Diane Pamela Wood
How Judge Wood rules, drawn from 29 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Judge Wood no longer sits on this court. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled here.
About Judge Wood
Diane Pamela Wood was a judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. Appointed by President William J. Clinton, Judge Wood received a commission on June 30, 1995. Judge Wood assumed senior status on September 7, 2022 and retired on April 30, 2024.
How Judge Wood decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
Second Amendment 'Arms' line under Heller/Bruen as a history-and-tradition line-drawing exercise: even the most important personal freedoms have limits, and weapons closer to military-grade arms than to common self-defense firearms can be regulated. She frames the question as where a given weapon falls between a personal handgun and a battlefield weapon.
“Using the tools of history and tradition to which the Supreme Court directed us in Heller and Bruen, we conclude that the state and the affected subdivisions have a strong likelihood of success in the pending litigation. ... Everyone can agree that a personal handgun, used for self-defense, is one of those Arms that law-abiding citizens must be free to 'keep and bear.' Everyone can also agree, we hope, that a nuclear weapon ... can be reserved for the military ... Many weapons, however, lie between these extremes.”
Broad, functional reading of the grand jury's investigatory reach: under R. Enterprises the relevance bar for a grand-jury subpoena is minimal, and the grand jury may legitimately probe HOW evidence was collected, including possible government misconduct, because that bears on whether and what to charge.
“It is well within the legitimate purview of the grand jury to inquire about the manner in which evidence was collected, including whether any government misconduct occurred in the process.”
Procedural preferences
In Rankins v. System Solutions of Kentucky, Wood vacated a Rule 54(b) partial judgment and dismissed the appeal because the spoliation claim overlapped factually and legally with the products-liability claims still pending below.
“to determine whether an order truly is 'final,' we ask whether there is significant factual and legal overlap between the claim proposed for appeal and the part of the case pending in the district court. ... we VACATE the Rule 54(b) judgment and DISMISS this appeal for want of jurisdiction.”
Rodriguez dog-sniff analysis turns on a single, well-defined question, did the sniff ADD TIME to the stop, not on whether the officer paused traffic tasks; and arguments not raised in the district court (e.g., officer diligence) are forfeited on appeal.
“the 'critical question' under Rodriguez is not whether the officer conducted any investigatory task during the stop. It is 'whether conducting the sniff prolongs -- i.e., adds time to -- the stop.'”
Cautions
In Fulks v. Watson, Wood affirmed dismissal of the entire action after the district court found that Fulks had submitted a forged document and lied about it under oath; she held that the district court had not abused its discretion in choosing that sanction.
“As we have noted before, 'perjury is among the worst kinds of misconduct.' ... 'Dismissal can [thus] be appropriate when the plaintiff has abused the judicial process by seeking relief based on information that the plaintiff knows is false.'”
In United States v. Johnson, Wood held that Johnson forfeited his claim that officers had not diligently pursued their traffic-stop tasks because he had not developed that timing argument in the district court; the panel affirmed denial of suppression.
“To the extent Johnson is now trying to rely on 'parsing the time line of the stop' to show that the officers failed diligently to pursue their traffic mission, that argument is forfeited.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“In Nos. 23-1353 and 23-1793, we AFFIRM the district courts’ orders denying preliminary injunctive relief.”
“we vacate the injunction issued by the district court in appeals No. 23-1825, 23-1826, 23-1827, and 23-1828.”
“Our conclusion that the dog sniff did not unreasonably prolong the stop makes the remainder of the Fourth Amendment analysis straightforward. ... The search of Johnson's car therefore did not violate the Fourth Amendment. In light of that fact, we have no need to reach the government's alternative arguments. The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.”
“It was well within the district court's discretion to conclude that dismissal was a sanction 'proportionate to the circumstances.' ... After finding that Fulks presented a forged document and perjured testimony, the district court determined that the appropriate sanction for his litigation misconduct was dismissal of the entire action. ... The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.”
“The grand jury is entitled to inquire into the circumstances surrounding the collection of evidence relevant to its investigation of Doe Corporation, including any government misconduct that may have occurred in the process. We REVERSE the district court's grant of the motion to quash the grand jury subpoena.”
“Because the district court erred in granting partial final judgment on SSK's spoliation claim, we VACATE the Rule 54(b) judgment and DISMISS this appeal for want of jurisdiction.”
“It was therefore wrong to dismiss Hively's complaint for failure to state a claim. The judgment of the district court is Reversed and the case is Remanded for further proceedings.”
“Because it precludes employees from seeking any class, collective, or representative remedies to wage-and-hour disputes, Epic's arbitration provision violates Sections 7 and 8 of the NLRA. Nothing in the FAA saves the ban on collective action. The judgment of the district court is therefore AFFIRMED.”
“We AFFIRM the order of the district court denying the motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim.”
“Finding no abuse of discretion in the district court's decision, however, we affirm.”
“We therefore AFFIRM the order of the district court denying TransUnion's motion to send this case to arbitration and return the case to the district court for further proceedings.”
“The judgment of the district court is therefore Affirmed in part and Reversed in part, and the case is Remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.”
“For these reasons, we GRANT the petition for review and REMAND this matter to the BIA for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.”
A historical record
Judge Wood 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.