Cindy Kyounga Chung

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit circuit Appointed by Joseph R. Biden (Democratic) 12 signed orders read

How Judge Chung decides

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

What persuades

Keeps wire-fraud analysis focused on deprivation of money or property without adding a personal-benefit or convergence element not found in the statute.

“because the government need not prove either that the scheme was intended to personally benefit Porat or “convergence,” we will affirm.”

Recognizes an accommodation-based pregnancy-discrimination theory when the record supports differential access to light duty.

“that Peifer makes out a prima facie case of pregnancy discrimination based on the Board’s denials of her light-duty requests under a failure to accommodate theory.”

Procedural preferences

Rejects an unnecessarily heightened standing test and remands when purchasers plausibly allege that a contaminated product was worth less than what they bought.

“Court erred in applying a heightened legal standard for standing, we will partially reverse the District Court’s order”

Requires the trial court to consider whether discovery is needed before deciding that parties formed a valid arbitration agreement.

“abused its discretion by failing to consider whether discovery was necessary before deciding that Cornelius and CVS reached a valid agreement to arbitrate.”

Cautions

Treats unverified legal authority as a professional-responsibility failure, including when a lawyer suspects automated research produced inaccurate citations.

“The attorney failed to verify the legal authority in any way. Unfortunately, the research contained myriad inaccuracies.”

Signed rulings

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

United States v. Moshe Porat
· 2023-08-07
Appeal (defendant-appellant) Denied

“Porat or “convergence,” we will affirm.”

United States v. Alice Chu
· 2024-04-25
Appeal (defendant-appellant) Denied

“For the foregoing reasons, we will affirm the District Court’s orders and judgment.”

Peifer v. Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole
· 2024-07-03
Appeal (plaintiff-appellant) Granted in part

“For the foregoing reasons, we will affirm in part and vacate in part, and remand for proceedings consistent with this opinion.”

Huertas v. Bayer U.S. LLC
· 2024-11-07
Appeal (plaintiffs-appellants) Granted

“For the foregoing reasons, we will reverse the District Court’s dismissal of the complaint as to Plaintiffs Huertas, Mistretta, Wyant, and Poovey and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.”

United States v. Carolyn Jackson
· 2025-03-21
Appeal (defendants-appellants) Denied

“For the reasons presented above, we will affirm.”

Cornelius v. CVS Pharmacy, Inc.
· 2025-04-02
Appeal (plaintiff-appellant) Granted in part

“For the reasons set forth above, we will affirm in part, vacate judgment, and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.”

Thankarasa v. Attorney General of the United States
· 2025-04-10
Petition for review (petitioner) Denied

“Accordingly, we will deny Thankarasa’s petition.”

United States v. Julio Suarez
· 2025-07-24
Appeal (defendant-appellant) Denied

“For the reasons set forth above, we will affirm the judgment of the District Court.”

Rivera v. New Castle County Police Department
· 2025-08-19
Appeal (plaintiff-appellant) Granted

“For the foregoing reasons, we will vacate and remand the District Court’s order denying the motion for reconsideration of the motion to dismiss for proceedings consistent with this opinion.”

Charles G. Berwind Trust v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
· 2025-10-30
Appeal (taxpayer-appellant) Denied

“forth above, we will affirm the judgment of the Tax Court.”

United States v. Christopher Texidor
· 2026-01-08
Appeal (defendant-appellant) Denied

“For these reasons, we will AFFIRM.”

In re Daniel A. Pallen
· 2026-03-27

The court imposed a reprimand after counsel repeatedly failed to verify inaccurate authorities and did not remediate the problem after receiving notice.

Put Judge Chung's record to work

Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Chung actually rules, not a generic AI guess.

Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Chung's own signed orders and cites them.