Robert Bruce King
How Judge King rules, drawn from 85 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge King
Robert Bruce King is a judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. Appointed by President William J. Clinton, Judge King received a commission on October 9, 1998.
Judge King's practices and standing orders
The court's website lists no individual practices or standing orders of Judge King'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 King decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
He limits Pullman abstention to cases in which the federal claim actually presents an unclear state-law issue or requires the federal court to interpret one.
“But the Pullman abstention doctrine requires that the federal claim ‘present’ an unclear issue of state law, or that the federal court will have to ‘interpret an unclear state law.’”
In Hussein Mouns v. Garland, King held that the agency should have applied the generally applicable reasonable-likelihood standard to the motion to reopen; the agency had not identified the special adverse considerations that would justify a stricter test.
“What was clear to the BIA, however, is that the ‘reasonable likelihood’ standard is the generally applicable standard for motions to reopen — particularly where, as in L-O-G-, ruling on the motion ‘requires the exercise of judgment regarding eligibility for the relief sought.’”
On trademark abandonment, he treats an owner’s intent to resume use as intensely factual, making summary judgment inappropriate when the record contains concrete evidence beyond a vague future intention.
“Of importance, our Court has recognized that the intent-to-resume-use inquiry underlying an abandonment analysis ‘is an intensely factual question.’”
In United States v. Ordonez-Zometa, King affirmed racketeering convictions after identifying evidence that the gang used an interstate financial system, phones, and rideshare travel to meet the commerce element.
“the government needed only to establish a ‘de minimis’ effect on interstate or foreign commerce.”
Procedural preferences
At the pleading stage, he does not require a Title VII retaliation complaint to establish the full McDonnell Douglas prima facie case.
“That is because the McDonnell Douglas framework’s prima facie case ‘is an evidentiary standard, not a pleading requirement.’”
In Strickland prejudice review, he rejects a piecemeal treatment of mitigation and requires the court to assess the totality of favorable evidence against the aggravating evidence.
“Instead, the State Decision ‘engaged in a different analysis — an analysis that unreasonably broke from Strickland by considering less than the totality of the evidence, and one that unreasonably discounted evidence favorable to [Coleman] by unduly minimizing its import and evaluating it piecemeal.’”
Cautions
In Cooper v. Doyle, King affirmed denial of qualified immunity on the undisputed facts while dismissing the officers’ attempt to relitigate disputed facts in the interlocutory appeal.
“based upon the undisputed facts, the Officers are not entitled to qualified immunity with respect to the plaintiff’s Fourth Amendment excessive force claim.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Pursuant to the foregoing, the doctrine of collateral estoppel does not bar the Government from prosecuting Ruhbayan for perjury and subornation of perjury, as charged in the Indictment. We therefore affirm the decision of the district court. AFFIRMED.”
“Vacated and remanded by published opinion.”
“Pursuant to the foregoing, the judgment of the district court is affirmed. AFFIRMED.”
“We hereby remove this appeal from abeyance, vacate the district court's Said opinion, and remand for such other and further proceedings as may be appropriate, consistent with our decision in Dire. VACATED AND REMANDED.”
“In response to our inquiry, Aetna maintained that the Order is appealable under the collateral order doctrine. As explained below, we disagree and dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.”
“As described below, we reject Brehm's challenges to his conviction and affirm the district court's judgment.”
“As explained below, we reject Abramski's contentions of error and affirm.”
“Affirmed by published opinion.”
“Further factual development would permit a definitive resolution of the matter, but remand is unnecessary in this instance because any Fifth Amendment error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. We therefore affirm Holness's convictions.”
“Pursuant to the foregoing, we reverse the judgment of the district court and remand for an award of habeas corpus relief. REVERSED AND REMANDED.”
“Pursuant to the foregoing, we reverse the judgment of the district court. REVERSED.”
“On appeal, Medina-Campo challenges the court's calculation of his prison term insofar as it was informed by the federal Sentencing Guidelines. Discerning no error, we affirm.”
Draft for Judge King with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge King, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge King's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace