Bruce Gordon MacDonald
How Judge MacDonald rules, drawn from 3 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Judge MacDonald no longer sits on this court. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled here.
About Judge MacDonald
Bruce Gordon MacDonald served as a United States magistrate judge in the District of Arizona from May 2012 until his retirement in May 2026. He sat in Tucson and earned both his undergraduate and law degrees from the University of Arizona.
How Judge MacDonald decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Procedural preferences
On referred dispositive matters his R&R is not rubber-stamped: in a Sec.1983 ADCS child-removal case the district judge adopted his Report in part and rejected it in part, resolving the motion to dismiss as granted in part / denied in part (some claims dismissed with prejudice, others allowed to proceed).
“The Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as described in this Order. ... AZDCS Defendants' Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Macdonald's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 39) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED as the findings of fact and conclusions of law by this Court. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner's Motion for Default Judgment (Doc. 33) is DENIED.”
“3) The Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as described in this Order. (Doc. 60.) 4) AZDCS Defendants' Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as described in this Order. (Doc. 44.) 5) Defendant Kot must ANSWER Claims One and Three. 6) Claims One and Three against Defendants Nido and Jimenez are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“IT IS ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Macdonald's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 202) is accepted and adopted in full, and Defendant's Objection (Doc. 204) is overruled. This Court finds that Defendant violated Special Condition No. 2 of his supervised release.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
- MacDonald served in the Tucson Division from May 2012 through May 2026.
- His work included criminal-duty proceedings, particularly border and immigration matters, and civil cases handled with the parties' consent under 28 U.S.C. 636(c).
- The sampled civil docket is led by Social Security disability appeals and also includes disability-accommodation, public-records, insurance, and prisoner matters.
- Many consent civil cases settled, while Social Security appeals more often produced a written affirmance or remand.
- This describes the mix of sampled matters, not an overall outcome rate.
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 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2025 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2024 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2024 | 0 | 1 |
| Sep 2023 | 0 | 1 |
| Mar 2023 | 0 | 1 |
| Sep 2022 | 0 | 1 |
| Mar 2022 | 0 | 1 |
| 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.
A historical record
Judge MacDonald no longer sits on this court. This profile stays available as a record of how they ruled here. If you're preparing for a matter, start from the court's current bench.