AsylumCompass
Saved
English

This historical identity has not been confirmed. Records cannot be attributed to this person.

From FY2021 to FY2025, 290 of 457 asylum grant-or-denial records under judge code JHW at Baltimore were grants (63.46%) and 167 were denials (36.54%). In the same years, the court recorded 46.77% and the national figure was 37.33%. EOIR data through 2026-08-31; past records do not predict an individual case.

Recorded grant share · Baltimore · BAL

Grants 290 · Denials 167 · N 457
95% interval: 58.95%–67.74%

Judge code JHW
63.46%N 457
Baltimore
46.77%N 6,132
United States · all courts
37.33%N 367,995

Among comparable judge codes at this court

17 judge codes at this court have 100 or more grant-or-denial records in FY2021–FY2025. Their recorded grant shares range from 11.88% to 82.44%; the median is 44.09%.
FY2026 so far
0.00%6 records through 2026-08-31 · court: 6.52%
Record coverage
9 courts with recordsFY1983–FY2026 · 56 court-years · Courts are not pooled
Hearing dates on calendar
0 master · 7 individualBaltimore · proceedings with hearing dates, 2026-09–2029-08Hearing schedule
Data through
2026-08-31EOIR records · not on the official listing checked 2026-09-16Data and sources

Historical outcomes by court

Each row is a fiscal year at the court stored on the dated record. Courts are not pooled; an official listing never moves old results to a new court. Small groups remain visible and are labeled.

Judge figures group saved asylum outcomes by the judge code on each EOIR proceeding. The code identifies the assigned judge; these records do not verify who personally made every application decision. How judge figures work

Recorded grant share by fiscal year at Baltimore

0%25%50%75%100%FY2017FY2018FY2019FY2020FY2021FY2022FY2023FY2024FY2025FY20260.00%0.00%0.00%50.00%83.33%86.07%70.55%35.67%0.00%62.22%55.07%40.62%33.08%47.00%66.49%75.33%59.17%24.21%6.52%37.13%46.12%47.28%43.52%23.13%
  • Judge code JHW
  • Baltimore
  • United States · all courts
National figures are published for FY2021–FY2025. A broken ring marks a value from fewer than 100 records.
Recorded grant and denial outcomes · EOIR dated records
Completion FYRecorded grant shareTotal (N)Grant recordsDenial records95% interval
Baltimore · BALExplore this court's full context
FY2026Partial year0.00%Small sample606<0.01%–39.03%
FY202535.67%1575610128.60%–43.42%
FY202470.55%1461034362.70%–77.34%
FY202386.07%1221051778.81%–91.11%
FY202283.33%Small sample3025566.44%–92.66%
FY202150.00%Small sample2119.45%–90.55%
FY20200.00%Small sample4040.00%–48.99%
FY20190.00%Small sample4040.00%–48.99%
FY20170.00%Small sample2020.00%–65.76%
FY20160.00%Small sample303<0.01%–56.15%
FY20140.00%Small sample2020.00%–65.76%
FY20130.00%Small sample2020.00%–65.76%
FY20090.00%Small sample1010.00%–79.35%
FY20050.00%Small sample1010.00%–79.35%
FY20040.00%Small sample1010.00%–79.35%
FY20030.00%Small sample1010.00%–79.35%
FY19990.00%Small sample303<0.01%–56.15%
FY19980.00%Small sample1010.00%–79.35%
FY19970.00%Small sample1010.00%–79.35%
FY19960.00%Small sample2020.00%–65.76%
FY19950.00%Small sample1010.00%–79.35%
FY19920.00%Small sample1010.00%–79.35%
FY19910.00%Small sample1010.00%–79.35%
FY19900.00%Small sample1010.00%–79.35%
FY19890.00%Small sample1010.00%–79.35%
Elizabeth · ELZExplore this court's full context
FY20220.00%Small sample100100.00%–27.75%
FY20213.23%Small sample311300.57%–16.19%
FY202018.18%Small sample224187.31%–38.52%
FY20190.00%Small sample303<0.01%–56.15%
FY20180.00%Small sample2020.00%–65.76%
Philadelphia · PHIExplore this court's full context
FY20220.00%Small sample14014<0.01%–21.53%
FY20210.00%Small sample190190.00%–16.82%
FY20200.00%Small sample303<0.01%–56.15%
Imperial · IMPExplore this court's full context
FY200847.37%Small sample1991027.33%–68.29%
FY200770.27%Small sample37261154.22%–82.51%
FY200642.86%Small sample28121626.51%–60.93%
FY20055.00%Small sample201190.89%–23.61%
FY20045.00%Small sample201190.89%–23.61%
FY20030.00%Small sample200200.00%–16.11%
FY20029.09%Small sample333303.14%–23.57%
FY200126.92%Small sample2671913.70%–46.08%
FY200012.50%Small sample243214.34%–31.00%
FY19995.56%Small sample181170.99%–25.76%
FY19980.00%Small sample300300.00%–11.35%
FY19970.00%Small sample35035<0.01%–9.89%
FY19967.14%Small sample282261.98%–22.65%
FY19954.17%Small sample241230.74%–20.24%
FY19830.00%Small sample1010.00%–79.35%
Detroit · DETExplore this court's full context
FY20080.00%Small sample2020.00%–65.76%
Boston · BOSExplore this court's full context
FY2007100.00%Small sample11020.65%–100.00%
FY200637.50%Small sample1661018.48%–61.36%
Tucson · TUCExplore this court's full context
FY2007100.00%Small sample22034.24%–100.00%
Sacramento · SMOExplore this court's full context
FY19990.00%Small sample4040.00%–48.99%
FY19980.00%Small sample8080.00%–32.44%
Phoenix · PHOExplore this court's full context
FY19990.00%Small sample303<0.01%–56.15%
FY19980.00%Small sample2020.00%–65.76%

Small sample: fewer than 100 grant or denial records. This share can swing widely.

These records do not predict an individual result or measure judge quality. A person may have more than one proceeding.

Source cutoff: 2026-08-31 · eoir-2026-08-judge-records-v2 · Source files and checks · Attribution details

Historical grant and denial records by nationality

Nationality groups count grant and denial proceedings in FY2021–FY2025, not people.

The dated results have a different coverage period and do not contain individual nationality. Small groups can change sharply.

Recorded judge × court × nationality · FY2021–FY2025 and each fiscal year
Recorded nationalityFY2021–FY2025 · pooledTotal (N)Court · same nationalityFY2025FY2024FY2023FY2022FY2021
Baltimore
Honduras61.21%11646.18% · N 1,13919 / 6019 / 2326 / 267 / 7—
El Salvador66.35%10446.97% · N 1,9448 / 2630 / 4021 / 2810 / 10—
Guatemala51.43%Small sample7039.58% · N 8014 / 247 / 1823 / 262 / 2—
Nigeria68.18%Small sample2257.86% · N 1595 / 85 / 85 / 50 / 1—
Cameroon85.71%Small sample2178.72% · N 2823 / 39 / 95 / 70 / 11 / 1
Romania75.00%Small sample1621.98% · N 910 / 33 / 36 / 63 / 4—
Nicaragua83.33%Small sample1261.47% · N 2182 / 48 / 8———
Venezuela81.82%Small sample1147.62% · N 1471 / 32 / 26 / 6——
Pakistan70.00%Small sample1072.92% · N 48—6 / 81 / 2——
Peru10.00%Small sample1012.61% · N 1110 / 40 / 41 / 2——
Nepal83.33%Small sample650.00% · N 583 / 3—2 / 3——
Haiti60.00%Small sample522.54% · N 710 / 23 / 3———
Colombia75.00%Small sample425.00% · N 723 / 30 / 1———
India0.00%Small sample435.35% · N 990 / 10 / 20 / 1——
Mexico0.00%Small sample430.11% · N 93—0 / 1—0 / 20 / 1
Russia100.00%Small sample450.79% · N 634 / 4————
Ecuador66.67%Small sample316.28% · N 860 / 11 / 11 / 1——
Egypt100.00%Small sample275.00% · N 4—2 / 2———
Ethiopia100.00%Small sample285.39% · N 89——2 / 2——
Ghana100.00%Small sample255.00% · N 202 / 2————
Ivory Coast (Cote D'Ivoire)100.00%Small sample254.55% · N 11——2 / 2——
Niger100.00%Small sample268.42% · N 19——2 / 2——
Rwanda50.00%Small sample266.67% · N 91 / 10 / 1———
Syria100.00%Small sample2100.00% · N 4—1 / 1—1 / 1—
Togo50.00%Small sample275.00% · N 81 / 2————
Uganda100.00%Small sample266.67% · N 15—1 / 11 / 1——
Belize0.00%Small sample10.00% · N 40 / 1————
Burkina Faso0.00%Small sample144.44% · N 9—0 / 1———
China100.00%Small sample166.67% · N 18—1 / 1———
Djibouti100.00%Small sample142.86% · N 7—1 / 1———
Dominican Republic0.00%Small sample175.00% · N 4——0 / 1——
Eritrea0.00%Small sample166.67% · N 240 / 1————
Guadeloupe100.00%Small sample166.67% · N 3—1 / 1———
Iran100.00%Small sample150.00% · N 4———1 / 1—
Jamaica0.00%Small sample123.08% · N 13—0 / 1———
Kenya0.00%Small sample160.00% · N 5—0 / 1———
Mali100.00%Small sample180.00% · N 5——1 / 1——
Senegal0.00%Small sample111.86% · N 59—0 / 1———
Sri Lanka100.00%Small sample157.14% · N 7—1 / 1———
Turkiye100.00%Small sample163.64% · N 33—1 / 1———
Ukraine100.00%Small sample150.00% · N 4———1 / 1—
United Kingdom100.00%Small sample1100.00% · N 1—1 / 1———
Vietnam0.00%Small sample10.00% · N 40 / 1————
Elizabeth
Mexico0.00%Small sample83.05% · N 164————0 / 8
Dominican Republic0.00%Small sample50.00% · N 123———0 / 20 / 3
Haiti0.00%Small sample35.63% · N 71————0 / 3
Ethiopia0.00%Small sample20.00% · N 4———0 / 2—
Guatemala0.00%Small sample25.26% · N 209———0 / 10 / 1
Jamaica0.00%Small sample21.85% · N 54———0 / 10 / 1
Sudan0.00%Small sample241.67% · N 12———0 / 10 / 1
Afghanistan0.00%Small sample140.00% · N 5————0 / 1
Albania0.00%Small sample160.00% · N 10———0 / 1—
Belarus0.00%Small sample120.00% · N 5————0 / 1
Brazil0.00%Small sample12.00% · N 50————0 / 1
Cuba0.00%Small sample115.79% · N 19————0 / 1
El Salvador0.00%Small sample12.61% · N 153————0 / 1
Honduras0.00%Small sample14.73% · N 148————0 / 1
Kenya0.00%Small sample112.50% · N 8———0 / 1—
Liberia0.00%Small sample19.52% · N 21————0 / 1
Nicaragua100.00%Small sample126.15% · N 65————1 / 1
Nigeria0.00%Small sample13.03% · N 33————0 / 1
Philippines0.00%Small sample10.00% · N 6————0 / 1
Russia0.00%Small sample130.77% · N 26————0 / 1
Sierra Leone0.00%Small sample111.11% · N 9————0 / 1
Somalia0.00%Small sample150.00% · N 4————0 / 1
Turkiye0.00%Small sample118.18% · N 11————0 / 1
Venezuela0.00%Small sample117.65% · N 68———0 / 1—
Philadelphia
Dominican Republic0.00%Small sample81.14% · N 88———0 / 10 / 7
Cuba0.00%Small sample430.30% · N 33———0 / 20 / 2
Mexico0.00%Small sample415.54% · N 193———0 / 10 / 3
Jamaica0.00%Small sample315.00% · N 40————0 / 3
Liberia0.00%Small sample250.00% · N 44———0 / 2—
Pakistan0.00%Small sample271.64% · N 67———0 / 10 / 1
Egypt0.00%Small sample147.62% · N 21———0 / 1—
Georgia0.00%Small sample169.23% · N 78————0 / 1
Guyana0.00%Small sample10.00% · N 4———0 / 1—
Kenya0.00%Small sample181.82% · N 11————0 / 1
Kuwait0.00%Small sample10.00% · N 3———0 / 1—
Laos0.00%Small sample10.00% · N 3————0 / 1
Lebanon0.00%Small sample150.00% · N 6———0 / 1—
Nigeria0.00%Small sample162.70% · N 126———0 / 1—
South Sudan0.00%Small sample10.00% · N 1———0 / 1—
Uzbekistan0.00%Small sample155.78% · N 147———0 / 1—

Small sample: fewer than 100 grant or denial records. This share can swing widely. Each fiscal year shows grants / N; — means no grant or denial record that year.

Judge means the code saved on the proceeding, not independently verified decision authorship. Flags are visual aids for mapped source categories; historical, unknown and non-geographic categories remain text-only.

EOIR CASE nationality aggregates · eoir-2026-08-nationality-complete-v1 · Download complete counts

Hearing schedule

One proceeding record is not necessarily a separate hearing session.

Baltimore · BAL · All proceedings · 2026-09–2029-08

Asylum-associated records are a subset of All proceedings.

Schedule display range: 2026-09–2029-08 (36 months)

Same count scale for both hearing types. Browse horizontally to see all 36 months.

Proceedings

Master Calendar Hearings · 0 proceedings with recorded hearing dates

Individual / Merits Hearings

Months with no retained records show 0.

Monthly counts are available for all recorded courts below.

Baltimore · BAL

Monthly counts

Jack H. Weil · JHW · Baltimore · BAL · 2026-09–2029-08 · All proceedings · Asylum-associated proceedings · Proceedings with recorded hearing dates · EOIR · 2026-08 edition
MonthAll proceedings · Master proceedingsAll proceedings · Individual proceedingsAsylum-associated proceedings · Master proceedingsAsylum-associated proceedings · Individual proceedings
2026-090000
2026-100303
2026-110403
2026-120000
2027-010000
2027-020000
2027-030000
2027-040000
2027-050000
2027-060000
2027-070000
2027-080000
2027-090000
2027-100000
2027-110000
2027-120000
2028-010000
2028-020000
2028-030000
2028-040000
2028-050000
2028-060000
2028-070000
2028-080000
2028-090000
2028-100000
2028-110000
2028-120000
2029-010000
2029-020000
2029-030000
2029-040000
2029-050000
2029-060000
2029-070000
2029-080000

Retained: 7Excluded: 49Unable to confirm: 0Source files and checks

Boston · BOS

Retained: 0Excluded: 0Unable to confirm: 0Source files and checks

Eloy · ELO

Retained: 0Excluded: 0Unable to confirm: 0Source files and checks

Elizabeth · ELZ

Retained: 0Excluded: 0Unable to confirm: 0Source files and checks

Florence · FLO

Retained: 0Excluded: 0Unable to confirm: 0Source files and checks

Imperial · IMP

Retained: 0Excluded: 0Unable to confirm: 0Source files and checks

Las Vegas · LVG

Retained: 0Excluded: 0Unable to confirm: 0Source files and checks

Otay Mesa · OTM

Retained: 0Excluded: 0Unable to confirm: 0Source files and checks

Philadelphia · PHI

Retained: 0Excluded: 0Unable to confirm: 0Source files and checks

Phoenix · PHO

Retained: 0Excluded: 0Unable to confirm: 0Source files and checks

Sacramento · SMO

Retained: 0Excluded: 0Unable to confirm: 0Source files and checks

Tucson · TUC

Retained: 0Excluded: 0Unable to confirm: 0Source files and checks

Dated result records

Nationality and representation selections do not filter this list. Case identifiers and personal attributes are not included.

Results for the current selection

Loading associated results…

These dates belong to proceedings associated with the recorded judge code. They do not establish when that person served or who made the application decision.

Monthly record distribution for this selection

Filtered records by court and fiscal year

All eight saved result categories · same filters as the result list
Historical record courtFiscal yearGrantedDeniedRecorded as abandonedRecorded as withdrawnRecorded as not adjudicatedRecorded as administratively closedOther recorded categoriesNo application result recordedTotal records

Each row totals its eight categories using the current filters. Fiscal years run from 10-01 through 09-30.

One row per eligible proceeding · latest completion date first
Proceeding completion dateHistorical record courtSaved application result

Counts use stored proceeding completion dates and judge codes. Later source releases may revise earlier records.

Source cutoff: 2026-08-31 · eoir-2026-08-judge-records-v2 · Source files and checks

Recorded BIA appeals associated with this judge code

These records are linked to proceedings carrying this EOIR judge code in the 2026-08 source snapshot. The data do not establish that the coded judge personally issued the decision under BIA review.

Historical decision FY2021–FY2025 pooled · respondent-filed appeals (A)

Denominator: respondent-filed BIA IJ Case Appeal events with an exact proceeding link and stored judge code, with a recorded disposition during the displayed period.

Respondent-filed recorded BIA appeal events during FY2021–FY2025
Appeal events (denominator)DIS · recorded dismissal/affirmanceREM · remand as recordedSUS · appeal sustained as recordedOther · mixed recorded dispositions
59327020

Small sample: N is below 100. Counts remain visible; a few events can change the pattern substantially.

Questions about these records

Is this the judge’s asylum approval or denial rate?

It is the recorded grant share: of 457 asylum grant-or-denial records under judge code JHW at Baltimore in FY2021–FY2025, 290 were grants (63.46%) and 167 were denials (36.54%).

Withdrawals, abandonment, administrative closure and other outcomes are outside this denominator. The judge code identifies the assigned judge; it does not prove who decided each application.

Why do other websites show a different number?

Publications count different things. This page counts asylum applications that ended in a grant or a denial in EOIR’s public CASE data, by fiscal year, at the court stored on each proceeding, and never pools courts.

Other reports may count other relief, such as withholding of removal or protection under the Convention Against Torture, count decisions rather than proceedings, combine courts or use other years. Compare the period, the population and N before comparing percentages.

Why are courts listed separately?

Each record keeps the court stored on its proceeding. This judge code has grant or denial records at 9 courts. They are shown separately and never pooled, and the official listing does not move older records to a new court.

Why is FY2026 marked as a partial year?

Fiscal year 2026 runs from 2025-10-01 to 2026-09-30, and the source data end on 2026-08-31. FY2026 figures cover only part of the year, so they are not compared with complete years.

What does a small sample mean here?

When fewer than 100 grant or denial records stand behind a share, one or two decisions can move it by several percentage points. Such figures are marked † or labeled as a small sample, and the 95% interval shows how wide the uncertainty is.

Where does this judge hear cases now?

This name is not on EOIR’s official hearing directory as checked on 2026-09-16.

Under this judge code, the 2026-08 EOIR edition records hearing dates from 2026-09 to 2029-08 at Baltimore: 0 master and 7 individual proceedings.

A listing or a scheduled date does not establish a sole duty station.

Can these numbers predict my case?

No. They describe past records under a judge code. The outcome of a case depends on its own facts, evidence and law. For advice about your case, talk to a qualified lawyer or accredited representative.

Data and sources

Source cutoff: · eoir-2026-08-judge-source-coverage-v1

Dated asylum records and recorded grants or denials are available by court and fiscal year.

Result record coverage

33,909Associated proceeding records
3,324Proceedings linked to asylum applications
3,280Eligible dated asylum records
1,001Dated grant or denial records

All courts and all stored dates in this source edition. These coverage counts do not change with the result-list filters.

Historical record courts
16
Earliest recorded completion FY
FY1983
Latest recorded completion FY
FY2026 · Partial year
Why some source records are outside the dated results
  • 336 eligible asylum records have no application result; 336 of them appear in the dated list.
  • 44 asylum-linked proceedings have conflicting saved application results.

A blank date or result does not establish a pending case, an undecided application, or the absence of a decision. Missing dates are not assigned to an assumed fiscal year.

All eligible dated result categories are included through the source cutoff, without aggregate suppression filters.

Source cutoff: 2026-08-31 · FY2026 is incomplete. Earlier stored dates may predate a judge’s appointment because assignment and saved completion date describe different events.

Nationality and representation selections do not filter this list. Case identifiers and personal attributes are not included.

Available historical coverage

Source coverage includes all normalized dated records for this identity. It is not verified decision authorship or a complete case history.

Coverage counting rules

Counts describe stored proceedings associated with the judge code, not unique cases, people, or verified decision authorship. Asylum applications are combined per proceeding using the same joins and conflict rules as the dated list.

3,280 asylum-linked proceedings meet the proceeding-type, case-link and result-consistency rules. These eligible records split into missing dates, invalid dates, dates after the cutoff, and dated records through the cutoff.

The dated list includes all saved result categories, including a blank result. Grant share uses only dated grants divided by dated grants plus denials; other categories are excluded.

These are saved results on proceedings assigned to the selected judge in EOIR data, not independently verified decision authorship. The application result has no separate decision timestamp. Completion dates may reflect a different event or later edits.

Each row represents one eligible proceeding after duplicate application rows are combined. Identical dates and results can appear multiple times. A person may have multiple proceedings. Within-day order does not indicate the sequence of decisions.

The public timeline includes all eight saved result categories and all stored completion years through the source cutoff. Conflicting application outcomes and inconsistent case joins remain excluded. Complete records can reconstruct counts hidden in legacy aggregate tables; those tables no longer provide a non-reconstruction guarantee.

Official court listing

Directory checked: EOIR hearing directory

Not on the checked official listing

The checked listing does not establish why this name is absent or where this person works now.

Hearing schedule sources

Schedule filtering and source checks

The 2026-08 EOIR edition is grouped using a source cutoff of 2026-08-31. Counts describe proceeding records with retained future hearing dates, grouped by the judge and court codes stored on each schedule record. Records with a handling reason and other excluded records are kept outside the counts; records that cannot be confirmed are listed separately. All proceedings includes the reliably identified asylum-associated subset.

Later recorded hearing dates are included in the source coverage summary.

All proceedings · future hearing dates through 2036-08-31

These source coverage counts include all proceedings and do not change with the proceedings filter above.

Baltimore

Retained: 7Excluded: 49Unable to confirm: 0

Raw Master and Individual records
56
Unconfirmed proportion
0.00%
Recorded handling reason
49
Historical schedule records
19,005
Future schedule records
56
Other schedule types
98
Reliable asylum association
9,500
No identifiable asylum association
9,560
Unlinked asylum records
1
Schedule and proceeding judge codes differ
7

Boston · BOS

Retained: 0Excluded: 0Unable to confirm: 0

Raw Master and Individual records
0
Unconfirmed proportion
Not calculable
Historical schedule records
141
Other schedule types
140
Reliable asylum association
73
No identifiable asylum association
68

Eloy

Retained: 0Excluded: 0Unable to confirm: 0

Raw Master and Individual records
0
Unconfirmed proportion
Not calculable
Historical schedule records
8
Other schedule types
5
Reliable asylum association
1
No identifiable asylum association
7

Elizabeth

Retained: 0Excluded: 0Unable to confirm: 0

Raw Master and Individual records
0
Unconfirmed proportion
Not calculable
Historical schedule records
3,915
Other schedule types
1,480
Reliable asylum association
1,043
No identifiable asylum association
2,872

Florence

Retained: 0Excluded: 0Unable to confirm: 0

Raw Master and Individual records
0
Unconfirmed proportion
Not calculable
Historical schedule records
24
Other schedule types
3
Reliable asylum association
5
No identifiable asylum association
19

Imperial

Retained: 0Excluded: 0Unable to confirm: 0

Raw Master and Individual records
0
Unconfirmed proportion
Not calculable
Historical schedule records
48,816
Other schedule types
45,204
Reliable asylum association
3,824
No identifiable asylum association
44,943
Unlinked asylum records
49

Las Vegas

Retained: 0Excluded: 0Unable to confirm: 0

Raw Master and Individual records
0
Unconfirmed proportion
Not calculable
Historical schedule records
35
Other schedule types
35
No identifiable asylum association
35

Otay Mesa

Retained: 0Excluded: 0Unable to confirm: 0

Raw Master and Individual records
0
Unconfirmed proportion
Not calculable
Historical schedule records
11
Other schedule types
11
Reliable asylum association
1
No identifiable asylum association
10

Philadelphia

Retained: 0Excluded: 0Unable to confirm: 0

Raw Master and Individual records
0
Unconfirmed proportion
Not calculable
Historical schedule records
1,058
Other schedule types
7
Reliable asylum association
490
No identifiable asylum association
568

Phoenix

Retained: 0Excluded: 0Unable to confirm: 0

Raw Master and Individual records
0
Unconfirmed proportion
Not calculable
Historical schedule records
13
Other schedule types
13
Reliable asylum association
13

Sacramento · SMO

Retained: 0Excluded: 0Unable to confirm: 0

Raw Master and Individual records
0
Unconfirmed proportion
Not calculable
Historical schedule records
287
Other schedule types
287
Reliable asylum association
93
No identifiable asylum association
194

Tucson

Retained: 0Excluded: 0Unable to confirm: 0

Raw Master and Individual records
0
Unconfirmed proportion
Not calculable
Historical schedule records
121
Other schedule types
41
Reliable asylum association
24
No identifiable asylum association
97
View schedule counting rules
Source files, versions and checks

BIA appeal sources

BIA scope and counting rules

These are historical pooled counts, not a judge score or a current pattern. This product has no annual judge-code breakdown. DIS does not prove this judge was affirmed; REM is not an asylum grant; SUS is not a final asylum outcome.

Recorded BIA disposition patterns can change over time. These FY2021–FY2025 counts are not a permanent characteristic of this judge code. Changes may coincide with law, policy, administration, BIA composition, case mix or backlog; these descriptive data do not establish a cause.

All-party source coverage is separate from the respondent-filed table. National parent appeal events: 119,252 · Linked to a stored judge code: 119,155.

Respondent-filed source events: 109,995 · Linked to a stored judge code: 109,915 · Published respondent-filed events: 67,156 · Respondent-filed events with identity limitations: 42,759.

Judge code: JHW · Stored source field: B_TblProceeding.IJ_CODE · Population: bia-decided-stored-judge-chronology-clean-1.

Disposition date basis: tblAppeal.datBIADecision · Historical period: 2020-10-01–2025-09-30 · Source cutoff: 2026-08-31.

The stored code is an association in the snapshot, not proof of decision authorship or assignment when the original decision was issued. Today’s judge directory and court listing describe current context only.

Source versions and checks

Coverage and source versions are listed separately from publication, acquisition and later checks. A check does not extend the records beyond their cutoff.

EOIR public CASE data

Used on this page: Dated results, historical outcomes and saved hearing schedules

Historical result coverageFY1983–FY2026 · Partial year: FY2026

Source edition2026-08

Source snapshot cutoff

The first and last available fiscal years bound this range; intervening years may have no records. Saved hearing dates and BIA disposition periods have separate coverage.

Standard comparison periodFY2021–FY2025

Source obtained or reviewed for this edition

Official source recheck ·

Source reachable at the last check; its contents have not been compared with this edition yet

Cite this page AsylumCompass. “Jack H. Weil: historical immigration judge code records.” https://asylumcompass.com/judge/jack-h-weil-jhw Include the source edition and period of the figure you cite.

Continue from this judge