Ana Isabel de Alba
How Judge Alba rules, drawn from 12 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Judge Alba left this court for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled here.
About Judge Alba
Ana Isabel de Alba was a judge of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California. Appointed by President Joseph R. Biden, Judge de Alba received a commission on July 7, 2022. Judge de Alba left the court on November 16, 2023 on appointment to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
How Judge Alba decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
Applies deferential review to a magistrate judge’s nondispositive ruling and requires a firm basis to find factual error.
“A district court will not set aside a magistrate judge’s order on a non-dispositive matter unless that order is clearly erroneous or contrary to law.”
Procedural preferences
In Hardy v. Santoro, de Alba applied the rule that a reconsideration motion cannot introduce arguments or evidence that could reasonably have been presented earlier in the case.
“A motion for reconsideration may not be used to raise arguments or present evidence for the first time when they could reasonably have been raised earlier in the litigation.”
Cautions
Late-produced material did not excuse a prisoner’s failure to exhaust when it had not been submitted with the opposition and was lost only after the deadline.
“Plaintiff does not explain why the missing documents were not submitted with his opposition, due June 2, 2022, when he had lost these documents after the deadline, on January 18, 2023.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Defendant Lucas’s motion for summary judgment for failure to exhaust, filed on March 14, 2022, (ECF No. 61), is GRANTED;”
“Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment, (ECF No. 18), is GRANTED;”
“Defendant’s Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment, (ECF No. 19), is DENIED;”
“Defendants’ motion to dismiss (ECF No. 22) is denied;”
“Defendant County of Fresno’s motion to dismiss, (ECF No. 31), is denied;”
“Respondent’s motion to dismiss, (ECF No. 6), is granted;”
The court adopted the recommendation and dismissed the habeas petition with prejudice; no party motion was identified in the order.
“Plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction, (ECF No. 12), is denied.”
“Plaintiff’s motion for preliminary injunction, (ECF No. 4), is denied;”
“Plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction, (ECF No. 24), is denied.”
“Plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration, (ECF No. 142), is denied;”
“Plaintiff’s August 22, 2023 motion for reconsideration, (ECF No. 72), is denied;”
“Mr. Davis’s Motion to Withdraw his Motion to Suppress (ECF No. 39) and Motion to Dismiss the Indictment (ECF No. 41) is granted and both Motions are so withdrawn.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
The ten earliest sampled in-tenure dockets were all terminated and included personal-injury, disability-access, civil-rights, habeas, contract, employment, consumer, and debt-collection matters. The sample is a fixed early-tenure slice, not a caseload distribution.
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 | 0 |
| 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 | 2 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 0 | 2 |
| Sep 2025 | 0 | 4 |
| Mar 2025 | 0 | 3 |
| Sep 2024 | 0 | 1 |
| Mar 2024 | 1 | 0 |
| Sep 2023 | 178 | 100 |
| Mar 2023 | 149 | 74 |
| Sep 2022 | 0 | 69 |
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.
A historical record
Judge Alba left this court for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. 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.