Carolyn K. Delaney
How Judge Delaney rules, drawn from 20 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Delaney
Carolyn K. Delaney became a United States Magistrate Judge for the Eastern District of California in August 2011. Before joining the bench, she served as an Assistant United States Attorney in that district and worked in the Justice Department and state prosecutors' offices. She earned her undergraduate degree from Wesleyan University and her law degree from Stanford University.
Judge Delaney's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Delaney, 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 ↗
- Standard Information ↗
- Settlement Conference Information ↗
Key rules
Filing
Do not send paper courtesy copies to Judge Delaney until further notice.
“NO COURTESY COPIES NEEDED UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE”
Conferences
Civil law-and-motion hearings are held by Zoom on Wednesdays at 10 a.m.
“Civil Law and Motion Calendar is held via Zoom on Wednesdays at 10:00 AM.”
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 Delaney decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
Treats interior immigration arrests after an earlier release as governed by the discretionary detention scheme in Section 1226(a), following the majority view among courts in the circuit rather than mandatory detention under Section 1225(b)(2).
“The undersigned agrees with this analysis and follows the majority view in finding that the applicable statute governing Petitioner’s detention here is § 1226(a), and not § 1225(b)(2).”
Procedural preferences
Resolves prisoner cross-motions for summary judgment by issuing findings and recommendations, which the assigned district judge adopted in full.
“FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 11/9/22 RECOMMENDING 111 Motion for Summary Judgment be granted, 120 Motion for Summary Judgment be denied, 121 Motion for TRO be denied and the action dismissed. [ADOPTED in FULL by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 1/30/2023]”
In consent cases, enters final judgment directly rather than issuing a recommendation to a district judge.
“Defendants’ motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 32) is GRANTED. The Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment for defendants and close this case.”
Cautions
Recommends denying a prisoner-plaintiff's request for a temporary restraining order and dismissing the action.
“RECOMMENDING ... 121 Motion for TRO be denied and the action dismissed. [ADOPTED in FULL: 'DENYING 121 Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order']”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 11/9/22 RECOMMENDING 111 Motion for Summary Judgment be granted, 120 Motion for Summary Judgment be denied, 121 Motion for TRO be denied and the action dismissed. [ADOPTED in FULL by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 1/30/2023]”
“RECOMMENDING ... 120 Motion for Summary Judgment be denied ... [ADOPTED in FULL by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 1/30/2023: 'DENYING 120 Motion for Summary Judgment']”
“RECOMMENDING ... 121 Motion for TRO be denied and the action dismissed. [ADOPTED in FULL: 'DENYING 121 Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order']”
In a pro se prisoner case, Delaney learned that the plaintiff had died and set a Rule 25(a) substitution deadline. When no motion to substitute was filed, she recommended sua sponte dismissal.
In a pro se prisoner case, the plaintiff failed to file a completed in forma pauperis application or pay the filing fee within 30 days. Delaney recommended sua sponte dismissal without prejudice under Rule 41(b).
“IT IS ORDERED that the above-captioned action is remanded to the Commissioner of Social Security for further proceedings pursuant to the fourth sentence of Section 205(g) of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. 405(g).”
“IT IS ORDERED that the above-captioned action is remanded to the Commissioner of Social Security for further proceedings pursuant to the fourth sentence of Section 205(g) of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. 405(g).”
“1. Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 12) is denied; 2. The Commissioner's cross-motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 14) is granted; and 3. Judgment is entered for the Commissioner.”
“1. Defendant Lester's motion to dismiss (ECF No. 27) is GRANTED; 2. Defendant City of Davis' motion to dismiss (ECF No. 28) is GRANTED; 3. Defendant Bonta's motion to dismiss (ECF No. 30) is GRANTED; 4. Plaintiff's FAC (ECF No. 16) is DISMISSED with leave to amend”
“IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that petitioner's application for a writ of habeas corpus (ECF No. 1) be denied.”
“IT IS RECOMMENDED that petitioner's ‘Motion for Emergency Stay and Release Pending Habeas Review’ (ECF No. 2) be denied.”
“Defendant's motion to compel (ECF No. 32) is GRANTED in PART, to the extent that within 30 days of service of this order, plaintiff shall do the following:”
“Plaintiff's motion to modify the scheduling order (ECF No. 34) is DENIED.”
On Rule 4 preliminary review of a pro se 28 U.S.C. 2254 petition challenging ongoing state criminal proceedings, the court applied Younger v. Harris abstention and recommended the third amended petition be summarily dismissed and the case closed. Sua sponte screening disposition on no party motion; grounding language: “IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that: 1. Petitioner's third amended petition for a writ of habeas corpus (ECF No. 11) be summarily dismissed; and 2. This case be closed.”
“Defendants’ motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 32) is GRANTED.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Delaney is a long-serving Sacramento magistrate judge whose reviewed work is dominated by referred prisoner civil-rights, habeas, and filing-fee screening matters. Because many matters come to her by referral rather than consent for final judgment, this profile does not describe her complete caseload.
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 | 2 | 2 |
| Mar 2025 | 5 | 4 |
| Sep 2024 | 1 | 6 |
| Mar 2024 | 0 | 2 |
| Sep 2023 | 0 | 3 |
| Mar 2023 | 1 | 2 |
| Sep 2022 | 5 | 0 |
| Mar 2022 | 2 | 0 |
| Sep 2021 | 1 | 0 |
| Mar 2021 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2020 | 0 | 0 |
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 Delaney: 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 Delaney with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Delaney, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Delaney's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace