D. Thomas Ferraro
How Judge Ferraro rules, drawn from 6 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Ferraro
D. Thomas Ferraro serves on recall as a United States Magistrate Judge for the District of Arizona in Tucson. He first joined the bench in December 2008 and earned degrees from Northern Arizona University and California Western School of Law.
Judge Ferraro's practices and standing orders
The court's website lists no individual practices or standing orders of Judge Ferraro'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 8, 2026).
How Judge Ferraro decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Procedural preferences
On a partial motion to dismiss an employment-discrimination complaint he recommends dismissing deficient Title VII and Section 1981 retaliation counts with leave to amend.
“IT IS ORDERED the R&R (Doc. 18) is ADOPTED and Defendant's Partial Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 13) is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED Counts Two, Three, and Four of Plaintiff's Complaint (Doc. 1) are DISMISSED with leave to amend.”
Recommends dismissal of a habeas petition where the petitioner fails to keep a current address on file after repeated warnings.
“IT IS ORDERED the R&R is ADOPTED (Doc. 19) and Petitioner Randy L. Rohrbaugh's Petition for Habeas Corpus Pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 2241is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
Cautions
Applies the presumption against federal jurisdiction rigorously, recommending remand under the federal-officer removal statute (28 U.S.C. 1442) where the removing party fails the causal-nexus and colorable-federal-defense test; 'deemed federal employee' status is not enough.
“United States Magistrate Judge Ferraro's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 39) is ACCEPTED AND ADOPTED; (2) Plaintiff's Motion to Remand (Doc. 17) is GRANTED; (3) The United States' Motion to Remand (Doc. 24) is GRANTED;”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“IT IS ORDERED the R&R (Doc. 18) is ADOPTED and Defendant's Partial Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 13) is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED Counts Two, Three, and Four of Plaintiff's Complaint (Doc. 1) are DISMISSED with leave to amend.”
“On June 7, 2012, Magistrate Judge D. Thomas Ferraro filed a R&R recommending that Defendant LaRuffa's motions to dismiss be denied. On July 2, 2012, this Court adopted the recommendation of Magistrate Judge Ferraro and referred this matter back to Judge Ferraro for all pretrial proceedings and report and recommendation.”
“United States Magistrate Judge Ferraro's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 39) is ACCEPTED AND ADOPTED; (2) Plaintiff's Motion to Remand (Doc. 17) is GRANTED; (3) The United States' Motion to Remand (Doc. 24) is GRANTED;”
“IT IS ORDERED the R&R is ADOPTED (Doc. 19) and Petitioner Randy L. Rohrbaugh's Petition for Habeas Corpus Pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 2241is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“IT IS ORDERED the R&R is ADOPTED (Doc. 17) and Robert Edward Johnson Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2254 is DENIED and DISMISSED (Doc. 1).”
“For the foregoing reasons, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that the District Court issue an order striking Smith Interface’s indirect infringement contentions. It is further RECOMMENDED that Apple’s motion be granted without leave to amend as Smith Interface has not demonstrated ‘good cause’ as to why its infringement contentions should be amended for a third time.”
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 | 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 Arizona, not for Judge Ferraro: 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 | 2,485 | 6 months |
| Closed with no court action | 135 | 2.2 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 2,001 | 5.2 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 335 | 15.2 months |
| Closed during trial | 14 | 32.4 months |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 2,485 | 6 months |
| Sep 2024 | 2,278 | 6.7 months |
| Sep 2023 | 2,126 | 8.3 months |
| Sep 2022 | 2,181 | 9.4 months |
| Sep 2021 | 3,857 | 20.9 months |
| Sep 2020 | 8,128 | 12.2 months |
| Sep 2019 | 2,842 | 9.6 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 Ferraro with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Ferraro, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Ferraro's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace