Skip to content
Asylum BeaconU.S. immigration court data

San Pedro Immigration Court

San Pedro, CA

EOIR data through August 31, 2026 · built September 11, 2026 · What these dates mean

0%

Asylum grant rate

of 1 decisions · FY2003–FY2009

95% interval: 0% — 79%

granted:
0
denied:
1

Small sample

With only 1 decisions this percentage is an estimate with a wide spread, not a characteristic of the judge. The interval shows how wide.

How this percentage is calculated

Grant rate = granted / (granted + denied). Administrative closures, withdrawals, abandonment and "not adjudicated" are excluded from the denominator. What is counted is a decision per proceeding, not per application: asylum, withholding and CAT protection are almost always asked for together, so withholding and CAT grants are counted separately from asylum. The U.S. fiscal year runs October 1 – September 30.

How this compares

  • San Pedro Immigration Court0% (1)
  • All U.S. courts33% (1,369,763)

This comparison does not adjust for which cases a judge was given: judges see different nationalities, different shares of detained respondents, and different rates of legal representation. A difference in percentages does not by itself mean identical cases were treated differently.

Trend by fiscal year

Not enough yearly data to chart

By applicant nationality

Grant rate by nationality, largest volumes first
Nationalitydecisionsgranted95% interval
Honduras10%0% — 79%

Timing and waits

How long each stage of a case takes at this court. Every figure is a median: half of cases are faster, half slower. Data as of August 31, 2026; these are past and current cases, not a forecast for yours.

this courtnationwide

How long decided cases took

from the NTA to the decision

too few to tell
fewer than 30 cases

Too few cases with a known NTA date for the duration to mean anything.

Cases decided this year may have begun a decade ago, so this is not a forecast for a case filed today.

The NTA is the charging document; serving it opens the case in court. The figure is a median, not a mean: durations have a long tail, and a few decade-long cases would pull a mean far from the typical case.

How long undecided cases have already waited

from the NTA to the data cutoff

too few to tell
nationwide 34 mo
proceedings in the queue: 0

No undecided proceedings in this release.

The queue counts proceedings with no decision yet in the release. It is how long people have already waited, not how much longer they will.

Shown separately is the share with a hearing scheduled after the cutoff: the rest have no future event in the release at all, and cannot be read as live alongside these.

When the nearest hearing is set

from the data cutoff to the nearest hearing

too few to tell
nationwide 7 mo
cases with a date set: 0

No hearings scheduled after this date in the release.

Hearings set shortly after the cutoff have already happened by the time you read this. The count here is of cases, while the queue above counts proceedings, so the two figures need not agree. The horizon describes the docket, not the speed of the court.

Rows attached to cases already decided are excluded — the release keeps them, and with them the count of those waiting would be a tenth higher. The judge and court come from the schedule row itself: whoever will hold the hearing, not whoever the proceeding is assigned to. Cases where the person is detained have a hearing within days, the rest within months, and courts at detention centres consist almost entirely of the former. The median is only given from fifty cases up: below that it rests on two or three rows.

From a master calendar hearing to the individual hearing

from a master calendar hearing to the one set after it

too few to tell
nationwide 11 mo
fewer than 50 hearings

The release has no master calendar hearings over the last year.

The figures cover master calendar hearings over the last twelve months of the release and what was set after each of them. The shares describe hearings, not cases: one case passes through several master hearings in a year and is counted as many times.

The next hearing has usually not happened yet: its date can be moved. A separate line shows after how many hearings nothing is scheduled — either the proceeding is over or the calendar has not been filled in, and towards the end of the window the second share grows simply because the calendar has not caught up. Cases where the person is detained move more than twenty times faster than the rest, and courts at detention centres consist almost entirely of them. A slot counts the cases of one judge at one time: you go to your judge's courtroom, not to the building. No hearing dates are shown here in any form. The median is only given from fifty hearings up.

Wait for a first hearing after moving here

from arrival here to the first hearing

too few to tell
nationwide 9 mo
fewer than 100 moves

The release has no cases that moved here on a change of venue.

The figures describe those who have already moved; they promise nothing about any one case.

The figures cover cases that arrived at this court on a change of venue. Only moves made at least a year before the release cutoff are included: those who arrived later may not have been given a hearing date yet, and their zero would describe the release date rather than the court. Some hearings are scheduled rather than held, and scheduled ones move; shown separately is how many arrivals have no hearing set at all. The gap between two ordinary hearings at the same court is measured between hearings, and what compares with it is the figure also counted from a hearing at the former court, not from the date of arrival. Cases where the person is detained move faster than the rest, and courts at detention centres consist almost entirely of them. The median is only given from a hundred moves up.

In absentia decisions

Removal cases at this court completed without the respondent in the room. This is not about the court's strictness: attendance depends on whether the person is detained, whether notice reached them and whether they have counsel.

0% of proceedings ended in absentia — 0 of 4.

  • The whole court0% (4)
  • All U.S. courts19% (11,588,297)

The denominator is every completed removal proceeding (RMV): other proceeding types almost never end in absentia. The headline share covers the whole history, while the table shows the latest fiscal years by the proceeding's completion date. An in absentia order can be challenged by a motion to reopen.

Full statisticsMotions, adjournment reasons, appeals to the BIA, three-member panels and second rounds after a remand.

Motions

What this court does with requests made along the way. Motions decided by this court's judges are counted.

No decided motions in this release

Adjournment reasons

Why hearings at this court do not go ahead, and how far that pushes cases.

No hearings with an adjournment reason in this release

What became of appeals to the BIA

Appeals against decisions by this court's judges. The key to the table is who filed: the same outcome means opposite things when the respondent appeals and when the government does.

BIA appeal outcomes by filer
Filed byAppealsDecision stoodSent backOverturnedClosed without merits
Respondent3100%0%0%0%
nationally712,35574%13%1%11%

There are also appeals of other kinds, not counted in this table: MTR BIA — 3, Circuit Court Remand — 2.

Only appeals on the merits (Case Appeal) are counted: motions to the Board itself and bond appeals are different events. The same outcome means opposite things depending on the filer, which is why the bucket is called "the judge's decision stood", not "X won".

How this is counted

A dismissed appeal means the removal order stood when the respondent appealed, and that the asylum grant stood when the government did; the two do not go into one percentage. Recent years are undercounted: an appeal takes months or years to resolve, so outcomes are counted by the date of the Board's decision while the appealed share is counted by the date of the judge's decision.

How to cite this page

Figures on this page belong to one monthly release and are replaced whole by the next. The release label and the data cutoff are part of the citation for that reason: without them the number cannot be checked later.

Asylum Beacon. San Pedro Immigration Court. EOIR Case Data, U.S. DOJ FOIA Library, release 2026-08, data through 2026-08-31. https://asylumbeacon.com/en/court/SPD

Methodology in full

Data comes from the monthly EOIR Case Data release (U.S. DOJ FOIA Library). This service is not affiliated with the U.S. government and does not give legal advice. The release lags by roughly a month, so check ACIS or Respondent Access for your current case status. The source has known gaps, including among relief applications: if something is missing here, that does not mean it is missing from your case.