AsylumCompass
Saved
English

From FY2021 to FY2025, 185 of 416 asylum grant-or-denial records under judge code YG1 at San Antonio were grants (44.47%) and 231 were denials (55.53%). In the same years, the court recorded 33.89% and the national figure was 37.33%. EOIR data through 2026-08-31; past records do not predict an individual case.

Recorded grant share · San Antonio · SNA

Grants 185 · Denials 231 · N 416
95% interval: 39.77%–49.28%

Judge code YG1
44.47%N 416
San Antonio
33.89%N 5,028
United States · all courts
37.33%N 367,995

Among comparable judge codes at this court

13 judge codes at this court have 100 or more grant-or-denial records in FY2021–FY2025. Their recorded grant shares range from 16.90% to 59.09%; the median is 34.61%.
FY2026 so far
11.97%117 records through 2026-08-31 · court: 7.82%
Record coverage
3 courts with recordsFY2009–FY2026 · 16 court-years · Courts are not pooled
Hearing dates on calendar
7,652 master · 1,290 individualSan Antonio · proceedings with hearing dates, 2026-09–2029-08Hearing schedule
Data through
2026-08-31EOIR records · official listing: San Antonio, 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 San Antonio

0%25%50%75%100%FY2017FY2018FY2019FY2020FY2021FY2022FY2023FY2024FY2025FY202625.51%35.97%33.33%20.00%78.46%53.19%70.91%22.40%11.97%19.24%28.95%32.74%34.23%44.49%52.34%43.44%34.31%19.22%7.82%37.13%46.12%47.28%43.52%23.13%
  • Judge code YG1
  • San Antonio
  • 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
San Antonio · SNAExplore this court's full context
FY2026Partial year11.97%117141037.26%–19.09%
FY202522.40%1924314917.07%–28.80%
FY202470.91%Small sample55391657.86%–81.23%
FY202353.19%Small sample94504443.18%–62.95%
FY202278.46%Small sample65511467.03%–86.71%
FY202120.00%Small sample10285.67%–50.98%
FY202033.33%Small sample45153021.36%–47.93%
FY201935.97%139508928.47%–44.23%
FY201825.51%Small sample98257317.92%–34.95%
FY20160.00%Small sample1010.00%–79.35%
FY20100.00%Small sample1010.00%–79.35%
FY20090.00%Small sample1010.00%–79.35%
Laredo · LROExplore this court's full context
FY20220.00%Small sample1010.00%–79.35%
FY202158.33%Small sample24141038.83%–75.53%
FY202032.53%Small sample83275623.42%–43.19%
Otay Mesa · OTMExplore this court's full context
FY201816.67%Small sample6153.01%–56.35%

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
San Antonio
Venezuela57.80%10954.20% · N 98712 / 4416 / 2122 / 2713 / 150 / 2
Honduras18.18%Small sample6616.26% · N 7380 / 342 / 66 / 184 / 70 / 1
Mexico5.13%Small sample398.21% · N 2681 / 22—0 / 111 / 50 / 1
Cuba32.35%Small sample3424.64% · N 6253 / 216 / 70 / 42 / 2—
El Salvador45.83%Small sample2423.70% · N 2701 / 81 / 26 / 83 / 40 / 2
Nepal69.57%Small sample2360.20% · N 2997 / 122 / 44 / 43 / 3—
Guatemala7.14%Small sample1417.17% · N 1980 / 80 / 11 / 40 / 1—
Nicaragua61.54%Small sample1330.20% · N 4571 / 41 / 22 / 24 / 5—
Russia100.00%Small sample1077.14% · N 35—4 / 4—6 / 6—
Iraq87.50%Small sample892.86% · N 143 / 44 / 4———
Afghanistan85.71%Small sample768.29% · N 414 / 51 / 1—1 / 1—
Cameroon100.00%Small sample780.95% · N 841 / 11 / 12 / 22 / 21 / 1
Colombia16.67%Small sample69.90% · N 3130 / 31 / 10 / 2——
Democratic Republic Of Congo83.33%Small sample674.19% · N 310 / 1—4 / 41 / 1—
Brazil100.00%Small sample563.64% · N 11———5 / 5—
Libya100.00%Small sample5100.00% · N 5———5 / 5—
India50.00%Small sample424.39% · N 411 / 2—0 / 11 / 1—
Pakistan100.00%Small sample473.91% · N 234 / 4————
Burundi66.67%Small sample375.00% · N 40 / 1—2 / 2——
Peru0.00%Small sample312.28% · N 570 / 3————
Bangladesh50.00%Small sample244.44% · N 9——1 / 1—0 / 1
Burkina Faso50.00%Small sample275.00% · N 12——0 / 1—1 / 1
Ethiopia50.00%Small sample293.33% · N 151 / 1—0 / 1——
Guinea0.00%Small sample257.14% · N 210 / 2————
Haiti0.00%Small sample225.00% · N 8——0 / 2——
Zambia0.00%Small sample233.33% · N 30 / 10 / 1———
Angola0.00%Small sample155.17% · N 290 / 1————
Congo0.00%Small sample165.52% · N 290 / 1————
Ecuador0.00%Small sample111.11% · N 81———0 / 1—
Eritrea100.00%Small sample181.48% · N 271 / 1————
Georgia100.00%Small sample1100.00% · N 31 / 1————
Indonesia0.00%Small sample166.67% · N 30 / 1————
Iran0.00%Small sample145.45% · N 110 / 1————
Jordan0.00%Small sample10.00% · N 3————0 / 1
Panama0.00%Small sample140.00% · N 50 / 1————
Rwanda0.00%Small sample175.00% · N 80 / 1————
Senegal0.00%Small sample121.43% · N 14———0 / 1—
Sierra Leone100.00%Small sample1100.00% · N 31 / 1————
Turkiye100.00%Small sample140.00% · N 151 / 1————
Vietnam0.00%Small sample10.00% · N 40 / 1————
Laredo
Venezuela100.00%Small sample1052.87% · N 261————10 / 10
Cuba12.50%Small sample842.05% · N 176———0 / 11 / 7
Honduras50.00%Small sample614.12% · N 170————3 / 6
Guatemala0.00%Small sample116.67% · N 48————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.

San Antonio · SNA · 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

Individual / Merits Hearings

Months with no retained records show 0.

Retained schedule records exist outside the displayed months.

Monthly counts are available for all recorded courts below.

Laredo · LRO

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

Otay Mesa · OTM

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

Pearsall · PSD

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

San Antonio · SNA

Monthly counts

Yvonne S. Gonzalez · YG1 · San Antonio · SNA · 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
2026-099034540929
2026-107274335030
2026-114963421231
2026-123983915230
2027-013573415326
2027-023723918338
2027-033844216134
2027-042573410931
2027-052553310828
2027-063033714836
2027-072553710535
2027-083244215939
2027-092683213027
2027-102874412337
2027-112362910724
2027-122003111129
2028-01107234821
2028-02186347730
2028-03241449440
2028-04235399238
2028-05218398036
2028-06186388037
2028-07158327526
2028-082124111638
2028-0983403738
2028-10036031
2028-11331124
2028-12135031
2029-01029027
2029-02031027
2029-03039037
2029-04030023
2029-05034021
2029-0602209
2029-07035027
2029-08043039

Retained: 9,078Excluded: 4,053Unable to confirm: 5Source 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)

This judge code has an unresolved identity or name association. Its BIA row is unavailable; this is not a zero count.

Questions about these records

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

It is the recorded grant share: of 416 asylum grant-or-denial records under judge code YG1 at San Antonio in FY2021–FY2025, 185 were grants (44.47%) and 231 were denials (55.53%).

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 3 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?

EOIR’s official hearing directory, checked 2026-09-16, lists this name at San Antonio.

Under this judge code, the 2026-08 EOIR edition records hearing dates from 2026-09 to 2029-08 at San Antonio: 7,652 master and 1,290 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

30,739Associated proceeding records
10,188Proceedings linked to asylum applications
5,486Eligible dated asylum records
932Dated 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
14
Earliest recorded completion FY
FY2005
Latest recorded completion FY
FY2026 · Partial year
Why some source records are outside the dated results
  • 4,684 eligible asylum records have no completion date.
  • 5,995 eligible asylum records have no application result; 1,329 of them appear in the dated list. 4,666 records lack both a usable completion date and an application result. The missing-date and missing-result counts overlap.
  • 18 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.

10,170 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

On the checked official listing

An official listing may include supervisory or multiple-court assignments; it does not establish a sole duty station.

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.

Laredo

Retained: 0Excluded: 0Unable to confirm: 0

Raw Master and Individual records
0
Unconfirmed proportion
Not calculable
Historical schedule records
2,857
Reliable asylum association
1,424
No identifiable asylum association
1,433

Otay Mesa

Retained: 0Excluded: 0Unable to confirm: 0

Raw Master and Individual records
0
Unconfirmed proportion
Not calculable
Historical schedule records
129
Other schedule types
42
Reliable asylum association
41
No identifiable asylum association
88

Pearsall

Retained: 0Excluded: 0Unable to confirm: 0

Raw Master and Individual records
0
Unconfirmed proportion
Not calculable
Historical schedule records
134
Other schedule types
83
Reliable asylum association
5
No identifiable asylum association
129

San Antonio

Retained: 9,078Excluded: 4,053Unable to confirm: 5

Raw Master and Individual records
13,136
Unconfirmed proportion
0.04%
Recorded handling reason
4,052
Recorded proceeding completion
1
Multiple records for the same proceeding and time
2
Multiple future records without a handling reason
3
Historical schedule records
54,906
Future schedule records
13,141
Other schedule types
114
Retained records outside the displayed range
136
Reliable asylum association
29,869
No identifiable asylum association
38,175
Unlinked asylum records
3
Schedule and proceeding judge codes differ
1
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: YG1 · 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 coverageFY2005–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. “Judge Yvonne S. Gonzalez · San Antonio Immigration Court asylum records.” https://asylumcompass.com/judge/yvonne-s-gonzalez-yg1 Include the source edition and period of the figure you cite.

Continue from this judge