Allison Claire
How Judge Claire rules, drawn from 15 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Claire
Allison Claire is a United States Magistrate Judge in the Sacramento Division of the Eastern District of California. Appointed in November 2012, she previously worked in the district’s Federal Defender office and clerked for District Judge Lawrence K. Karlton.
Judge Claire's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Claire, as published on the court's website (checked October 9, 2026). Judges revise these often, so confirm the current version on the court's site before you file.
- Case Management Procedures and Motion Schedule ↗
- Informal Telephonic Conferences re Discovery Disputes ↗
- Standing Orders ↗
Key rules
Motions
Judge Claire lists civil motions for Wednesdays at 10:00 a.m.
“Motion Type: Civil Day: Wednesdays* Time: 10:00 a.m.”
Motions
Judge Claire lists criminal motions for Mondays at 9:00 a.m.
“Motion Type: Criminal Day: Mondays* Time: 09:00 a.m.”
Motions
Contact the courtroom deputy for available motion hearing dates.
“*Contact courtroom deputy for available dates.”
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 9, 2026).
How Judge Claire decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In Avery v. Elia, she recommended dismissing the prisoner’s complaint without prejudice for failure to exhaust administrative remedies.
“Defendants' March 9, 2012 motion to dismiss be granted in part; ... Plaintiff's complaint be dismissed without prejudice for failure to exhaust administrative remedies”
In a consent Social Security appeal, she reversed the administrative decision after finding that the claimant’s hand and wrist evidence undermined the finding of nonseverity, including a possible closed period of disability.
“The ALJ erred in finding that plaintiff’s wrist and hand impairments were nonsevere”
Procedural preferences
In Jagerson v. Cate, she recommended dismissing the habeas petition because the challenged record did not clearly affect the duration of custody.
“Respondent's motion to dismiss this petition (ECF No. 19) be granted, and the petition be dismissed”
In Flagstar Bank, FSB v. Peterson, she recommended remanding the removed action because its state-law complaint supplied no federal claim.
“Plaintiff's motion to remand be granted; and ... This action be remanded to the Sacramento County Superior Court.”
Cautions
In Evi v. Commissioner of Social Security, she recommended denying the claimant’s summary-judgment motion and granting the Commissioner’s.
“Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 10) be DENIED; ... The Commissioner's cross-motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 13) be GRANTED”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Respondent's motion to dismiss this petition (ECF No. 19) be granted, and the petition be dismissed”
“Defendants' motion to dismiss, filed on March 7, 2012 (Doc. No. 13), be denied”
“Plaintiff's motion to remand be granted; and ... This action be remanded to the Sacramento County Superior Court.”
“Defendants' March 9, 2012 motion to dismiss be granted in part; ... Plaintiff's complaint be dismissed without prejudice for failure to exhaust administrative remedies”
“Plaintiff's March 12, 2012 motion for preliminary injunctive relief be denied.”
“Defendants' January 2, 2013 motion to dismiss be granted; Plaintiff's federal claims be dismissed without leave to amend; Plaintiff's state law claims be dismissed without prejudice to renewal in state court.”
“Respondent's motion to dismiss (ECF No. 13) be granted on the alternate grounds that the petition is moot and that it does not come within this court's habeas corpus jurisdiction”
“Plaintiff's August 29, 2012 motion to dismiss and/or strike be granted in part. ... The motion should be granted in all other respects.”
“Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 10) be DENIED; ... The Commissioner's cross-motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 13) be GRANTED”
“The undersigned recommends that defendant’s motion to dismiss (ECF No. 19) be GRANTED and that plaintiff’s claims of age discrimination, disability discrimination, and whistleblower retaliation be dismissed without leave to amend.”
“the undersigned recommends that defendant’s motion to dismiss (ECF No. 21) be GRANTED, and that plaintiff be granted LEAVE TO AMEND as to his Title VII hostile work environment claim only.”
“Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 11) is GRANTED; 2. The Commissioner’s cross-motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 14) is DENIED; 3. This matter is REMANDED to the Commissioner for further consideration consistent with this order”
Sua sponte findings and recommendations in a Section 2254 habeas matter recommending dismissal without prejudice for failure to prosecute and failure to comply with a court order, after the court's IFP order was repeatedly returned as undeliverable and the petitioner never updated his address of record. No party motion was before the court. Verbatim recommendation: 'IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed for without prejudice for failure to prosecute, see L.R. 183(b), and failure to comply with this court’s order, see L.R. 110.' Signer identity confirmed by the -AC caption, the magistrate-judge findings-and-recommendations format, and the record's own filing text stating the order was signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 2/13/2025.
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
- Allison Claire is the consent (636(c)) assigned magistrate judge on a Sacramento docket dominated by Social Security appeals; she is the judge who enters the final consent judgment.
- Many of these dockets were opened and screened by predecessor magistrate judges before reassignment to her.
- Her broader docket also carries referred prisoner civil-rights (42 U.S.C. 1983), state habeas (28 U.S.C. 2254), and removed civil and mortgage matters.
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 | 43 |
| 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 | 4 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 43 | 4 |
| Sep 2025 | 24 | 3 |
| Mar 2025 | 14 | 2 |
| Sep 2024 | 25 | 2 |
| Mar 2024 | 27 | 4 |
| Sep 2023 | 28 | 7 |
| Mar 2023 | 11 | 5 |
| Sep 2022 | 21 | 2 |
| Mar 2022 | 25 | 5 |
| Sep 2021 | 14 | 4 |
| Mar 2021 | 21 | 5 |
| Sep 2020 | 15 | 1 |
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 Eastern District of California, not for Judge Claire: 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 | 2,984 | 8.1 months |
| Closed with no court action | 1,029 | 5.5 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 1,899 | 9.1 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 36 | 29.9 months |
| Closed during trial | 20 | 50.5 months |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 2,984 | 8.1 months |
| Sep 2024 | 2,575 | 9.2 months |
| Sep 2023 | 2,528 | 10.5 months |
| Sep 2022 | 2,624 | 11.2 months |
| Sep 2021 | 2,316 | 9.9 months |
| Sep 2020 | 2,319 | 9.2 months |
| Sep 2019 | 2,562 | 10.3 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 Claire with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Claire, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Claire's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace