Robin Stacie Rosenbaum
How Judge Rosenbaum rules, drawn from 49 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Rosenbaum
Robin Stacie Rosenbaum is a judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. Appointed by President Barack Obama, Judge Rosenbaum received a commission on June 2, 2014. Judge Rosenbaum previously served on the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, commissioned there on June 27, 2012.
Judge Rosenbaum's practices and standing orders
The court's website lists no individual practices or standing orders of Judge Rosenbaum'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 Rosenbaum decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In Arthur Huggins v. School District of Manatee County, the court reversed because Saunders had not carried her burden to invoke qualified immunity and Huggins had plausibly alleged First Amendment claims.
“Because Saunders fails to carry her burden to invoke qualified immunity and because Huggins plausibly alleges speech-restriction and First Amendment retaliation claims against her, we reverse.”
In Phillip Beazer v. Richmond County Constructors, LLC, the court held that Beazer was entitled to equitable tolling and that his lawsuit was timely.
“We hold that Beazer is entitled to equitable tolling and his lawsuit was timely.”
In Federal Trade Commission v. FleetCor Technologies, Inc., she rejected the company's reliance on a lack of consumer complaints, explaining that actual deception was not an element of the FTC's deceptive-advertising claim and that the question was whether the ads were likely to mislead.
“A false advertisement can be likely to deceive even if no consumer complains.”
Procedural preferences
In William Drummond v. Southern Company Services, Inc., the court said the factual issue it identified could not be resolved on a motion to dismiss.
“But either way, that isn’t an issue to resolve on a motion to dismiss.”
In Citadel Securities LLC v. U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, she reviewed the agency's legal conclusion de novo while treating its factual findings as conclusive when supported by substantial evidence.
“But we treat its factual findings as conclusive if substantial evidence supports them.”
In the train-crew case, the court evaluated the reasonableness of the agency’s action as a whole rather than treating an isolated phrase in the rulemaking explanation as controlling.
“we conduct our deferential review with an eye towards the reasonableness of an agency’s action as a whole.”
Cautions
In her partial dissent in United States v. McLaurin, Rosenbaum questioned applying the drug premises enhancement to a defendant based solely on a coconspirator’s conduct. She would have remanded for findings about McLaurin’s own connection to the premises.
“But I respectfully disagree with the Majority Opinion’s ruling that courts may apply U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(b)(12)’s premises enhancement to a defendant, under U.S.S.G. § 1B1.3(a)(1)(B), based solely on the relevant conduct of his co-conspirators.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“VACATED and REMANDED for further proceedings.”
“we find that the district court did not abuse its discretion when it granted Arias's motion for voluntary dismissal without prejudice.”
“With the benefit of the parties' briefs and oral argument, we now affirm in part and reverse in part.”
“As for searches conducted within the three-day period before Defendants abandoned their interest in the phone, we find no reversible error in the district court's denials of Defendants' suppression motions. We also deny Johnson's challenges to his sentence.”
“we affirm the determination of the district court not to award punitive damages, and we vacate the district court's judgment to the extent that the court awarded statutory damages in the absence of actual damages. Finally, we find no abuse of discretion in the district court's denial of attorney's fees, so we affirm that ruling.”
“Because the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the injunction, we affirm.”
“For these reasons, we vacate the judgment for Defendants-Appellees and remand this matter to the district court for further proceedings. VACATED and REMANDED.”
“After careful consideration, and with the benefit of oral argument, we affirm Focia's conviction and sentence.”
“After careful review, and with the benefit of oral argument, we affirm in part, vacate in part, and remand for further proceedings.”
“We therefore affirm the district court's order denying the quashing of the IRS's summonses.”
“we affirm much of what it did. Nevertheless, for the reasons that follow, we must reverse discrete portions of the district court's judgment and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.”
“So we must reverse the denial of summary judgment. We remand to the district court to, in the first instance, conduct an individualized analysis of each Defendant's actions and omissions.”
Draft for Judge Rosenbaum with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Rosenbaum, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Rosenbaum's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace