Michael W. Fitzgerald

How Judge Fitzgerald rules, drawn from 11 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

Court
United States District Court for the Central District of California
Position
district
Appointed by
Barack Obama (Democratic)
Commissioned
2012-03-15
Education
Harvard University (A.B., 1981); University of California, Berkeley, School of Law (J.D., 1985)
Signed orders read
11

How Judge Fitzgerald decides

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

What persuades

In asbestos products-liability cases, applies maritime and federal causation standards, granting summary judgment absent evidence the decedent was exposed to each defendant's specific product.

“ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT”

On bankruptcy appeal, he followed controlling circuit precedent despite acknowledged policy concerns about its result.

“Whatever misgivings the bankruptcy court or this Court might have about the holding in Debbie Reynolds , it is controlling, and the bankruptcy court correctly applied it here.”

Procedural preferences

In patent cases, applies its prior claim-construction order on summary judgment and declines to re-litigate the construction, granting non-infringement and denying the invalidity motion as moot.

“the Court GRANTS Defendants’ Motions for Summary Judgment of Non-Infringement and DENIES AS MOOT Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment of Invalidity.”

At the pleading stage in an education-disability action, declined to impose a pre-suit accommodation-request rule that controlling circuit law had not adopted for schools.

“In the absence of Ninth Circuit authority imposing the notice requirement in the education context, the Court declines to exalt form over substance and dismiss the Complaint on this basis.”

Cautions

Reads insurance accrual rules in the insured's favor at the pleading stage, denying a limitations-based motion to dismiss where the claim accrues at the termination of covered disability.

“For the reasons set forth below, the Motion is DENIED.”

In a prescription-drug mass-tort action, treated limitations as case-dispositive where the plaintiff could not obtain cross-jurisdictional class tolling and had not relied on the other case as an alternative remedy.

“Given this history, it is not plausible that Plaintiff relied on an out-of-state class action suit as part of the diligent pursuit of his rights, and thus equitable tolling does not apply.”

Signed rulings

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

Nelson v. Air & Liquid Systems Corp.
2:12-cv-00793 · 2013-02-12
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT”

Uniloc Luxembourg v. eClinicalWorks, LLC
2:11-cv-10122 · 2013-08-29
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“the Court GRANTS Defendants’ Motions for Summary Judgment of Non-Infringement and DENIES AS MOOT Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment of Invalidity.”

Summary judgment (defendant) Moot / procedural

“DENIES AS MOOT Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment of Invalidity.”

Almont Ambulatory Surgery Center, LLC v. UnitedHealth Group, Inc.
2:14-cv-03053 · 2015-02-12
Motions to dismiss (counter-defendant) Granted in part

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

Gray v. United of Omaha Life Insurance Co.
2:16-cv-09019 · 2017-05-01
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied

“For the reasons set forth below, the Motion is DENIED.”

De La Fuente v. State of California
2:16-cv-03242 · 2017-10-04
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“Accordingly, Defendants’ Motion is GRANTED.”

In re Wrightwood Guest Ranch, LLC
ED CV 17-895 / ED CV 17-947 · 2018-02-22
Bankruptcy appeal (appellants) Denied

“Accordingly, the Court AFFIRMS the Surcharge Order.”

Janette Beckman and LeeAnne Hansen v. American Airlines, Inc. and Sigsbee “John” Nelson
2:23-cv-07410 · 2024-10-03
Summary judgment (defendant American Airlines) Granted

“this Court granted summary judgment in favor of Defendant”

Summary judgment (defendant Sigsbee “John” Nelson) Granted in part

“Nelson, this Court granted summary judgment in his favor on the statutory claims”

In re Consolidated Freightways Corp.
5:16-cv-00164 · 2016-06-28
Bankruptcy appeal (appellants) Denied

“Accordingly, the Court AFFIRMS the decision of the Bankruptcy Court.”

In re Holy Hill Community Church
2:16-cv-05739 / 2:16-cv-05828 · 2017-01-05
Bankruptcy appeal (appellants) Granted in part

“Accordingly, the Court AFFIRMS the decision of the Bankruptcy Court to dismiss Appellants’ Second Amended Complaint and to expunge the lis pendens, but REMANDS to the Bankruptcy Court for the limited purpose of correcting the scope of its dismissal order.”

Petition for writ of mandamus (petitioners) Denied

“The Court DENIES the Petition for Writ of Mandamus.”

Hendrix v. Novartis Pharmaceutical Corp.
2:13-cv-02402 · 2013-10-02
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment as to all counts.”

P.P. v. Compton Unified School District
2:15-cv-03726 · 2015-09-29
Motions to dismiss (defendants) Denied

“For the foregoing reasons, the Motion is DENIED. Defendants will have 21 days from the entry of this Order in which to file an Answer to the Complaint.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

  • A removal-heavy general civil diet typical of the Los Angeles federal bench: insurance breach/bad-faith suits removed on diversity, lemon-law and other consumer-contract removals against automakers, employment-discrimination removals, ADA and Fair Housing accessibility cases, False Claims Act / qui tam matters, and the occasional state-custody habeas.
  • Durations below are filing-to-termination for 13 terminated cases filed in 2021 (median about 373 days), not motion-to-ruling latency.
  • Many of these cases resolve by stipulated dismissal after private mediation rather than by a merits ruling, which the durations reflect.
  • Consistent with that pattern, of the contested dockets whose timelines were reviewed, most closed by stipulated voluntary dismissal after a court-ordered mediation rather than by a dispositive ruling (e.g. a COVID business-interruption insurance suit and a trademark suit both dismissed by stipulation before their pending motions were decided).

Draft for Judge Fitzgerald with the record in hand

Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Fitzgerald, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Grounded in Judge Fitzgerald's own signed orders
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace