
ALBANIA1354%29%77%
RUSSIA13100%77%100%
BRAZIL1127%10%57%

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.

17 mo

median

half of cases: 12—22 mo

based on 1,703 cases

NTA-to-decision duration by fiscal year
Decided inCasesmedianhalf of cases, mo
FY200520627 mo1833
FY200425521 mo1727
FY200325419 mo1522
FY200221215 mo1220
FY200115213 mo918
FY200013713 mo1017
FY19998113 mo1019
FY19988510 mo716
FY199715413 mo1017
FY199613310 mo617

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 Decision457
Summary Affirmance380
Denied288
Remand173
Dismissed (Grant V/D 30 days)75
Summarily Dismiss57
Withdrawal of Appeal54
Lacks Jurisdiction - BIA52
Termination39
SUMMARY AFFIRMANCE/VD38
Other33
Deferred Enforced Departure30
Temporary Protected Status22
Granted21
Terminate-DHS PD16
Dismiss as Untimely14
Dismissed (Voluntary Departure Granted)14
Sustain11
Summary Dismissal (a) inad reason on appeal8
SUMMARY DISMISSAL - BOTH (a) & (e)7
Dismiss Soriano7
Rejection5
Background Check Remand5
Summary Dismissal (e) no brief2
Grant with no Remand2
Coercive Population Control1
Continued1

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.