Raymond J. Lohier, Jr.
How Judge Lohier rules, drawn from 40 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
How Judge Lohier decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
Whether a prison grievance procedure was available for exhaustion purposes is assessed objectively by asking whether a similarly situated person of ordinary firmness would have regarded it as usable.
“[T]he test for deciding whether the ordinary grievance procedures were available” is ‘an objective one: that is, would a similarly situated individual of ordinary firmness have deemed them available.”
Whether a secondary use is transformative for copyright purposes turns on the message a reasonable observer would perceive, not either side's subjective account of its intent.
“But whether a secondary use is transformative turns on what a reasonable observer thinks, not the subjective intent of the copyright holder or that of the secondary user.”
Procedural preferences
Issuing a right-to-sue letter and the charging party's filing of a private action do not terminate the agency's statutory power to continue investigating the underlying discrimination charge.
“We hold that the EEOC retains its statutory investigative authority after it issues a right-to-sue letter and the charging party files a separate suit.”
Cautions
Bare legal title does not necessarily establish constitutional standing to contest civil forfeiture. A claimant must show a colorable property interest that extends beyond acting as a straw owner for someone else.
“Their uncontested legal title in the Amadea alone, they say, constitutes a facially colorable interest sufficient to establish Article III standing. Not quite.”
The thirty-day removal period is not triggered by correspondence that merely prompts further investigation when the jurisdictional basis cannot yet be learned with certainty from the document itself.
“the relevant jurisdictional information could not be ‘found out or learned with certainty’ from Vermont’s email or the DEC letter,”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“We therefore affirm the District Court's judgment dismissing UBS's claims and affirm its order denying UBS's motion to enjoin arbitration.”
“For the foregoing reasons, we VACATE in part and AFFIRM in part the order of the District Court, and we REMAND for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.”
“Because we conclude that the applicable regulations and the United States Department of Health and Human Services' interpretation of those regulations support Lopes's position, we AFFIRM the judgment of the District Court.”
“For the foregoing reasons, the judgment of the District Court is AFFIRMED.”
“We therefore vacate and remand with instructions to reinstate the jury verdict with respect to Newton's Fourteenth Amendment claim and to reconsider Newton's First Amendment claim in light of this opinion.”
“We conclude that the State Court decision was, to the contrary, an adjudication on the merits entitled to AEDPA deference and not so lacking in justification as to warrant habeas relief. Accordingly, we reverse the decision of the District Court.”
“For the foregoing reasons and those set forth in the accompanying summary order, we AFFIRM the judgment of conviction of the District Court.”
“For the foregoing reasons, we certify the following question to the New York Court of Appeals: Do sections 8-102(16)(c) and 8-107(l)(a) of the New York City Administrative Code preclude a plaintiff from bringing a disability discrimination claim based solely on a perception of untreated alcoholism? ... Decision is RESERVED.”
“For the foregoing reasons, the order of the District Court is VACATED and the matter is REMANDED to the District Court with instructions to determine a reasonable award of attorneys' fees consistent with this opinion. Plaintiffs-appellants are also entitled to recover reasonable attorneys' fees in connection with this appeal.”
“Proceeding to the merits, we conclude that sufficient evidence supported Caltabiano's conviction on the mail fraud counts, that he waived his primary challenge to the District Court's jury instructions, and that his sentence was not procedurally unreasonable. We therefore AFFIRM.”
“As explained below, we VACATE the judgment of the District Court and REMAND for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.”
“We have considered Holcombe's remaining arguments and conclude that they are without merit. For the foregoing reasons, the judgment of the District Court is AFFIRMED.”
Draft for Judge Lohier with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Lohier, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Lohier's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace