Scott M. Matheson, Jr.
How Judge Matheson rules, drawn from 227 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Matheson
Scott Milne Matheson, Jr. is a judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. Appointed by President Barack Obama, Judge Matheson received a commission on December 27, 2010.
Judge Matheson's practices and standing orders
The court's website lists no individual practices or standing orders of Judge Matheson's own (checked October 11, 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 11, 2026).
How Judge Matheson decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In Shipp’s resentencing appeal, Matheson read the prior mandate in light of its opinion and held that it barred the escape conviction as a predicate but did not prevent the district court from using a different predicate.
“The district court may consider the opinion to determine the intent of the mandate.”
In Knopf v. Williams, he found that the plaintiff had not shown clearly established law protecting the internal email at issue in the retaliation claim.
“Mr. Knopf has failed to show a violation of clearly established federal law on an essential element of his claim.”
Procedural preferences
In Henderson v. Glanz, Matheson dismissed two officers’ interlocutory appeals because they asked the court to resolve factual disputes rather than discrete legal questions, while reaching a third officer’s appeal.
“We dismiss the appeals of DO Johnson and Sheriff Glanz for lack of jurisdiction because they ask us to resolve issues of fact and do not turn on discrete questions of law.”
In Hagos v. Raemisch, Matheson held that consecutive state sentences formed a continuous stream of custody, allowing Hagos to challenge a conviction even while later sentences remained.
“Mr. Hagos’s kidnapping and murder convictions were imposed consecutively and form a continuous stream. Under Peyton and Garlotte, Mr. Hagos is therefore in custody to seek habeas relief for any of the sentences forming that continuous stream.”
In Mostafa v. Blanche, Matheson held that a counseled litigant waived a challenge to deposition transcript costs by failing to object to the magistrate judge’s ruling in district court.
“Mr. Mostafa did not object in district court to the magistrate judge’s ruling that the Administrative Order setting maximum rates applied only to in-court reporters, not privately hired deposition reporters. He has therefore waived the issue.”
In Blum v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Matheson held that the taxpayers had to challenge a partnership-level consent in the partnership proceeding; their failure to do so waived that issue in their later individual appeal.
“We need not address the validity of the Individual Consents because we hold the Blums cannot challenge the first TMP Consent in this partner-level proceeding.”
Cautions
In Margheim’s malicious-prosecution appeal, he held that dismissal of the underlying drug case after suppression of evidence did not indicate innocence, so the plaintiff could not establish favorable termination and the prosecutor was entitled to qualified immunity.
“Under these circumstances, the dismissal of the Drug Case was not a favorable termination.”
In Bear Creek’s bankruptcy appeal, he held that after appointment of a Chapter 7 trustee, former management and counsel lacked authority to appeal the conversion order on the debtor’s behalf.
“Once the bankruptcy court converted the case to Chapter 7 and appointed Mr. Royal as trustee, only he could appeal on the Debtor’s behalf.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Accordingly, we AFFIRM the judgment of the district court.”
“For the foregoing reasons, we affirm the district court’s denial of Mr. Whitley’s motion to suppress.”
“For the foregoing reasons, we affirm the district court's denial of Mr. Garcia's motion to suppress.”
“We conclude 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(2)(A) does not violate equal protection under the Fifth Amendment and affirm Mr. Titley's sentence as based on the requisite three qualifying offenses under the ACCA.”
“Mr. Gilmore moved to suppress evidence of the firearm ... Exercising jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, we affirm.”
“We deny the PFR. Mr. Rodas-Orellana has failed to establish he is a member of a particular social group or that he was persecuted on account of any such membership. ... We also deny Mr. Rodas-Orellana's challenge to the BIA's denial of his motion to reconsider.”
“Exercising jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and 18 U.S.C. § 3742(a), we affirm the district court.”
“He then entered a conditional guilty plea, reserving the right to appeal the denial of his motion to suppress. Mr. Padilla-Esparza now appeals. Exercising jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, we affirm.”
“We reverse the district court's order dismissing Mr. Hagos's § 2254 petition ... We reverse and remand for consideration of Mr. Hagos's § 2254 petition.”
“We dismiss the appeals of DO Johnson and Sheriff Glanz for lack of jurisdiction because they ask us to resolve issues of fact and do not turn on discrete questions of law.”
“We have jurisdiction over DO Thomas's appeal and determine he is entitled to qualified immunity because Ms. Henderson could not show he violated a clearly established constitutional right.”
“After carefully examining the record, we agree. Exercising jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, we grant counsel's motion to withdraw and dismiss this appeal.”
Draft for Judge Matheson with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Matheson, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Matheson's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace