Michael T. Liburdi
How Judge Liburdi rules, drawn from 12 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
How Judge Liburdi decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
On removal, applies the Grable/Gunn framework and remands where the state-law claim does not necessarily raise a substantial, disputed federal issue.
“IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED: (1) The State of Arizona’s motion to remand (Doc. 12) is GRANTED. The Clerk of Court is directed to REMAND this matter to the Arizona Superior Court in Maricopa County.”
In the reviewed wage case, he treated the economic realities as controlling over the parties' lease label and denied both sides summary judgment where half of the employment-status factors remained genuinely disputed.
“There remains a genuine issue of material fact on three factors, and the other three weight in favor of an employment relationship.”
In the reviewed prisoner excessive-force case, he required the summary-judgment movants to identify the record shortfall rather than merely assert that the self-represented plaintiff lacked evidence; the verified complaint itself could function as evidence.
“it is not sufficient simply to assert that the plaintiff has no evidence—Defendants must show it.”
Procedural preferences
Under the Telecommunications Act, requires a provider to show the least intrusive means through a feasibility analysis of alternative sites, upholding a permit denial supported by substantial evidence.
“IT IS ORDERED Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 28) is GRANTED.”
Treats summary judgment filed before a responsive pleading and discovery as premature when the record cannot yet show whether a genuine factual dispute exists.
“Without discovery or a responsive pleading, the Court cannot yet determine whether there is a genuine issue of material fact, so the Court must deny the motions for summary judgment (Docs. 24, 28, 32) as premature.”
Requires substantial evidence before appointing a guardian ad litem and applies the exceptional-circumstances standard to requests for counsel in civil cases.
“The record does not supply enough for the Court to conclude that Ms. Berent is incompetent, so the Court will not appoint a guardian ad litem.”
For material attached to a dispositive motion, he requires specific compelling reasons that overcome public access; a settlement confidentiality clause by itself did not justify blanket sealing.
“Liberty has not met its burden to show that compelling reasons justify sealing its Motion for Summary Judgment and the attached Settlement Agreement.”
Cautions
Dismisses a securities-fraud complaint that is an impermissible 'puzzle pleading' failing to allege which statements were false and why or to plead a strong inference of scienter under the PSLRA.
“IT IS ORDERED granting Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 50) and Underwriters’ Joinder (Doc. 52). For the reasons stated above, all Defendants, including Garcia Senior, are dismissed, without prejudice.”
In the reviewed disability-rights case, he denied reconsideration where an intervening decision addressed a different question and the remaining arguments repeated earlier positions or failed to show manifest error.
“With there being no basis for reconsideration, the Court will deny Plaintiffs’ motion (Doc. 79).”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“IT IS ORDERED granting Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 50) and Underwriters’ Joinder (Doc. 52). For the reasons stated above, all Defendants, including Garcia Senior, are dismissed, without prejudice.”
“IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 15) is denied.”
“IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED: (1) The State of Arizona’s motion to remand (Doc. 12) is GRANTED. The Clerk of Court is directed to REMAND this matter to the Arizona Superior Court in Maricopa County.”
“IT IS ORDERED Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 28) is GRANTED.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 30) is DENIED.”
“IT IS ORDERED granting ASmoke's Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction (Part of Doc. 13).”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying as moot Dansons' Renewed Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Doc. 26).”
“IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Retransfer Venue (Doc. 32) is DENIED.”
“Without discovery or a responsive pleading, the Court cannot yet determine whether there is a genuine issue of material fact, so the Court must deny the motions for summary judgment (Docs. 24, 28, 32) as premature.”
“The Court therefore does not have the authority to enter default at this time. And because seeking a default judgment is a two-step process that first requires an entry of default, the Court cannot enter a default judgment. The Court denies Mr. Kelly’s motion for entry of default (Doc. 37) and motion for default judgment (Doc. 39).”
“IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Service by U.S. Marshals (Doc. 40) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motions to Appoint Guardian Ad Litem or Pro Bono Counsel (Docs. 2, 24) are DENIED.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Reassign Case as Related Case (Doc. 6) is DENIED.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Service by U.S. Marshals (Doc. 6) is DENIED.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Order Requiring Defendants to Post Bond to Secure Judgment (Doc. 6) is DENIED.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Emergency Motion for Writ of Mandamus (Doc. 22) is DENIED.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Reconsideration (Doc. 23) is DENIED.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Seal (Doc. 28) is DENIED.”
“Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 74) is granted as to Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment claims against Defendants Villanueva and Lopez, and the Motion is denied without prejudice as to Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment claim against Defendant Tribolet.”
“Plaintiff’s Motion for Temporary Restraining Order (Doc. 112) is denied.”
“Defendants’ Motion to Extend Deadline to Respond (Doc. 114) is denied as moot.”
“IT IS ORDERED granting Defendant Jason McClelland’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 132).”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED granting Defendant Jeffrey Van Winkle’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 134).”
“IT IS ORDERED Plaintiffs’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on Liability (Doc. 222) is DENIED.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED Plaintiffs’ Motion to Strike (Doc. 228) is DENIED.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED Defendants’ Revised Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 230) is DENIED.”
“IT IS FINALLY ORDERED Defendants’ Motion to Strike (Doc. 232) is DENIED.”
“IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED denying Plaintiffs’ Motion for Reconsideration of Order on Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 79).”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying Plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave to File a Reply to Defendant’s Response to Motion for Reconsideration (Doc. 83).”
“IT IS ORDERED that Liberty’s Motion for Leave to File Under Seal (Doc. 43) is denied without prejudice.”
Draft for Judge Liburdi with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Liburdi, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Liburdi's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace