Judge Hable, Paul A.

Hearing cases: hearings are scheduled

Last hearing: July 30, 2026
Next hearing: August 3, 2026 · 206 scheduled in all
Last decision: July 30, 2026

Courts worked at: 9

Hearings scheduled here

LOS FRESNOS — IMMIGRATION COURT1984—2026 · 23,532 hearings
SAN ANTONIO — IMMIGRATION COURT · 0 hearings

Worked here before

CHICAGO — IMMIGRATION COURT2026—2026 · 114 hearings
JENA — IMMIGRATION COURT2019—2024 · 983 hearings
LAREDO — IMMIGRATION COURT2023—2024 · 42 hearings
CONROE — IMMIGRATION COURT2023—2024 · 15 hearings
PEARSALL — IMMIGRATION COURT2019—2024 · 27 hearings
HARLINGEN — IMMIGRATION COURT2019—2023 · 6,440 hearings
OMAHA — IMMIGRATION COURT2019—2019 · 13 hearings

The periods overlap, and that is not an error: a judge hears cases at a new court while still closing out old ones at the previous one. Each row answers "when did this judge work here", not "from when to when did they serve here".

Status is derived from the court calendar: whether the judge has hearings scheduled after the release cutoff. The EOIR release carries no personnel data, so retirement, removal, elevation to the BIA and extended absence cannot be told apart — only what the data shows is stated here. Hearings are scheduled two to three years out, so an empty calendar for a working judge is rare; for judges who went quiet in the last few months it may still be an artifact of the cutoff, which lags by about a month. The lookup table's "active" flag is not used: it disagrees with the calendar for a third of judges.

Asylum grant rate

of 515 decisions · FY1990–FY2026

95% interval: 5% — 9%

granted:: 33
denied:: 482

How this percentage is calculated

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

How this compares

This judge6% (515)
The whole court — LOS FRESNOS — IMMIGRATION COURT10% (975)
All U.S. courts33% (1,350,724)

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

U.S. fiscal year: October 1 – September 30.

FY2026 is incomplete: the release covers only 10 of its 12 months. Its point is drawn hollow and the segment leading to it is dashed.

Years with fewer than 10 decisions are not plotted (2): at that sample size the percentage is noise. They remain in the table.

Show as a table

Grant rate by fiscal year
Period	decisions	granted	95% interval
FY2026partial	33	9%	3% — 24%
FY2025	94	6%	3% — 13%
FY2024	51	4%	1% — 13%
FY2023	69	3%	1% — 10%
FY2022	64	5%	2% — 13%
FY2021	49	14%	7% — 27%
FY2020	97	7%	4% — 14%
FY2019	56	4%	1% — 12%
FY2012	1	0%	0% — 79%
FY2004	1	100%	21% — 100%

By applicant nationality

Grant rate by nationality, largest volumes first
Nationality	decisions	granted	95% interval
HONDURAS	82	1%	0% — 7%
NICARAGUA	81	6%	3% — 14%
MEXICO	67	6%	2% — 14%
EL SALVADOR	56	4%	1% — 12%
CUBA	48	4%	1% — 14%
GUATEMALA	36	3%	0% — 14%
VENEZUELA	26	15%	6% — 34%
COLOMBIA	15	7%	1% — 30%
AFGHANISTAN	13	0%	0% — 23%
CAMEROON	9	22%	6% — 55%
ECUADOR	8	13%	2% — 47%
IRAN	8	25%	7% — 59%
CHINA	7	14%	3% — 51%
DOMINICAN REPUBLIC	5	0%	0% — 43%
PERU	5	0%	0% — 43%

How long a case takes

How long it took from service of the NTA to the decision on the application, for the cases this judge has already finished.

4 mo

median

half of cases: 2—6 mo

based on 515 cases

NTA-to-decision duration by fiscal year
Decided in	Cases	median	half of cases, mo
FY2026	33	3 mo	2—6
FY2025	94	4 mo	2—6
FY2024	51	3 mo	2—5
FY2023	69	3 mo	2—4
FY2022	64	3 mo	2—3
FY2021	49	3 mo	2—15
FY2020	97	6 mo	5—7
FY2019	56	5 mo	4—5

Duration runs from the NTA date (charging document served) to the decision on the application. Median, not mean: the distribution has a long right tail. Cases decided this year may have begun a decade ago, so duration by year of decision is not a forecast for a case filed today.

The queue

Cases with no decision yet. A different figure from the duration of completed cases: quick cases leave the queue first, so the long ones accumulate among those still waiting.

208
cases waiting: 2 mo
already waited, median

Half have waited between 1 mo and 4 mo.
160 (77%) have a hearing scheduled later than the date this data was collected. The rest have no upcoming event in the release.

The queue counts proceedings with no decision in the release. The figure runs from the NTA date to the release cutoff — it is how long people have already waited, not how much longer they will. Shown separately: how many have a hearing scheduled after the cutoff. The rest have no upcoming event in the release and should not be read alongside live cases.

What became of appeals to the BIA

An immigration judge's decision can be appealed to the Board of Immigration Appeals. This is what the Board did with those appeals. A high share of reversals and remands tells a different story than a low grant rate alone.

What became of appeals to the BIA
BIA decision	Appeals
Dismiss Appeal/Affirm IJ's Decision	100
Remand	30
Summary Dismissal (G) untimely or waived appeal	16
Withdrawal of Appeal	11
Summary Dismissal (e) no brief	11
Denied	9
Summary Affirmance	8
Sustain	5
Dismissed (Voluntary Departure Granted)	1
Lacks Jurisdiction - BIA	1
Summarily Dismiss	1
Termination	1

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 provide legal advice. The data lags by roughly a month; for current case status use ACIS and Respondent Access. The source is known to have missing records, including relief applications — absent data does not mean it is absent from your case.