Don R. Willett
How Judge Willett rules, drawn from 63 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Willett
Don R. Willett is a judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. Appointed by President Donald J. Trump, Judge Willett received a commission on January 2, 2018.
Judge Willett's practices and standing orders
The court's website lists no individual practices or standing orders of Judge Willett'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 Willett decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In the physicians' challenge to FDA posts about ivermectin, he held that the complaint plausibly alleged the agency exceeded its authority by advising against a treatment.
“FDA is not a physician. It has authority to inform, announce, and apprise—but not to endorse, denounce, or advise.”
In Thompson's appeal, he applied controlling res judicata precedent and rejected reliance on an inconsistent decision under the circuit's rule of orderliness.
“Orderliness, rightly understood, compels deference, not defiance. And disregarding on-point precedent in favor of an aberrational decision flouting that precedent is the antithesis of orderliness.”
In Van Loon's sanctions challenge, he held that immutable smart contracts were not property that could be blocked under the statute and reversed the district court.
“Until then, we hold that Tornado Cash’s immutable smart contracts (the lines of privacy-enabling software code) are not the ‘property’ of a foreign national or entity, meaning (1) they cannot be blocked under IEEPA, and (2) OFAC overstepped its congressionally defined authority.”
In an appeal over a maritime licensing decision, he denied the environmental groups' petition because their members had not shown a concrete injury tied to the project.
“Such allegations can establish standing only when a member identifies a concrete, project-specific interest impaired by the challenged agency action.”
In Neumann's Pharmacy's appeal, he vacated a deregistration order because the agency departed from its own regulations and misapplied state law.
“But even the most urgent regulatory goals do not permit an agency to depart from the regulations it has adopted while claiming to enforce them.”
In Liedtke's employment appeal, he held that disputed evidence about her resignation and performance plan required a jury on the discrimination and retaliation claims.
“A reasonable jury could credit either account.”
In an oilfield indemnity appeal, he held that vessels used to carry workers to platforms did not play the substantial role needed to make the service agreement a maritime contract.
“But providing a ride to work falls short of the ‘substantial role’ that Doiron requires.”
In Stramaski, Willett rejected a public supervisor’s qualified-immunity defense to an employee’s statutory retaliation claim. He reasoned that immunizing retaliation would undermine the Fair Labor Standards Act’s protection for workers who complain about violations.
“Allowing officials to claim qualified immunity for retaliation would undermine that protection.”
Procedural preferences
In Morrow's class action, he vacated a fee award because class members had not received the notice required before counsel's fees were approved.
“Because the district court abused its discretion when it awarded fees without providing notice to class members as mandated by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(h), we VACATE and REMAND for further proceedings.”
In Davis's civil rights appeal, he vacated the dismissal with prejudice of some claims because the record did not show Davis had pleaded his best case, and remanded with leave to amend.
“On this record, we are not persuaded that Davis has pleaded his best case as to these claims.”
In Brown's civil rights appeal, he upheld one jury verdict but ordered a new trial on municipal liability because findings of liability and no causation could not be reconciled.
“The municipal-liability verdict does not: the jury found liability but no causation, and those answers cannot be reconciled.”
Cautions
In Wilson's suppression appeal, he held that the warrant application did not establish a case-specific link between the home and the evidence sought.
“The Constitution requires that those inferences be anchored in case-specific circumstances, not in generalized assumptions about what ‘most people’ might do.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“In sum, we hold that the Crude Haulers transport property 'in interstate or foreign commerce within the meaning of the Motor Carrier Act.' We accordingly REVERSE the district court's denial of summary judgment and REMAND with instructions to dismiss the plaintiffs' claims with prejudice.”
“The judgment of the district court is accordingly AFFIRMED.”
“First United says CM's handling of its claim breached the insurance contract and various Louisiana insurance statutes. The district court agreed and, following a bench trial, awarded damages plus statutory penalties, attorney fees, and costs. CM appealed. We AFFIRM in part, REVERSE in part, and REMAND for further proceedings.”
“On appeal, Wilkerson argues that (1) the evidence was insufficient to support his convictions, and (2) the jury was improperly instructed. We disagree and AFFIRM his convictions.”
“The issue is simply stated: Did the district court err in denying qualified immunity to Villanueva and Ebrom? We answer yes given the bare-bones nature of Shaw's allegations. ... We REVERSE.”
“We AFFIRM as to the Malley claim because the affidavit lacked any facts to establish probable cause. But we REVERSE as to the Franks claim because it is incompatible with a Malley theory.”
“And because the threat of criminal prosecution differs materially from the specific processes listed, we AFFIRM the district court's judgment.”
“The district court committed no error, and we AFFIRM in all respects.”
“We VACATE in part Rivas-Estrada's sentence and REMAND for the district court to amend its written judgment by removing the three unpronounced special conditions.”
“All to say, on-point res judicata precedent bars this suit. We AFFIRM.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Circuit judges do not manage an assigned federal trial docket in their appellate role. Willett previously served on the Supreme Court of Texas.
Draft for Judge Willett with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Willett, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Willett's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace