S. James Otero
How Judge Otero rules, drawn from 23 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Judge Otero no longer sits on this court. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled here.
About Judge Otero
S. James Otero was a judge of the United States District Court for the Central District of California. Appointed by President George W. Bush, Judge Otero received a commission on February 12, 2003. Judge Otero assumed senior status on December 30, 2018 and retired on April 10, 2020.
How Judge Otero decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In Dahl v. Swift Distributions, Otero granted the defendants’ motion for summary adjudication of noninfringement of the patents at issue in its entirety.
“For the following reasons, Defendants’ Motion for Summary Adjudication is GRANTED in its entirety.”
Procedural preferences
In Kalter’s travel-injury case, he granted the tour operator’s summary-judgment motion after finding the matter suitable for decision without oral argument.
“For the following reasons, Grand Circle's Motion is GRANTED.”
Cautions
In Wiener, Otero denied class certification because the named plaintiff did not satisfy the Rule 23(a)(3) typicality requirement. He decided that motion on the papers.
“Because Wiener does not satisfy the typicality re*663quirement of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a)(3), Plaintiffs Motion is DENIED.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Because Wiener does not satisfy the typicality re*663quirement of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a)(3), Plaintiffs Motion is DENIED.”
“For the following reasons, Plaintiffs Motion is GRANTED.”
“For the following reasons, Grand Circle's Motion is GRANTED.”
“For the following reasons, Defendants’ Motion for Summary Adjudication is GRANTED in its entirety.”
“For the following reasons, Defen *1210 dants’ Motions for Summary Judgment are GRANTED.”
“For the following reasons, the Court GRANTS IN *1084PART AND DENIES IN PART the Government’s Motion to Dismiss.”
“For the reasons stated below, the Court GRANTS IN PART AND DENIES IN PART the Motion.”
“Because Plaintiff has met its burden of establishing the required preliminary injunction factors, the Court DISCHARGES the Order to Show Cause and ISSUES a preliminary injunction.”
“For the foregoing reasons, the Court GRANTS Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment.”
“For the foregoing reasons, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff Jaime Corona’s Motion to Remand and REMANDS this action to the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Los Angeles.”
“For the foregoing reasons, the Court GRANTS IN PART AND DENIES IN PART Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Complaint.”
“For the foregoing reasons, the Court GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART POM’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
- Drawn from a sample of his case assignments.
- His docket (a visible window of 2016-2019, all terminated by his 2020 retirement) mixed a multi-year False Claims Act qui tam (United States v. Federal Defense Industries), the high-profile Clifford v. Trump (Stormy Daniels) defamation and contract suits, federal criminal cases, serial-filer ADA Title III suits (Rutherford), pro se prisoner, civil-rights, and habeas matters, and commercial contract disputes.
- Durations below are filed-minus-terminated for terminated dockets in the sample.
- Case-level nature-of-suit codes were blank on these records; the mix is inferred from the case captions and numbers.
A historical record
Judge Otero no longer sits on this court. This profile stays available as a record of how they ruled here. If you're preparing for a matter, start from the court's current bench.