Matthew McCrary Scoble
How Judge Scoble rules, drawn from 11 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Scoble
Matthew M. Scoble has served as a United States Magistrate Judge for the District of Alaska since September 2018. Before his appointment, he worked as an assistant federal defender in California and Alaska. He served as the district's chief magistrate judge from 2021 to 2025.
Judge Scoble's practices and standing orders
The court's website lists no individual practices or standing orders of Judge Scoble's own (checked October 9, 2026), so the court's local rules and general orders are the place to look (court page ↗).
Standing orders for every case in this court
Orders the court applies to all of its cases, whichever judge has them, as published on the court's website (checked October 9, 2026).
- Procedure for Access and Management of Sealed, Restricted and Ex Parte Documents (Second Amended) ↗
- Procedures for the Filing, Service, and Management of Highly Sensitive Documents ↗
- Appointment of Counsel and Procedures for Compassionate Release Motions ↗
- Electronic Communication Devices in the Courtroom ↗
How Judge Scoble decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In Oil Spill Response Vessels, LLC v. City of Kodiak, Scoble considered public records concerning the company's dissolution and concluded that the dissolved LLC lacked capacity to sue.
“Because OSRV was dissolved, it does not have capacity to sue. Because it does not have capacity to sue, it cannot participate in a 'Case' or 'Controvers[y].'”
In United States v. Carlton, Scoble recommended suppressing evidence from a phone extraction because the warrant affidavit recklessly omitted facts that undermined probable cause; District Judge Gleason later adopted his recommendation in full.
“the good faith exception cannot save the warrant here.”
Procedural preferences
In United States v. Schmidlkofer, Scoble recommended denying suppression after finding reasonable suspicion for a vehicle stop. He treated precedent involving different facts as persuasive because the officers' reliance on training, experience, and common sense supported the same conclusion.
“Although the circumstances ... are facially different from the current scenario ... the basic application of how the officers relied on their training, experience, common sense, and intuition, result in the same finding of reasonable suspicion as the cases referenced.”
In United States v. Lebron, Scoble denied an evidentiary hearing because the defense had not identified a factual dispute requiring one; he explained that a hearing would not substitute for investigation or discovery.
“the purpose of an evidentiary hearing is to resolve factual disputes, not to substitute for investigation or the discovery process.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“this Court recommends the Motion to Suppress [Doc. 104] be GRANTED.”
“Lebron's Motion to Suppress should be GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B).”
“Lebron's motion for an evidentiary hearing is DENIED.”
“the Motion to Take Judicial Notice, Dkt. 24 ... should be GRANTED.”
“all Plaintiff Oil Spill Response Vessels, LLC's claims against all Defendants be DISMISSED FOR LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1).”
“all Plaintiff Darren K. Byler's claims against all Defendants be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE for failure to state a claim under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6).”
“Dillard's Petition should be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B).”
“the Petition at Docket 1 be DISMISSED without prejudice”
“and Recommendation with the recommendation that the case be dismissed and all pending motions be denied as moot.”
Scoble recommended sua sponte dismissal of an admiralty in rem complaint for failure to prosecute after the plaintiff repeatedly missed court-ordered status-report deadlines. The recommendation addressed the plaintiff's noncompliance rather than a party motion.
“the Motions to Dismiss at Dockets 170, 172, 174, and 175 are DENIED.”
“the Motion to Suppress Evidence at Docket 17 is DENIED IN PART and GRANTED IN PART.”
“the Motion to Suppress at Docket 208 is DENIED.”
“the Motions to Dismiss at Dockets 214 and 266 are DENIED.”
“the Motion to Suppress at Docket 24 is DENIED.”
“Judge Scoble issued his Report and Recommendation, in which he recommended that the motion be granted.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median motion-to-ruling time: 10 days (N = 4).
Scoble's consent civil caseload is weighted toward Social Security disability appeals and also includes prisoner civil-rights, employment, admiralty, vessel, and aviation personal-injury matters. His criminal magistrate duties include initial appearances, detention hearings, search warrants, and referred pretrial motions.
Pending matters in the official report
Reported by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts under the Civil Justice Reform Act, as of March 31, 2026.
| Motions pending more than six months | 0 |
| Bench trials submitted more than six months | 0 |
| Bankruptcy appeals pending more than six months | 0 |
| Social Security appeals pending more than six months | 0 |
| Civil cases pending more than three years | 0 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2025 | 1 | 0 |
| Mar 2025 | 0 | 1 |
| Sep 2024 | 1 | 2 |
| Mar 2024 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2023 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2023 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2022 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2022 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2021 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2021 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2020 | 0 | 0 |
A snapshot on that date: matters listed may since have been decided or reassigned. A motion referred to a magistrate judge is counted for both judges. Motions in multidistrict litigation, section 2255 cases and Social Security appeals are not counted, and a very large three-year count is generally a multidistrict docket. Source: Appendix A of the report (PDF); about the report.
How long civil cases take in this court
For the whole of United States District Court for the District of Alaska, not for Judge Scoble: median time from filing to disposition of the civil cases the court closed in the 12 months ending September 30, 2025, as reported by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts.
| Cases | Median time | |
|---|---|---|
| All civil cases closed | 235 | 10.1 months |
| Closed with no court action | 38 | 10.3 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 191 | 9.2 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 2 | not reported |
| Closed during trial | 4 | not reported |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 235 | 10.1 months |
| Sep 2024 | 230 | 9 months |
| Sep 2023 | 259 | 6.3 months |
| Sep 2022 | 358 | 6.4 months |
| Sep 2021 | 281 | 9.4 months |
| Sep 2020 | 263 | 8.1 months |
| Sep 2019 | 336 | 8.3 months |
The table leaves out prisoner petitions, land condemnations, deportation reviews, recovery of overpayments and enforcement of judgments, and reports no median for fewer than 10 cases. A district that closed a large multidistrict litigation in the period shows very large counts and long medians for that year. Source: Table C-5, U.S. District Courts (spreadsheet).
Draft for Judge Scoble with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Scoble, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Scoble's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace