Maria S. Aguilera
How Judge Aguilera rules, drawn from 18 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Aguilera
Maria S. Aguilera joined the United States District Court for the District of Arizona as a magistrate judge in 2019. She sits in Tucson. Before her appointment, she served as a deputy county attorney, federal public defender, and assistant United States attorney.
Judge Aguilera's practices and standing orders
The court's website lists no individual practices or standing orders of Judge Aguilera'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 Aguilera decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Cautions
In a commercial contract dispute, Aguilera recommended denying late amendment of an answer after finding that the defendant had given no fair notice of its setoff and untimeliness defenses.
“PSE LLC did not provide fair notice of its setoff and untimeliness defenses”
In a lease dispute, Aguilera recommended denying judgment on the pleadings because a factual dispute remained over the parties’ contractual intent.
“Judgment on the pleadings is therefore inappropriate.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“IT IS ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 108) is accepted and adopted in full. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 87) is granted. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment in favor of Defendant and close this case.”
“The Report and Recommendation (Doc. 59) is adopted. Defendants Ethicon, Inc. and Johnson & Johnson’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Doc. 26) is granted in part and denied in part. ... To the extent Plaintiffs have alleged a claim of negligent design, summary judgment is denied.”
“Defendant Judge Fell’s Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED. (Doc. 13.) Defendant Judge Fell is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. ... Defendant Voll is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Plaintiff may file an Amended Complaint as to his claims against Defendant Voll only no later than April 16, 2025.”
“IT IS ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 26) is ADOPTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 15) is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Failure-to-Accommodate Claim is DISMISSED.”
“Magistrate Judge Aguilera's Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED. (Doc. 42.) Defendant Herbert Coleman Jr.'s Motion to Dismiss is DENIED. (Doc. 33.)”
“IT IS ORDERED Magistrate Judge Maria S. Aguilera’s Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED. ... the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security is VACATED and REMANDED to the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration for the calculation and award of benefits.”
“IT IS ORDERED ADOPTING IN FULL Magistrate Judge Aguilera's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 33); IT IS FURTHER ORDERED the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security is REVERSED and the case is REMANDED for further proceedings consistent with this Order and Judge Aguilera's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 33).”
“Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED: 1. The Report and Recommendation (Doc. 107) is ADOPTED; 2. Young's Amended Petition under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254 for a Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody (Doc. 93) is DENIED and DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“IT IS ORDERED the Report & Recommendation (Doc. 62) is ADOPTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED the Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 19) is DENIED.”
“Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows: (1) Magistrate Judge Aguilera's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 116) is accepted and adopted. (2) Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment (Doc. 92) is denied.”
“Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows: (1) United States Magistrate Judge Aguilera's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 115) is accepted and adopted. (2) Plaintiff's objections are rejected. (3) Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 90) is granted in part and denied in part.”
“IT IS ORDERED that: 1. Magistrate Judge Aguilera's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 19) is ADOPTED. 2. Respondent's Motion to Dismiss Amended Petition (Doc. 12) is GRANTED. 3. Petitioner's First Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 6) is DENIED.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
The sampled Tucson assignments are dominated by criminal-duty matters involving illegal reentry and other border offenses, alongside Social Security appeals and prisoner or other civil cases. Because the current-duty cases are from 2026, they do not support duration figures; the duration information below comes from older referred cases.
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 Aguilera: 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 Aguilera with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Aguilera, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Aguilera's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace