Alka Sagar
How Judge Sagar rules, drawn from 32 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Sagar
Alka Sagar became a U.S. magistrate judge for the Central District of California in August 2013 and sits in Los Angeles. Before joining the bench, she served as an assistant U.S. attorney in Los Angeles and held leadership roles in the Major Crimes and Major Frauds sections. She was the first Indian American woman to serve as a federal judge.
Judge Sagar's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Sagar, as published on the court's website (checked October 8, 2026). Judges revise these often, so confirm the current version on the court's site before you file.
- Judge's Procedures and Schedules ↗
- Judge Sagar_Joint Motion for Stipulated Protective Order (Updated May 2024) ↗
- Judge Sagar_Request for Informal Discovery Conference Form (Updated May 2024) ↗
Key rules
Contacting chambers
The parties are not allowed to contact or communicate with the judge or law clerks in any manner without express authorization from the Court.
“The parties are not allowed to contact or communicate with the judge or law clerks in any manner without express authorization from the Court.”
Filing
In civil cases, paper courtesy copies are required only when the filing exceeds 25 pages.
“No paper courtesy copies of documents in civil cases are required unless the filing is over 25 pages.”
Discovery
Before requesting an informal discovery conference, parties must make at least two attempts to resolve the dispute themselves.
“Before any such telephonic conference, however, the parties must engage in at least two attempts to resolve the dispute without Court involvement consistent with the pre-filing conference of counsel required by Local Civil Rule 37-1.”
Conferences
Counsel wishing to request a remote appearance in civil cases must file a request in writing by no later than five court days before the noticed hearing date, with the understanding that in certain cases the Court may be limited by any applicable bans or restrictions on live streaming or broadcasting of audio or video to the public.
“Counsel wishing to request a remote appearance in civil cases must file a request in writing by no later than five court days before the noticed hearing date, with the understanding that in certain cases the Court may be limited by any applicable bans or restrictions on live streaming or broadcasting of audio or video to the public.”
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 8, 2026).
- General Order 11-10: Alternative Dispute Resolution Program ↗
- General Order 19-01: Criminal Duty Matters Electronic Filing Pilot Project ↗
- General Order 20-13: Criminal Duty Matters Electronic Filing Pilot Project ↗
- General Order 18-02: Submission of Certain Prisoner Filings Through Electronic Mail ↗
- General Order 24-07: Criminal Justice Act Plan ↗
How Judge Sagar decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In Hofstrom v. Colvin, Sagar affirmed the disability decision after finding that the ALJ gave specific and legitimate reasons for rejecting Dr. Jordan’s opinion, which conflicted with Dr. Campbell’s findings.
“Because Dr. Jordan's opinion that Plaintiff's was unable to work was contradicted by the findings and conclusions of Dr. Campbell, the ALJ was required to provide 'specific and legitimate reasons' for rejecting Dr. Jordan's opinion... As set forth below, the ALJ met this requirement.”
In Morejon Gonzalez, Sagar granted a habeas petition and ordered a bond hearing after the government conceded that the petitioner belonged to the Bautista bond eligible class.
“As Respondents concede that Petitioner is a class member entitled to a bond hearing under the reasoning of [Bautista], the Court GRANTS the petition for the reasons stated in the orders in that case.”
Procedural preferences
In Hofstrom v. Colvin, Sagar took the parties’ joint stipulation under submission without oral argument before deciding the Social Security appeal.
“The Court has taken this matter under submission without oral argument. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 78; L.R. 7-15.”
In Mendoza-Rodriguez, the government stated that it did not oppose the habeas petition; Sagar granted it and ordered an individualized bond hearing.
“On April 16, Respondents filed an Answer which states that they 'are not presenting an opposition argument at this time.'... For the reasons set forth below, the Court GRANTS the Petition.”
Cautions
In Calixtro, Sagar ordered immediate release after finding that another Bautista compliant bond hearing would be futile because the immigration judge had refused to apply the class judgment at the prior hearing.
“The Court concludes that ordering Respondents to provide another bond hearing that complies with the December 18, 2025 declaratory judgment in Bautista would be futile... Thus, the Court concludes that immediate release from custody is the only means to provide complete relief to Petitioner.”
In Langram, Sagar denied a habeas petition and dismissed it with prejudice after the petitioner did not respond to an order to show cause concerning failure to prosecute.
“IT IS ADJUDGED that the First Amended Petition is denied and dismissed with prejudice.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“For all of the foregoing reasons, the decision of the Commission is affirmed.”
“Pursuant to Sentence four of 42 U.S.C. section 405(g), IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this matter is remanded for further administrative action consistent with this Opinion.”
“For all of the foregoing reasons, the decision of the Administrative Law Judge is affirmed.”
“For all of the foregoing reasons, the decision of the Commission is affirmed.”
“For all of the foregoing reasons, the decision of the Administrative Law Judge is affirmed.”
“The above captioned matter is dismissed with prejudice, each party to bear its own fees, costs, and expenses.”
“IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the above-captioned action is remanded to the Commissioner of Social Security for further proceedings consistent with the terms of the Stipulation to Remand.”
“IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the above-captioned action is remanded to the Commissioner of Social Security for further proceedings consistent with the Stipulation to Remand.”
“IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the above-captioned action is remanded to the Commissioner of Social Security for further proceedings consistent with the Stipulation to Remand.”
“IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the above-captioned action is remanded to the Commissioner of Social Security for further proceedings consistent with the Stipulation to Remand.”
“IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the above-captioned action is remanded to the Commissioner of Social Security for further proceedings consistent with the Stipulation to Remand.”
“Pursuant to the ‘Opinion and Order on a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus,’ IT IS ADJUDGED that the Petition is denied and dismissed with prejudice.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
- Judge Sagar's docket includes a longstanding consent calendar of Social Security disability appeals, many of which now end in stipulated remands rather than contested merits decisions.
- Since 2023 she has also handled a growing consent habeas calendar, particularly immigration-detention petitions under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 that are often filed with emergency applications and resolved within days or weeks.
- The July-August 2026 sample includes five release orders and one denial issued 7 to 24 days after filing.
- Her other work includes civil discovery referrals, ADA access suits, consumer-credit and employment cases, and criminal matters.
Pending matters in the official report
Reported by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts under the Civil Justice Reform Act, as of March 31, 2026.
| Motions pending more than six months | 5 |
| Bench trials submitted more than six months | 0 |
| Bankruptcy appeals pending more than six months | 0 |
| Social Security appeals pending more than six months | 0 |
| Civil cases pending more than three years | 1 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 5 | 1 |
| Sep 2025 | 7 | 1 |
| Mar 2025 | 6 | 1 |
| Sep 2024 | 2 | 0 |
| Mar 2024 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2023 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2023 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2022 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2022 | 2 | 0 |
| Sep 2021 | 2 | 0 |
| Mar 2021 | 2 | 0 |
| Sep 2020 | 2 | 1 |
A snapshot on that date: matters listed may since have been decided or reassigned. A motion referred to a magistrate judge is counted for both judges. Motions in multidistrict litigation, section 2255 cases and Social Security appeals are not counted, and a very large three-year count is generally a multidistrict docket. Source: Appendix A of the report (PDF); about the report.
How long civil cases take in this court
For the whole of United States District Court for the Central District of California, not for Judge Sagar: median time from filing to disposition of the civil cases the court closed in the 12 months ending September 30, 2025, as reported by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts.
| Cases | Median time | |
|---|---|---|
| All civil cases closed | 15,190 | 3.9 months |
| Closed with no court action | 4,414 | 3.1 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 10,538 | 4.3 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 103 | 17.9 months |
| Closed during trial | 135 | 25.7 months |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 15,190 | 3.9 months |
| Sep 2024 | 15,348 | 3.9 months |
| Sep 2023 | 13,583 | 4.4 months |
| Sep 2022 | 12,887 | 4.7 months |
| Sep 2021 | 14,213 | 4.7 months |
| Sep 2020 | 14,205 | 5 months |
| Sep 2019 | 13,478 | 4.9 months |
The table leaves out prisoner petitions, land condemnations, deportation reviews, recovery of overpayments and enforcement of judgments, and reports no median for fewer than 10 cases. A district that closed a large multidistrict litigation in the period shows very large counts and long medians for that year. Source: Table C-5, U.S. District Courts (spreadsheet).
Draft for Judge Sagar with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Sagar, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Sagar's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace