Paul B. Matey

How Judge Matey rules, drawn from 31 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Position
Circuit judge
Appointed by
Donald J. Trump (Republican)
Commissioned
March 18, 2019
Education
University of Scranton (B.A., 1993); Seton Hall University School of Law (J.D., summa cum laude, 2001)
Signed orders read
31

About Judge Matey

Paul Brian Matey is a judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. Appointed by President Donald J. Trump, Judge Matey received a commission on March 18, 2019.

Judge Matey's practices and standing orders

The court's website lists no individual practices or standing orders of Judge Matey'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 Matey decides

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

What persuades

Treats constitutional text as central but not exhaustive when interpreting a provision that recognizes a preexisting right.

“Text does not exhaust the law, but it cannot be ignored.”

Procedural preferences

In a religious land-use dissent, Judge Matey distinguished a precedent about election-law injunctions and argued that its status-quo concern did not govern the church’s request for preliminary relief.

“There are no comparable concerns in Holy Trinity’s requested relief, which merely asks for the restoration of neutral zoning treatment for religious purposes as already required under federal law, not a bespoke rule tailored to the interests of a political party on election eve.”

In his Migliori dissent, Judge Matey argued that any fee award should account for the voters’ limited success in their election-law litigation. The majority affirmed the award.

“A prevailing party’s fee award must be adjusted to reflect the degree of success in the litigation”

Signed rulings

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

Berkelhammer v. ADP TotalSource Group, Inc.
22-1618 · 2023-07-17
Appeal (appellants (plan participants Beth Berkelhammer and Naomi Ruiz)) Denied

“Because Appellants’ claims belong to the Plan, the Plan’s consent to arbitrate controls. So we will affirm the District Court’s judgment.”

United States v. Gussie
21-3216 · 2022-10-18
Appeal (appellant (defendant Jacinta A. Gussie)) Denied

“For these reasons, we will affirm the District Court's judgment.”

Argueta-Orellana v. Attorney General United States
20-1581 · 2022-05-20
Petition for review (petitioner (Jorge Argueta-Orellana)) Denied

“For these reasons, we will deny the petition for review in part and dismiss the remainder.”

Abdurahman v. Prospect CCMC LLC
20-3459 & 20-3466 · 2022-07-28
Appeal (appellants (defendants Prospect CCMC / Crozer Chester Medical Center and Dr. Dorian Jacobs)) Denied

“The Appellants fail to establish their entitlement to judgment as a matter of law. We will affirm the District Court's order denying the motion to dismiss in favor of arbitration.”

Lopez v. Attorney General United States
21-1490 · 2022-09-09
Petition for review (petitioner (Jarvin Orlando Lopez)) Denied

“An application for cancellation of removal under NACARA is not an application for adjustment of status under § 212(h) of the INA. So we will deny Lopez’s petition for review.”

Doyduk v. Attorney General United States
21-3333 · 2023-04-14
Petition for review (petitioner (Ersin Doyduk)) Denied

“Because considering the evidence underlying Doyduk's expunged charges fell within the IJ's broad discretion, we will deny the petition.”

Nichino America, Inc. v. Valent U.S.A. LLC
21-1850 · 2022-08-12
Appeal (appellant (Nichino America, Inc., the plaintiff seeking an injunction)) Denied

“For these reasons, we will affirm the District Court's order denying Nichino's motion for a preliminary injunction.”

Ellison v. United States
22-2169 · 2024-10-30
Appeal (appellant (defendant Kay Ellison)) Denied

“Because Ellison failed to demonstrate that her attorney's alleged error affected the jury's verdict, we will affirm the District Court's denial of her petition for a writ of habeas corpus.”

Johnson v. City of Philadelphia
19-2938 · 2020-09-22
Appeal (appellant (plaintiff Tamika Johnson, administratrix of the decedents' estates)) Denied

“As those conditions do not exist here, we must affirm the District Court's decision to dismiss.”

Allied Painting & Decorating, Inc. v. International Painters and Allied Trades Industry Pension Fund
23-1537 · 2024-07-11
Appeal (appellant (the International Painters and Allied Trades Industry Pension Fund)) Denied

“As a result, the Fund cannot recover the claimed withdrawal liability, and we will affirm the District Court's order vacating the Arbitrator's Award.”

United States v. Damon
18-2444 · 2019-08-06
Appeal (appellant (defendant Ronald Damon)) Denied

“So we will affirm the decision of the District Court and grant the Government's motion to the extent the District Court's order is affirmed.”

Rogers v. Superintendent Greene SCI
21-2601 · 2023-09-07
Appeal (appellant (petitioner Ronald Rogers)) Granted

“We agree and will reverse the District Court's order denying a writ of habeas corpus.”

Draft for Judge Matey with the record in hand

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

Opens in Ezel Pro.

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