Judges at this hearing office vary in approval rates and decision volume. Select a judge to view individual statistics.
(Judge-level statistics reflect the most recent fiscal year with available data.
Approval rates may vary over time and by case type.)
| Judge Name | Approval Rate | Compared to Office Average | Decision Count | Data Recency |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Robert Wright | 55% | Near (office avg. 56%) | 4,113 | 2020 |
| Carl E Stephan | 54% | Below (office avg. 56%) | 5,127 | 2020 |
| Mary Sparks | 62% | Above (office avg. 56%) | 2,506 | 2020 |
| Andrew Soltes | 0% | Below (office avg. 56%) | 0 | — |
| Andrew J. Soltes | 44% | Below (office avg. 56%) | 1,419 | 2025 |
| Mark Sochaczewsky | 0% | Below (office avg. 56%) | 2 | 2013 |
| Robert Ringler | 73% | Above (office avg. 56%) | 720 | 2011 |
| John J Pickett | 74% | Above (office avg. 56%) | 2,882 | 2015 |
| Arthur Patane | 55% | Near (office avg. 56%) | 5,121 | 2025 |
| David F Neumann | 48% | Below (office avg. 56%) | 1,628 | 2020 |
| Michelle S Marcus | 56% | Near (office avg. 56%) | 3,729 | 2025 |
| Gordon Mahley | 80% | Above (office avg. 56%) | 5 | 2010 |
| Brian LeCours | 44% | Below (office avg. 56%) | 2,377 | 2025 |
| Paul F Kelly | 66% | Above (office avg. 56%) | 2,698 | 2025 |
| Charlie M Johnson | 41% | Below (office avg. 56%) | 274 | 2018 |
| Thomas Grabeel | 68% | Above (office avg. 56%) | 2,754 | 2014 |
| Tammy Georgian | 0% | Below (office avg. 56%) | 1 | 2019 |
| Myriam C Fernandez Rice | 0% | Below (office avg. 56%) | 3 | 2020 |
| John G Farrell | 56% | Near (office avg. 56%) | 1,884 | 2025 |
| Terence Farrell | 63% | Above (office avg. 56%) | 2,899 | 2015 |
| Tom Duann | 0% | Below (office avg. 56%) | 1 | 2017 |
| Dale Black-Pennington | 55% | Near (office avg. 56%) | 4,813 | 2025 |
| Asad Ba-Yunus | 0% | Below (office avg. 56%) | 0 | — |
| Asad M. Ba-Yunus | 36% | Below (office avg. 56%) | 1,423 | 2025 |
These statistics provide additional context about how cases are processed at this hearing office.
They reflect system-level activity, not individual judge decision behavior, and may vary based on administrative and procedural factors.