Percy Anderson

United States District Court for the Central District of California district Appointed by George W. Bush (Republican) 4 signed orders read

How Judge Anderson decides

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

What persuades

In trademark disputes over expressive works he grants summary judgment under the Rogers v. Grimaldi test (artistic relevance above zero and not explicitly misleading), rejecting a 'cultural significance' gloss and deciding on the papers without oral argument.

“For the foregoing reasons, the Court grants Fox's Motion for Summary Judgment. The Court shall enter a Judgment consistent with this Order.”

Cautions

On de novo review he adopts magistrate recommendations dismissing state-prisoner 28 U.S.C. 2254 petitions with prejudice, including as untimely under AEDPA.

“IT IS ORDERED that: 1. Respondent's Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED; 2. Judgment shall be entered denying the Petition and dismissing this action with prejudice.”

Signed rulings

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

Culver v. Director of Corrections
450 F. Supp. 2d 1135 · 2006-09-16
Motions to dismiss (respondent) Granted

“IT IS ORDERED that: 1. Respondent's Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED; 2. Judgment shall be entered denying the Petition and dismissing this action with prejudice.”

Bovarie v. Giurbino
558 F. Supp. 2d 1030 · 2008-04-03
Habeas petition (petitioner) Denied

“the Magistrate Judge recommends that the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus be dismissed with prejudice. ... ACCORDINGLY, IT IS ORDERED: 1. The final report and recommendation is adopted. 2. Judgment shall be entered consistent with this order.”

Dotson v. Scribner
619 F. Supp. 2d 866 · 2008-10-10
Habeas petition (petitioner) Denied

“Having made a de novo determination, the Court agrees with the recommendation of the Magistrate Judge. IT IS ORDERED that Judgment be entered denying the Petition and dismissed this action with prejudice.”

Twentieth Century Fox Television v. Empire Distribution Inc.
161 F. Supp. 3d 902 · 2016-02-01
Summary judgment (plaintiff) Granted

“For the foregoing reasons, the Court grants Fox's Motion for Summary Judgment. The Court shall enter a Judgment consistent with this Order.”

Motions to strike (plaintiff) Moot / procedural

“Because the Court rules in favor of Fox on First Amendment grounds, the Court denies as moot Fox's Motion to Strike and Empire Distribution's request for a continuance under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(d).”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

The reviewed mid-2026 assignments are dominated by pending alien-detainee habeas petitions and pro se civil filings. Reviewed cases filed in 2022 include employment and prisoner civil-rights, disability-access, agency-review, copyright, maritime-contract, landlord-tenant, and criminal matters, many of which ended quickly. Duration figures are limited to terminated cases in the reviewed set.

Put Judge Anderson's record to work

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

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