Ecuador
Sufficient sampleTotal decisions
798
Grants
160
Denials
638
Immigration judge
Public EOIR asylum decision statistics
Grant rate
32.0%
542 / 1696
Total decisions
1696
Merits decision sample in current public statistics
Grant rate
32.0%
Grants: 542
Denial rate
68.0%
Denials: 1154
Other relief rate
0.0%
Other relief: 0
This profile is summarized from public sources for background context only. It is not an ImmJudge evaluation.
Attorney General William P. Barr appointed Richard H. Drucker as an Immigration Judge in December 2020. Judge Drucker earned a Bachelor of Arts in 1978 from Ohio State Universityand a Juris Doctor in 1981 from Cleveland State University, Cleveland Marshall College of Law.From 2016 to 2020, he was an associate attorney with Margaret W. Wong and Associates, in Cleveland. From 1981 to 2016, he was an attorney with Richard H. Drucker LPA, in Cleveland.Judge Drucker is a member of the Ohio State Bar.
This summary is based on public material and may not reflect the latest assignment information.
Source: TRAC Judge Report · View original report
Community perspective
Read public experiences and process discussions related to Richard Drucker.
You can start with these public topics
This table shows anonymized case details. It does not include applicant names, case numbers, A Numbers, or EOIR internal case IDs. Results are informational only, not legal advice, and cannot predict any individual case outcome.
Showing 0 of 0
Review this judge's historical asylum outcomes for applicants from different nationalities.
| Nationality | Total decisions | Grants | Denials | Grant rate | Denial rate | Distribution | Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Ecuador Sufficient sample | 798 | 160 | 638 | 20.1% | 79.9% | View details | |
Honduras Sufficient sample | 102 | 28 | 74 | 27.5% | 72.5% | View details | |
Colombia Sufficient sample | 87 | 32 | 55 | 36.8% | 63.2% | View details | |
Spain Sufficient sample | 65 | 16 | 49 | 24.6% | 75.4% | View details | |
Guatemala Sufficient sample | 61 | 4 | 57 | 6.6% | 93.4% | View details | |
Venezuela Sufficient sample | 55 | 33 | 22 | 60.0% | 40.0% | View details | |
Russia Sufficient sample | 50 | 45 | 5 | 90.0% | 10.0% | View details | |
Uzbekistan Sufficient sample | 50 | 36 | 14 | 72.0% | 28.0% | View details | |
Niue Sufficient sample | 48 | 30 | 18 | 62.5% | 37.5% | View details | |
Peru Sufficient sample | 44 | 7 | 37 | 15.9% | 84.1% | View details | |
India Sufficient sample | 43 | 24 | 19 | 55.8% | 44.2% | View details | |
Mexico Sufficient sample | 32 | 1 | 31 | 3.1% | 96.9% | View details | |
Bulgaria Moderate sample | 27 | 24 | 3 | 88.9% | 11.1% | View details | |
Haiti Moderate sample | 25 | 12 | 13 | 48.0% | 52.0% | View details | |
Brazil Moderate sample | 17 | 3 | 14 | 17.6% | 82.4% | View details | |
Georgia Moderate sample | 12 | 12 | 0 | 100.0% | 0.0% | View details | |
Cameroon Moderate sample | 11 | 6 | 5 | 54.5% | 45.5% | View details | |
Cuba Moderate sample | 11 | 1 | 10 | 9.1% | 90.9% | View details | |
China Moderate sample | 10 | 10 | 0 | 100.0% | 0.0% | View details | |
Guinea Moderate sample | 10 | 5 | 5 | 50.0% | 50.0% | View details |
Total decisions
798
Grants
160
Denials
638
Total decisions
102
Grants
28
Denials
74
Total decisions
87
Grants
32
Denials
55
Total decisions
65
Grants
16
Denials
49
Total decisions
61
Grants
4
Denials
57
Total decisions
55
Grants
33
Denials
22
Total decisions
50
Grants
45
Denials
5
Total decisions
50
Grants
36
Denials
14
Total decisions
48
Grants
30
Denials
18
Total decisions
44
Grants
7
Denials
37
Total decisions
43
Grants
24
Denials
19
Total decisions
32
Grants
1
Denials
31
Total decisions
27
Grants
24
Denials
3
Total decisions
25
Grants
12
Denials
13
Total decisions
17
Grants
3
Denials
14
Total decisions
12
Grants
12
Denials
0
Total decisions
11
Grants
6
Denials
5
Total decisions
11
Grants
1
Denials
10
Total decisions
10
Grants
10
Denials
0
Total decisions
10
Grants
5
Denials
5
These statistics come from public EOIR data. They reflect historical statistics only, are not legal advice, and cannot predict any individual case outcome.
Status: active
Status: active
Status: active
Status: active
Status: active
Status: active
This website is for general information only and is not legal advice.