Skip to content
Asylum BeaconU.S. immigration court data

Judge Iskra, Wayne

NEW YORK — IMMIGRATION COURT

Not hearing cases: nothing for over two years

Last hearing
February 18, 2016
Next hearing
none scheduled
Last decision
June 6, 2022
Courts worked at: 9

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.

36%

Asylum grant rate

of 4,050 decisions · FY1986–FY2015

95% interval: 34%37%

granted:
1,447
denied:
2,603

The period has closed

This judge no longer hears cases, so the figure describes FY1986–FY2015 — 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 judge36% (4,050)
  • The whole court — NEW YORK — IMMIGRATION COURT57% (230,016)
  • 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%199319982002200620102014

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
FY201510%0%79%
FY20142864%46%79%
FY201319277%70%82%
FY201212578%70%85%
FY201113971%63%78%
FY201012974%65%80%
FY200913166%58%74%
FY200812049%40%58%
FY200712138%30%47%
FY200616945%38%52%
FY200513141%33%50%
FY200418437%30%44%
FY200323028%23%34%
FY200218627%21%34%
FY200115038%31%46%
FY200018636%29%43%
FY199925120%16%26%
FY199826428%23%34%
FY199724432%26%38%
FY199627329%24%34%
FY199538811%8%14%
FY19943118%6%12%
FY19939115%9%24%
FY199030%0%56%
FY198910%0%79%
FY198820%0%66%

By applicant nationality

Grant rate by nationality, largest volumes first
Nationalitydecisionsgranted95% interval
ETHIOPIA62565%61%68%
CHINA50924%21%28%
EL SALVADOR3556%4%9%
PAKISTAN18929%23%35%
CAMEROON17470%63%76%
SOMALIA17238%31%45%
GUATEMALA1616%3%10%
SUDAN10252%42%61%
ERITREA10077%68%84%
INDIA965%2%12%
INDONESIA7528%19%39%
GHANA7219%12%30%
HONDURAS6710%5%20%
AFGHANISTAN6139%28%52%
NIGERIA5925%16%38%

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.

13 mo

median

half of cases: 6—22 mo

based on 4,050 cases

NTA-to-decision duration by fiscal year
Decided inCasesmedianhalf of cases, mo
FY201319229 mo2140
FY201212526 mo2041
FY201113929 mo1841
FY201012920 mo1426
FY200913115 mo1327
FY200812018 mo1230
FY200712123 mo1631
FY200616920 mo1432
FY200513114 mo824
FY200418412 mo723

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 Decision856
Remand591
Denied432
Dismissed (Grant V/D 30 days)226
Summary Affirmance211
Sustain128
Granted110
Withdrawal of Appeal98
Termination96
SUMMARY AFFIRMANCE/VD82
Temporary Protected Status77
Dismissed (Voluntary Departure Granted)68
Other64
Background Check Remand54
Coercive Population Control51
Lacks Jurisdiction - BIA48
Summarily Dismiss31
Dismiss Soriano15
Moot Bond13
Dismiss as Untimely8
Continued8
Terminate-DHS PD7
Deferred Enforced Departure6
Conditional Grant--CPC Asylum5
Summary Dismissal (e) no brief5
Dismissed as Moot3
Administratively Closed-DHS PD3
Rejection3
Granted Soriano2
SUMMARY DISMISSAL - BOTH (a) & (e)1
Grant with no Remand1
Denied Soriano1
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.