Judge Patrick Burke

FY 2020 - 2025*, Cleveland Immigration Court

*data covers the first 11 months of fiscal year 2025

Published Nov 7, 2025

Patrick P. Burke was appointed as an immigration judge to begin hearing cases in November 2023. Judge Burke earned a Bachelor of Arts in 2004 from the Ohio State University and a Juris Doctor in 2007 from the Ohio State University Moritz College of Law. From 2017 to 2023, he served as an assistant U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Ohio on the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force in Cleveland. From 2012 to 2017, he served as a supervisory assistant U.S. attorney for the Western District of Texas as chief of the Del Rio Division. He most recently served as a judge advocate in the U.S. Army Reserve with the 139th Legal Operations Detachment at Fort Campbell, Kentucky. Judge Burke is a member of the Ohio State Bar.

Deciding Asylum Cases

Detailed data on decisions by Judge Burke were examined for the period covering fiscal years 2020 through the first 11 months of 2025. During this period, court records show that Judge Burke decided 132 asylum claims on their merits. Of these, he granted asylum for 13, granted 3 other types of relief, and denied relief to 116. Converted to percentage terms, Burke denied 87.9 percent and granted 12.1 percent of asylum cases (including forms of relief other than asylum).

Figure 1 provides a comparison of Judge Burke's denial rate each fiscal year over this recent period. (Rates for years with less than 25 decisions are not shown.)

Nationwide Comparisons

Compared to Judge Burke's denial rate of 87.9 percent, Immigration Court judges across the country denied 58.9 percent of asylum claims during this same period. Judges at the Cleveland Immigration Court where Judge Burke decided these cases denied asylum 75.3 percent of the time. See Figure 2.

Judge Burke's asylum grant and denial rates are compared with other judges serving on the same court in this table. Note that when an Immigration Judge serves on more than one court during the same period, separate Immigration Judge reports are created for any Court in which the judge rendered at least 100 asylum decisions.

Why Do Denial Rates Vary Among Judges?

Although denial rates are shaped by each Judge's judicial philosophy, denial rates are also shaped by other factors, such as the types of cases on the Judge's docket, the detained status of immigrant respondents, current immigration policies, and other factors beyond an individual Judge's control. For example, TRAC has previously found that legal representation and the nationality of the asylum seeker are just two factors that appear to impact asylum decision outcomes.

The composition of cases may differ significantly between Immigration Courts in the country. Within a single Court when cases are randomly assigned to judges sitting on that Court, each Judge should have roughly a similar composition of cases given a sufficient number of asylum cases. Then variations in asylum decisions among Judges on the same Immigration Court would appear to reflect, at least in part, the judicial philosophy that the Judge brings to the bench. However, if judges within a Court are assigned to specialized dockets or hearing locations, then case compositions are likely to continue to differ and can contribute to differences in asylum denial rates.

Representation

When asylum seekers are not represented by an attorney, almost all of them (77%) are denied asylum. In contrast, a significantly higher proportion of represented asylum seekers are successful. In the case of Judge Burke, 15.9% were not represented by an attorney. See Figure 3. For the nation as a whole, about 17.1% of asylum seekers are not represented.

Nationality

Asylum seekers are a diverse group. Over one hundred different nationalities had at least one hundred individuals claiming asylum decided during this period. As might be expected, immigration courts located in different parts of the country tend to have proportionately larger shares from some countries than from others. And, given the required legal grounds for a successful asylum claim, asylum seekers from some nations tend to be more successful than others.

The largest group of asylum seekers appearing before Judge Burke came from Colombia. Individuals from this country made up 12.9% of his caseload. Other nationalities in descending order of frequency appearing before Judge Burke were: Brazil (12.1%), Nicaragua (9.8%), Honduras (8.3%), Venezuela (6.8%). See Figure 4.

In the nation as a whole during this same period, major nationalities of asylum seekers, in descending order of frequency, were Honduras (11.2%), Guatemala (11.2%), El Salvador (10.9%), Mexico (8.2%), China (5.2%), Venezuela (5.2%), India (5.1%), Ecuador (4.5%), Nicaragua (4.4%), Colombia (4.4%), Brazil (3.1%), Russia (3.1%), Cuba (2.8%).