Kent Amos Jordan

How Judge Jordan rules, drawn from 26 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

Judge Jordan no longer sits on this court. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled here.

Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Position
Circuit judge
Status
Retired 2025
Served
2006–2025
Appointed by
George W. Bush (Republican)
Commissioned
December 13, 2006
Education
Brigham Young University (B.A., economics, 1981); Georgetown University Law Center (J.D., 1984)
Signed orders read
26

About Judge Jordan

Kent A. Jordan was a judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. Appointed by President George W. Bush, Judge Jordan received a commission on December 13, 2006. Judge Jordan previously served on the United States District Court for the District of Delaware, commissioned there on November 15, 2002. Judge Jordan retired on January 15, 2025.

How Judge Jordan decides

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

What persuades

In StoneMor v. Teamsters Local 469, Jordan affirmed vacatur of a labor-arbitration award because the arbitrator rewrote the agreement’s grievance deadline by using execution instead of ratification as the starting date.

“Nevertheless, our review is ‘not toothless,’ and we will reverse if the arbitrator ‘rewrites the contract[.]’”

In Nitkin v. Main Line Health, Jordan affirmed summary judgment on a hostile-work-environment claim after disregarding generalized allegations and finding the seven identified incidents insufficiently severe or pervasive.

“The District Court properly disregarded Nitkin’s generalized assertions of harassing conduct.”

For all-risk insurance coverage, he places the initial burden on the insured to show that the loss was fortuitous rather than assuming that an unexplained loss falls within coverage.

“Because we agree that an insured bears the burden of proving fortuity, and that the Inganamorts did not meet that burden here, we will affirm.”

Procedural preferences

When an arbitration agreement's formation is undisputed and a delegation clause assigns scope and enforceability to the arbitrator, he requires a party opposing arbitration to challenge that delegation provision directly; a challenge to the contract generally does not keep arbitrability in court.

“a party seeking to avoid arbitration must directly challenge the arbitration or delegation clause, not just the contract as a whole.”

Cautions

In Lall v. Department of Homeland Security, he held that a citizenship certificate issued in error did not confer citizenship where statutory conditions were unmet, despite the government's twenty-one-year delay in canceling it, and affirmed dismissal of Lall's citizenship claim.

“Because Lall never obtained citizenship, he was subject to removal. And, for the reasons set forth below, our equitable powers do not permit us to grant citizenship.”

Signed rulings

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

Omar Alejandro Frias-Camilo v. Attorney General United States of America
15-3733 · 2016-06-23
Petition for review (petitioner) Denied

“We will therefore deny his petition for review.”

Jeanne Zaloga v. Borough of Moosic
15-2723 · 2016-10-24
Appeal (appellant) Granted

“For the foregoing reasons, we will reverse the District Court's order denying Mercatili's motion for summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity and remand with instructions to enter judgment in his favor.”

Elaine Levins v. Healthcare Revenue Recovery Group LLC
17-3330 · 2018-08-22
Appeal (appellant) Granted in part

“For the foregoing reasons, we will vacate the District Court's dismissal of the 1692e(14) claim and remand for further proceedings. We will affirm, however, the District Court's dismissal of the claims under 1692d(6) and 1692e(10).”

Narinder Singh v. Attorney General United States of America
15-1152 · 2015-11-04
Petition for review (petitioner) Denied

“For the foregoing reasons, we will deny Singh's petition for review.”

Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection v. Trainer Custom Chemical, LLC
17-2607 · 2018-10-05
Appeal (appellant (Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection)) Granted

“For the foregoing reasons, we will affirm in part, vacate in part, and remand for further proceedings. We will affirm the District Court’s order that Trainer is liable under CERCLA and HSCA for PADEP’s response costs incurred after it acquired the Site, but we will vacate the District Court’s order with respect to Trainer’s liability for PADEP’s response costs incurred before acquisition of the Site.”

United States v. Jerome Wilson
16-3485 · 2018-01-17
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“For the foregoing reasons, we will affirm the sentence imposed by the District Court.”

United States v. Ishmael Abdullah
18-1082 · 2018-10-02
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“For the foregoing reasons, we will affirm the sentence imposed by the District Court.”

Steven Papp v. Fore-Kast Sales Co., Inc.
15-2851 · 2016-11-22
Appeal (appellant) Granted

“For the foregoing reasons, we will reverse.”

Junior Nathaniel Ricketts v. Attorney General United States
16-3182 · 2018-07-30
Appeal (appellant) Moot / procedural

“For the foregoing reasons, the motion to transfer will be granted and the consolidated petitions for review will remain stayed pending a final decision on Ricketts's appeal of his nationality determination.”

StoneMor, Inc. v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Local 469
23-1489 · 2024-07-10
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“For the foregoing reasons we will affirm the judgment of the District Court vacating the arbitrator's award.”

United States v. Matthew Packer
22-2554 · 2023-09-26
Appeal (appellant) Denied

“For the foregoing reasons, we will affirm.”

American Home Assurance Company v. Superior Well Services, Inc.
22-1498 · 2023-05-31
Appeal (appellant) Granted

“For the foregoing reasons, we will reverse the District Court's summary judgment order and remand with instructions to enter judgment for American Home.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

Circuit judges do not carry a trial caseload; not enumerated.

A historical record

Judge Jordan no longer sits on this court. This profile stays available as a record of how they ruled here. If you're preparing for a matter, start from the court's current bench.