Honduras
Sufficient sampleTotal decisions
246
Grants
27
Denials
219
Grant rate: 11.0%Denial rate: 89.0%
Immigration judge
Craig A Harlow
Community discussion · 0Public EOIR asylum decision statistics
- Status
- active
- Data source
- EOIR Case Data
Grant rate
28.6%
284 / 992
Total decisions
992
Merits decision sample in current public statistics
Grant rate
28.6%
Grants: 284
Denial rate
71.4%
Denials: 708
Other relief rate
0.0%
Other relief: 0
Judge profile
This profile is summarized from public sources for background context only. It is not an ImmJudge evaluation.
Attorney General Eric Holder appointed Judge Harlow in February 2013. Judge Harlow received a bachelor of arts degree in 1989 from Lubbock Christian University in Lubbock, Texas, and a juris doctorate in 1992 from St. Mary's University School of Law in San Antonio. From June 2012 to February 2013, he served as an assistant chief counsel, Office of Chief Counsel, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), Department of Homeland Security, in Dallas. From October 2010 to May 2012, Judge Harlow served as deputy chief counsel for ICE in Oakdale, La. From September 2007 to September 2010, he was the senior attorney for the New Orleans Office of Chief Counsel. From October 1992 to August 2007, Judge Harlow was an assistant chief counsel for ICE in Oakdale, entering on duty through the Attorney General's Honors Program. From May 1991 to August 1991, he was a summer law intern in the Oakdale Immigration Court. Judge Harlow is a member of the State Bar of Texas.
This summary is based on public material and may not reflect the latest assignment information.
Source: TRAC Judge Report · View original report
Outcome distribution
Grants284 / 992
Denials708 / 992
Other relief0 / 992
Community perspective
Community discussion
Read public experiences and process discussions related to Craig A Harlow.
0 topics
You can start with these public topics
- Share a public process or preparation experience
- Discuss how to interpret public data
- Ask a question without personal case details
Case details
0 rowsThis 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.
Case Ratio
-
Distribution
Showing 0 of 0
View by applicant nationality
Review this judge's historical asylum outcomes for applicants from different nationalities.
| Nationality | Total decisions | Grants | Denials | Grant rate | Denial rate | Distribution | Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Honduras Sufficient sample | 246 | 27 | 219 | 11.0% | 89.0% | View details | |
Spain Sufficient sample | 132 | 6 | 126 | 4.5% | 95.5% | View details | |
Venezuela Sufficient sample | 95 | 61 | 34 | 64.2% | 35.8% | View details | |
Mexico Sufficient sample | 91 | 3 | 88 | 3.3% | 96.7% | View details | |
Guatemala Sufficient sample | 69 | 15 | 54 | 21.7% | 78.3% | View details | |
Cuba Sufficient sample | 68 | 26 | 42 | 38.2% | 61.8% | View details | |
Nepal Sufficient sample | 52 | 35 | 17 | 67.3% | 32.7% | View details | |
Niue Sufficient sample | 34 | 8 | 26 | 23.5% | 76.5% | View details | |
Somalia Moderate sample | 29 | 15 | 14 | 51.7% | 48.3% | View details | |
Colombia Moderate sample | 20 | 1 | 19 | 5.0% | 95.0% | View details | |
Eritrea Moderate sample | 18 | 15 | 3 | 83.3% | 16.7% | View details | |
Cameroon Moderate sample | 16 | 14 | 2 | 87.5% | 12.5% | View details | |
Ecuador Moderate sample | 12 | 3 | 9 | 25.0% | 75.0% | View details | |
India Moderate sample | 12 | 1 | 11 | 8.3% | 91.7% | View details | |
Pakistan Moderate sample | 10 | 7 | 3 | 70.0% | 30.0% | View details | |
Ethiopia Small sample | 9 | 7 | 2 | 77.8% | 22.2% | View details | |
Afghanistan Small sample | 8 | 8 | 0 | 100.0% | 0.0% | View details | |
Switzerland Small sample | 7 | 2 | 5 | 28.6% | 71.4% | View details | |
Central African Republic Small sample | 6 | 5 | 1 | 83.3% | 16.7% | View details | |
Guinea Small sample | 5 | 2 | 3 | 40.0% | 60.0% | View details |
View details
Spain
Sufficient sampleTotal decisions
132
Grants
6
Denials
126
Grant rate: 4.5%Denial rate: 95.5%
Venezuela
Sufficient sampleTotal decisions
95
Grants
61
Denials
34
Grant rate: 64.2%Denial rate: 35.8%
Mexico
Sufficient sampleTotal decisions
91
Grants
3
Denials
88
Grant rate: 3.3%Denial rate: 96.7%
Guatemala
Sufficient sampleTotal decisions
69
Grants
15
Denials
54
Grant rate: 21.7%Denial rate: 78.3%
Cuba
Sufficient sampleTotal decisions
68
Grants
26
Denials
42
Grant rate: 38.2%Denial rate: 61.8%
Nepal
Sufficient sampleTotal decisions
52
Grants
35
Denials
17
Grant rate: 67.3%Denial rate: 32.7%
Niue
Sufficient sampleTotal decisions
34
Grants
8
Denials
26
Grant rate: 23.5%Denial rate: 76.5%
Somalia
Moderate sampleTotal decisions
29
Grants
15
Denials
14
Grant rate: 51.7%Denial rate: 48.3%
Colombia
Moderate sampleTotal decisions
20
Grants
1
Denials
19
Grant rate: 5.0%Denial rate: 95.0%
Eritrea
Moderate sampleTotal decisions
18
Grants
15
Denials
3
Grant rate: 83.3%Denial rate: 16.7%
Cameroon
Moderate sampleTotal decisions
16
Grants
14
Denials
2
Grant rate: 87.5%Denial rate: 12.5%
Ecuador
Moderate sampleTotal decisions
12
Grants
3
Denials
9
Grant rate: 25.0%Denial rate: 75.0%
India
Moderate sampleTotal decisions
12
Grants
1
Denials
11
Grant rate: 8.3%Denial rate: 91.7%
Pakistan
Moderate sampleTotal decisions
10
Grants
7
Denials
3
Grant rate: 70.0%Denial rate: 30.0%
Ethiopia
Small sampleTotal decisions
9
Grants
7
Denials
2
Grant rate: 77.8%Denial rate: 22.2%
Afghanistan
Small sampleTotal decisions
8
Grants
8
Denials
0
Grant rate: 100.0%Denial rate: 0.0%
Switzerland
Small sampleTotal decisions
7
Grants
2
Denials
5
Grant rate: 28.6%Denial rate: 71.4%
Central African Republic
Small sampleTotal decisions
6
Grants
5
Denials
1
Grant rate: 83.3%Denial rate: 16.7%
Guinea
Small sampleTotal decisions
5
Grants
2
Denials
3
Grant rate: 40.0%Denial rate: 60.0%
These statistics come from public EOIR data. They reflect historical statistics only, are not legal advice, and cannot predict any individual case outcome.
Other judges at the same immigration court
Justin Adams
Status: active
- Asylum Grant Rate
- 12.7%
- Denial Rate
- 87.3%
Arvid C. Boyes
Status: active
- Asylum Grant Rate
- 23.7%
- Denial Rate
- 76.3%
Richard F. Brodsky
Status: active
- Asylum Grant Rate
- 24.8%
- Denial Rate
- 75.2%
Margaret D Burkhart
Status: active
- Asylum Grant Rate
- 65.2%
- Denial Rate
- 34.8%
Thomas G. Jr Crossan
Status: active
- Asylum Grant Rate
- 20.1%
- Denial Rate
- 79.9%
Yvonne S. Gonzalez
Status: active
- Asylum Grant Rate
- 38.6%
- Denial Rate
- 61.4%
This website is for general information only and is not legal advice.