Terrence L. O'Brien

How Judge O'Brien rules, drawn from 34 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
Position
Circuit judge
Status
Senior status
Appointed by
George W. Bush (Republican)
Commissioned
April 16, 2002
ABA rating
Well Qualified
Education
University of Wyoming (B.S., accounting, 1965); University of Wyoming College of Law (J.D., 1972)
Signed orders read
34

About Judge O'Brien

Terrence L. O'Brien is a judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. Appointed by President George W. Bush, Judge O'Brien received a commission on April 16, 2002. Judge O'Brien assumed senior status on April 30, 2013.

Judge O'Brien's practices and standing orders

The court's website lists no individual practices or standing orders of Judge O'Brien'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).

Key rules from these orders · The court's local rules ↗

How Judge O'Brien decides

Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

What persuades

In Anderson Living Trust v. Energen Resources, he interpreted the leases through their text and the ordinary meaning of their language.

“We rely on the text of the leases and the meaning commonly ascribed to the language used (the essence of the common law, which reflects the practices of the community, rather than dictates practices to the community).”

In Porter’s supervised-release appeal, he held that her plea agreement’s waiver of an appeal from the original sentence did not cover a later revocation sentence, then affirmed the revocation sentence on its merits.

“Porter would have reasonably understood at the time of her guilty plea that she was waiving only discretely expressed rights, notably the right to directly appeal from the sentence imposed in accordance with that plea”

Procedural preferences

In Alzainati v. Holder, he dismissed part of the immigration petition for lack of jurisdiction and denied the remainder.

“We dismiss the petition in part for lack of jurisdiction and deny the petition in part.”

In Communications Workers of America v. Avaya, he reversed an order compelling arbitration after examining the scope of the parties’ agreement.

“we agree with Avaya's position and reverse the district court's order compelling arbitration.”

Cautions

In United States v. Nava-Sotelo, he reversed a sentencing decision after concluding that the statutory consecutive term applied to a firearm discharge despite the district court’s finding of accident.

“We answer in the affirmative and reverse.”

In Gutierrez-Orozco v. Lynch, he held that even credible testimony could be insufficient under the immigration record as a whole.

“even credible testimony may not be ‘persuasive or sufficient in light of the record as a whole.’”

Signed rulings

A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.

United States v. Nava-Sotelo
· 2003-12-31
Appeal (appellant (United States)) Granted

“We answer in the affirmative and reverse.”

Clymore v. United States
· 2005-07-05
Appeal (appellant (Craig Clymore)) Granted

“Exercising jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, we reverse and remand.”

MacKenzie v. City & County of Denver
· 2005-07-14
Appeal (appellant (Rita MacKenzie)) Denied

“For the reasons stated below and exercising jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, we affirm.”

United States v. Resendiz-Patino
· 2005-08-26
Appeal (appellant (Gerardo Resendiz-Patino)) Denied

“Exercising jurisdiction under 18 U.S.C. § 3742(a) and 28 U.S.C. § 1291, we AFFIRM.”

Anderson v. United States Department of Labor
· 2005-09-02
Petition for review (petitioner (Adrienne Anderson)) Denied

“The Administrative Review Board (ARB) ... concluded she was not and therefore determined she lacked standing to sue under the employee protection provisions of the environmental statutes. We agree.”

Haynes v. Level 3 Communications, LLC
· 2006-08-08
Appeal (appellant (Linda Haynes)) Denied

“We exercise jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and AFFIRM.”

United States v. Abdush-Shakur
· 2006-10-04
Appeal (appellant (Shakir Abdush-Shakur)) Denied

“We affirm.”

Jencks v. Modern Woodmen of America
· 2007-03-19
Appeal (appellant (Karen Jencks)) Denied

“The district court granted summary judgment in favor of MWA. Jencks appealed. We affirm.”

Berry v. T-Mobile USA, Inc.
· 2007-06-27
Appeal (appellant (Barbara Berry)) Denied

“Exercising jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, we AFFIRM.”

United States v. Tiger
· 2008-06-24
Appeal (appellant (Ronald Dean Tiger)) Granted

“We REMAND to the district court with instructions to vacate Tiger's sentence and resentence.”

Bruner v. Baker
· 2007-10-30
Appeal (appellant (Bobby R. Bruner)) Denied

“The district court granted summary judgment in favor of all defendants. We exercise jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and AFFIRM.”

Davis v. Kansas Department of Corrections
· 2007-11-19
Appeal (appellant (Marvin B. Davis)) Denied

“Davis' appeal is DISMISSED as frivolous.”

Draft for Judge O'Brien with the record in hand

Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge O'Brien, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Grounded in Judge O'Brien's own signed orders
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace