Fernando Manzano Olguin
How Judge Olguin rules, drawn from 17 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Olguin
Fernando Manzano Olguin is a judge of the United States District Court for the Central District of California. Appointed by President Barack Obama, Judge Olguin received a commission on January 16, 2013.
Judge Olguin's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Olguin, 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 Olguin Initial Standing Order.2025 ↗
- Trial.Requirements.2025 ↗
- CR Under Seal Procedures ↗
Key rules
Filing
A mandatory chambers copy of all e-filed documents shall be delivered to the Clerk's Office, 4th Floor, no later than noon the following business day.
“A mandatory chambers copy of all e-filed documents shall be delivered to the Clerk's Office, 4th Floor, no later than noon the following business day.”
Motions
All ex parte applications must include a proposed order.
“All ex parte applications must include a proposed order.”
Motions
Civil motions are heard on Thursdays at 10 a.m.
“Civil Motions: Thursdays at 10:00 a.m.”
Motions
Before filing a preliminary injunction motion, confer with opposing counsel at least five days in advance.
“counsel contemplating a preliminary injunction motion are required to meet and confer, in substantive compliance with Local Rule 7-3, at least five (5) days prior to the filing of such a motion.”
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 Olguin decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
Treats the 2014 California Labor Code amendments (§ 244(a)) as having eliminated administrative-exhaustion prerequisites (including UC internal exhaustion) for whistleblower § 1102.5 claims, displacing the older Campbell rule.
“Based on the foregoing, IT IS ORDERED THAT, defendant's Motion to Dismiss (Document No. 12) is denied.”
Allowed intervention where the existing government defendants could not adequately represent water users’ distinct contractual and water-rights interests during the liability phase.
“Defendants cannot adequately represent the numerous legally protected interests held by the Cachuma Users that could be adversely impacted by Plaintiffs lawsuit.”
Granted a housing injunction after finding a strong likelihood that the plaintiff would succeed on disability discrimination claims.
“there is a strong likelihood of success on the merits of Johnson’s claim for disability discrimination in violation of the FHA and FEHA.”
Procedural preferences
In this motion to dismiss, he concluded that oral argument was unnecessary and decided the motion on the briefs.
“the court concludes that oral argument is not necessary to resolve the Motion”
Cautions
Strict Fourth-Amendment exigency analysis: a warrantless home entry is presumptively unconstitutional absent true exigent circumstances, and a mere belief that drugs 'potentially' would be destroyed does not suffice even with probable cause.
“Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (Document No. 53) is granted in part as to his claim of unlawful entry in violation of the Fourth Amendment.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Based on the foregoing, IT IS ORDERED THAT, defendant's Motion to Dismiss (Document No. 12) is denied.”
“Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (Document No. 53) is granted in part as to his claim of unlawful entry in violation of the Fourth Amendment. The Motion is denied in all other respects.”
“Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Document No. 53) is granted in part as to plaintiff's claim pursuant to Monell v. Dep't of Soc. Servs., 436 U.S. 658... The Motion is denied in all other respects.”
“Plaintiffs Motion to Judge Olguin Concerning the Scope of Discovery, Pursuant to Referral By Magistrate Judge Walsh (Document No. 299) is granted.”
“Based on the foregoing, IT IS ORDERED THAT: ... Defendant shall not take any further steps to evict plaintiff Norma Johnson pending resolution of the above-captioned case.”
“Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Document No. 17) is denied.”
“Cachuma Users’ Motion to Intervene (Document No. 14) is granted.”
“Plaintiffs’ Motion to Remand (Document No. 12) is granted.”
“The Motion is granted with respect to plaintiffs’ claim for monetary damages under the CLRA. The Motion is denied in all other respects.”
“The Motion for Modification of Class Certification Order; Preliminary Approval of Settlement; And Establishment of Qualified Settlement Fund (Document No. 246) is granted upon the terms and conditions set forth in this Order.”
“Plaintiffs Motion for Final Approval of Class Action Settlement (Document No. 268) is granted as set forth herein.”
“Plaintiffs Unopposed Motion for Attorneys’ Fees, Litigation Costs and Class Representative’s Enhancement Payment (Document No. 248) is granted as set forth herein.”
“defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment, or in the Alternative, Partial Summary Judgment (Document No. 101) is denied.”
“the Joint Motion of Rule 19 Owner Defendants to Dismiss Cross-claims of City and CRA/LA (Document No. 242) is granted. The City’s and CRA/ LA’s crossclaims are dismissed with prejudice.”
“defendant’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Document 92) is granted in part and denied in part.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
His civil docket includes disability-access suits, insurance and contract removals, Telephone Consumer Protection Act claims, and habeas matters; many end within months through settlement, default, or remand. Longer contested matters include securities, copyright, and qui tam litigation. The duration figures are limited to two terminated contested cases.
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 | 9 |
| 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 | 13 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 9 | 13 |
| Sep 2025 | 4 | 8 |
| Mar 2025 | 3 | 9 |
| Sep 2024 | 15 | 13 |
| Mar 2024 | 3 | 8 |
| Sep 2023 | 1 | 6 |
| Mar 2023 | 5 | 11 |
| Sep 2022 | 5 | 12 |
| Mar 2022 | 10 | 12 |
| Sep 2021 | 3 | 15 |
| Mar 2021 | 2 | 16 |
| Sep 2020 | 2 | 8 |
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 Olguin: 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 Olguin with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Olguin, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Olguin's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace