Jonathan Allen Kobes
How Judge Kobes rules, drawn from 80 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
How Judge Kobes decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
A narrowed class definition did not end American Pipe tolling unless it unambiguously excluded the plaintiff; genuine ambiguity was resolved in favor of preserving the individual claim.
“We join our sister circuits in holding that ‘anything short of unambiguous narrowing would undermine the balance contemplated by the Supreme Court’ in American Pipe and is insufficient to exclude a plaintiff from a class for tolling purposes.”
A criminal defendant's waiver of counsel required a meaningful warning about the risks of self-representation; merely calling the choice a bad decision was inadequate.
“While we do not have ‘a list of essential points’ or ‘specific warnings’ about self-representation, Tschacher, 687 F.3d at 932 (citations omitted), the district court must still ‘adequately warn[] the defendant about the dangers and disadvantages of proceeding pro se,’ United States v. Crawford, 487 F.3d 1101, 1106 (8th Cir. 2007). That did not happen here.”
A failure-to-accommodate claimant must identify the assistance sought and connect it to the protected condition; an employer need not infer a specific pregnancy accommodation from a general message about pain. He also treats an unrebutted showing of operational hardship as dispositive.
“The plaintiff need not use ‘the magic words “reasonable accommodation,”’ but the request ‘must make clear that the employee wants assistance for her [pregnancy].’”
In a design-defect case, he requires the plaintiff to present a feasible safer design or affirmatively pursue the rare theory that the product should be removed from the market. A passing exception in precedent does not eliminate both evidentiary paths.
“But it is still the plaintiff’s burden to either present alternative design evidence or assert that the product should be removed from the market.”
He treats reliance on an official court-record source as reasonable absent notice of systemic unreliability, even when the source produces an inaccurate match. The statute requires reasonable procedures, not strict liability or limitless independent investigation.
“Advantage reasonably believed that the official website for the North Dakota Courts was a reputable source.”
Procedural preferences
An application to confirm or vacate an arbitration award must plead its own independent basis for federal jurisdiction; the underlying dispute or an earlier action cannot supply a missing citizenship allegation.
“Applicants seeking to vacate or confirm awards under § 9 and § 10 must identify an ‘independent jurisdictional basis’ for their actions.”
A civil-contempt sanction imposed while the underlying claims remained pending was not immediately appealable because the district court still had substantive work to do.
“The district court has more to do; in fact, it hasn’t had the opportunity to adjudicate Nolting’s liability on any claim made directly against him.”
At the pleading stage, he does not evaluate the validity or sincerity of a claimed religious belief, but requires facts connecting that belief to the challenged workplace requirement. A general assertion of personal choice did not explain how faith required or guided the refusal.
“The problem is that her complaint fails to connect her objections to the County’s testing policy with her specific religious beliefs.”
Under de novo benefits review, the district court may consider the full evidentiary record rather than confining itself to the plan administrator's stated rationale.
“because the standard of review was de novo, the district court was ‘not limited to the fiduciary’s explanation of its denial.’”
Cautions
For qualified immunity, a broad statement of constitutional principle did not clearly establish liability without precedent addressing materially similar circumstances.
“But this general principle is too broad to clearly establish a constitutional violation here.”
Adverse inferences cannot substitute for missing proof of an essential causal link. Even assuming withheld evidence could support an inference at summary judgment, the proposed inferences did not connect the alleged racketeering acts directly to collection of the judgments.
“None of the adverse inferences the employees asked it to draw would have filled the ‘gaps’ in their causation evidence.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“We reverse the district court's order granting summary judgment and remand for further proceedings.”
“The district court granted Warren's motion for summary judgment. We affirm.”
“Although we agree that the officer who stopped Lowry lacked reasonable suspicion, suppression of the evidence is inappropriate under the attenuation doctrine. We therefore affirm.”
“The district court granted defendants' motions to dismiss with prejudice. Anderson appeals the dismissal of his constitutional claims, and we affirm.”
“We hold that Adam and Eve has not engaged in speech and therefore cannot state a claim under the First Amendment. We also hold that the zoning law is not unconstitutionally vague and does not violate equal protection. We affirm.”
“we reverse in part, dismiss in part, and vacate in part. The case is remanded to the district court.”
“We affirm the district court's career offender enhancement. ... The judgment of the district court is affirmed.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Circuit judges do not carry a trial caseload; not enumerated.
Draft for Judge Kobes with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Kobes, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Kobes's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace