Jesus G. Bernal

United States District Court for the Central District of California district Appointed by Barack Obama (Democratic) 5 signed orders read

How Judge Bernal decides

Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

What persuades

Applies antitrust-injury, standing, and monopolization standards rigorously at summary judgment, granting the defendants' motions where the plaintiff cannot meet them.

“the Court GRANTS the motions.”

Procedural preferences

Parses multi-count complaints claim by claim on summary judgment, granting the motion in part and denying it in part.

“the Court GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART the Motion.”

Cautions

Declines to resolve disputed excessive-force and qualified-immunity facts on summary judgment, denying the motion and sending them to a jury.

“the Court DENIES the motion.”

Signed rulings

A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.

Montoya v. Orange County Sheriff's Department
8:11-cv-01922 · 2013-08-13
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted in part

“the Court GRANTS IN PART Defendant’s Motion and DENIES Plaintiffs Motion.”

Summary judgment (plaintiff) Denied
McInteer v. Ashley Distribution Services, Ltd.
5:13-cv-00141 · 2014-08-19
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted in part

“the Court GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART the Motion.”

AFMS LLC v. United Parcel Service Co.
2:10-cv-05830 · 2015-04-30
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“the Court GRANTS the motions.”

Welte v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
5:13-cv-00444 · 2016-05-27
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“the Court GRANTS the motion.”

Jackson v. County of San Bernardino
5:13-cv-01755 · 2016-06-13
Summary judgment (defendant) Denied

“the Court DENIES the motion.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

His current intake (2026) is dominated by alien-detainee Section 2241 habeas plus consumer/FCRA-style suits and prisoner/state-custody civil, all still pending. Reaching back to earlier filing years surfaces his contested merits civil docket -- including a pair of False Claims Act qui tam suits against dermatology practices (one of which, United States v. Pacific Dermatology Institute, ended in a six-million-dollar consent judgment after he twice ruled on motions to dismiss) -- alongside the employment, Section 1983, antitrust, and mortgage cases reflected in the published opinions above. The duration below is from the one terminated contested civil case whose timeline was read.

Put Judge Bernal's record to work

Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Bernal actually rules, not a generic AI guess.

Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Bernal's own signed orders and cites them.