Davis, John W
This court
Decisiones totales
941
Tasa de aprobación de asilo
13.5%
Denegaciones
86.5%
Tasa de otras formas de alivio
0.0%
Larger sample
Datos actualizados: 8 jul 2026
← Back to all courtsactive active active active active active active active active
Tribunal de inmigración
Immigration Court Immigration Court
10 judges · AZ
- City / state
- Immigration Court, AZ
- Data source
- EOIR Case Data
Tasa promedio de aprobación
18.6%
1077 / 5800
Tasa promedio de aprobación
18.6%
Aprobaciones de asilo
1077
Denegaciones
4723
Jueces incluidos
10
Immigration Court Immigration Court has 10 indexed immigration judges. Court-level statistics are based on public EOIR records.
Jueces incluidos en este tribunal
Review asylum decision statistics for indexed judges at this court.
active
Spencer-Walters, Linda I.
This court
Decisiones totales
749
Tasa de aprobación de asilo
8.4%
Denegaciones
91.6%
Tasa de otras formas de alivio
0.0%
Larger sample
Datos actualizados: 8 jul 2026
Phelps, Richard A
This court
Decisiones totales
533
Tasa de aprobación de asilo
19.3%
Denegaciones
80.7%
Tasa de otras formas de alivio
0.0%
Larger sample
Datos actualizados: 8 jul 2026
Mabry Iii, William
This court
Decisiones totales
461
Tasa de aprobación de asilo
46.9%
Denegaciones
53.1%
Tasa de otras formas de alivio
0.0%
Larger sample
Datos actualizados: 8 jul 2026
Feldman, Irene C.
This court
Decisiones totales
410
Tasa de aprobación de asilo
10.5%
Denegaciones
89.5%
Tasa de otras formas de alivio
0.0%
Larger sample
Datos actualizados: 8 jul 2026
Orechwa, Nicolas
This court
Decisiones totales
352
Tasa de aprobación de asilo
9.9%
Denegaciones
90.1%
Tasa de otras formas de alivio
0.0%
Larger sample
Datos actualizados: 8 jul 2026
Schnitzer, Michael
This court
Decisiones totales
328
Tasa de aprobación de asilo
7.9%
Denegaciones
92.1%
Tasa de otras formas de alivio
0.0%
Larger sample
Datos actualizados: 8 jul 2026
Zhang, Xinzhe
This court
Decisiones totales
34
Tasa de aprobación de asilo
0.0%
Denegaciones
100.0%
Tasa de otras formas de alivio
0.0%
Larger sample
Datos actualizados: 8 jul 2026
Logan, Steven P.
This court
Decisiones totales
33
Tasa de aprobación de asilo
3.0%
Denegaciones
97.0%
Tasa de otras formas de alivio
0.0%
Larger sample
Datos actualizados: 8 jul 2026
Duvall, Bradly
This court
Decisiones totales
Pendiente
Tasa de aprobación de asilo
Pendiente
Denegaciones
Pendiente
Tasa de otras formas de alivio
Pendiente
No statistics yet
Datos actualizados: 8 jul 2026
Grant rate by nationality
| Nationality | Grant rate | Grants | Denials | Decisions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MEXICO | 2.4% | 30 | 1215 | 1245 |
| CUBA | 60.7% | 428 | 277 | 705 |
| GUATEMALA | 3.7% | 24 | 626 | 650 |
| EL SALVADOR | 2.9% | 13 | 437 | 450 |
| HONDURAS | 5.8% | 16 | 258 | 274 |
| VENEZUELA | 51.4% | 108 | 102 | 210 |
| NICARAGUA | 28.0% | 58 | 149 | 207 |
| RUSSIA | 47.4% | 72 | 80 | 152 |
| COLOMBIA | 6.5% | 8 | 116 | 124 |
| INDIA | 16.7% | 19 | 95 | 114 |
| CAMEROON | 47.7% | 52 | 57 | 109 |
| VIETNAM | 10.3% | 10 | 87 | 97 |
| CHINA | 22.7% | 15 | 51 | 66 |
| PERU | 6.3% | 4 | 60 | 64 |
| HAITI | 4.8% | 3 | 60 | 63 |
| IRAN | 15.9% | 10 | 53 | 63 |
| ECUADOR | 5.3% | 3 | 54 | 57 |
| ETHIOPIA | 27.7% | 13 | 34 | 47 |
| SOMALIA | 48.9% | 22 | 23 | 45 |
| AFGHANISTAN | 34.1% | 14 | 27 | 41 |
| JAMAICA | 9.8% | 4 | 37 | 41 |
| BANGLADESH | 20.0% | 8 | 32 | 40 |
| SUDAN | 10.5% | 4 | 34 | 38 |
| PHILIPPINES | 0.0% | 0 | 37 | 37 |
| CAMBODIA | 0.0% | 0 | 33 | 33 |
| ARMENIA | 12.5% | 4 | 28 | 32 |
| PAKISTAN | 6.3% | 2 | 30 | 32 |
| GEORGIA | 32.3% | 10 | 21 | 31 |
| BRAZIL | 6.9% | 2 | 27 | 29 |
| DOMINICAN REPUBLIC | 7.1% | 2 | 26 | 28 |
| LAOS | 7.4% | 2 | 25 | 27 |
| NIGERIA | 14.8% | 4 | 23 | 27 |
| NEPAL | 19.2% | 5 | 21 | 26 |
| SYRIA | 23.1% | 6 | 20 | 26 |
| GHANA | 20.8% | 5 | 19 | 24 |
| IRAQ | 8.3% | 2 | 22 | 24 |
| JORDAN | 4.2% | 1 | 23 | 24 |
| ERITREA | 73.9% | 17 | 6 | 23 |
| MAURITANIA | 21.1% | 4 | 15 | 19 |
| UKRAINE | 17.6% | 3 | 14 | 17 |
| EGYPT | 12.5% | 2 | 14 | 16 |
| UZBEKISTAN | 25.0% | 4 | 12 | 16 |
| FIJI | 0.0% | 0 | 15 | 15 |
| TOGO | 46.7% | 7 | 8 | 15 |
| ANGOLA | 0.0% | 0 | 13 | 13 |
| BOLIVIA | 0.0% | 0 | 13 | 13 |
| CONGO | 15.4% | 2 | 11 | 13 |
| MOROCCO | 33.3% | 4 | 8 | 12 |
| YEMEN | 25.0% | 3 | 9 | 12 |
| IVORY COAST (COTE D'IVOIRE) | 36.4% | 4 | 7 | 11 |
| KENYA | 0.0% | 0 | 11 | 11 |
| SENEGAL | 18.2% | 2 | 9 | 11 |
| SRI LANKA | 63.6% | 7 | 4 | 11 |
| CHAD | 30.0% | 3 | 7 | 10 |
| TURKIYE | 50.0% | 5 | 5 | 10 |
| BOSNIA-HERZEGOVINA | 0.0% | 0 | 9 | 9 |
| KIRGHIZIA (KYRGYZSTAN) | 44.4% | 4 | 5 | 9 |
| LIBERIA | 0.0% | 0 | 9 | 9 |
| INDONESIA | 0.0% | 0 | 8 | 8 |
| AZERBAIJAN | 14.3% | 1 | 6 | 7 |
| BELARUS | 28.6% | 2 | 5 | 7 |
| BURKINA FASO | 0.0% | 0 | 7 | 7 |
| DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF CONGO | 14.3% | 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Former Countries | 0.0% | 0 | 7 | 7 |
| EQUATORIAL GUINEA | 33.3% | 2 | 4 | 6 |
| KAMPUCHEA | 0.0% | 0 | 6 | 6 |
| SIERRA LEONE | 16.7% | 1 | 5 | 6 |
| THAILAND | 0.0% | 0 | 6 | 6 |
| GUINEA | 0.0% | 0 | 5 | 5 |
| GUYANA | 0.0% | 0 | 5 | 5 |
| ISRAEL | 20.0% | 1 | 4 | 5 |
| LEBANON | 0.0% | 0 | 5 | 5 |
| PANAMA | 0.0% | 0 | 5 | 5 |
| ROMANIA | 0.0% | 0 | 5 | 5 |
| SOUTH AFRICA | 0.0% | 0 | 5 | 5 |
| TAJIKISTAN (TADZHIK) | 0.0% | 0 | 5 | 5 |
| ALBANIA | 0.0% | 0 | 4 | 4 |
| BENIN | 0.0% | 0 | 4 | 4 |
| BULGARIA | 25.0% | 1 | 3 | 4 |
| CROATIA | 25.0% | 1 | 3 | 4 |
| GAMBIA | 0.0% | 0 | 4 | 4 |
| KAZAKHSTAN | 25.0% | 1 | 3 | 4 |
| MALI | 0.0% | 0 | 4 | 4 |
| POLAND | 25.0% | 1 | 3 | 4 |
| SAMOA | 0.0% | 0 | 4 | 4 |
| SOUTH KOREA | 0.0% | 0 | 4 | 4 |
| UGANDA | 50.0% | 2 | 2 | 4 |
| ARGENTINA | 33.3% | 1 | 2 | 3 |
| BELIZE | 0.0% | 0 | 3 | 3 |
| BURMA (MYANMAR) | 0.0% | 0 | 3 | 3 |
| MACAU | 0.0% | 0 | 3 | 3 |
| MALAYSIA | 33.3% | 1 | 2 | 3 |
| TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO | 0.0% | 0 | 3 | 3 |
| BYELORUSSIA (BELARUS) | 0.0% | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| ESTONIA | 0.0% | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| Former Countries | 0.0% | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| GERMANY | 0.0% | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| GUADELOUPE | 50.0% | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| HOLLAND | 0.0% | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| MONGOLIA | 0.0% | 0 | 2 | 2 |
Data source and disclaimer
Data comes from public EOIR records. It is for informational use only, is not legal advice, and cannot predict any individual case outcome.