Stanley A. Boone

United States District Court for the Eastern District of California magistrate 12 signed orders read

How Judge Boone decides

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

What persuades

On a Rule 12(b)(6) motion Boone recommends dismissal with leave to amend where the allegations are insufficient but amendment would not be futile or prejudicial (for example on trademark-infringement and false-designation counterclaims).

“The assigned magistrate judge found the allegations were insufficient to support PIV's counterclaims for trademark infringement and false designation of origin and recommended the motion to dismiss be granted. (See Doc. 16 at 5-17.) ... 1. The Findings and Recommendations dated (Doc. 16) are ADOPTED in full. 2. Plaintiff's motion to dismiss (Doc. 8) is GRANTED. 3. Defendant's first and second counterclaims are DISMISSED with leave to amend.”

Procedural preferences

Deciding nondispositive matters directly, he denies a plaintiff's motion for entry of default where the defendant has answered and is defending the action, reflecting the Ninth Circuit's preference for deciding cases on the merits.

“In this instance, Defendant filed an answer to the complaint on February 27, 2024, and is defending this action. ... Accordingly, Plaintiff is not entitled to entry of default. ... Plaintiff's motion for entry of default, filed March 8, 2024, is HEREBY DENIED.”

Signed rulings

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

Mike's Novelties, Inc. v. PIV Enterprises, Inc.
1:23-cv-01309-JLT-SAB · 2024-03-12
Motions to dismiss (plaintiff) Granted

“The assigned magistrate judge found the allegations were insufficient to support PIV's counterclaims for trademark infringement and false designation of origin and recommended the motion to dismiss be granted. (See Doc. 16 at 5-17.) ... 1. The Findings and Recommendations dated (Doc. 16) are ADOPTED in full. 2. Plaintiff's motion to dismiss (Doc. 8) is GRANTED. 3. Defendant's first and second counterclaims are DISMISSED with leave to amend.”

Mubiru v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
1:23-cv-01597-KES-SAB · 2024-03-11
Motion for entry of default (plaintiff) Denied

“In this instance, Defendant filed an answer to the complaint on February 27, 2024, and is defending this action. ... Accordingly, Plaintiff is not entitled to entry of default. ... Plaintiff's motion for entry of default, filed March 8, 2024, is HEREBY DENIED.”

GS Holistic, LLC v. J's Smoke Shop
1:23-cv-00286-ADA-SAB · 2023-06-09
Motions to strike (plaintiff) Granted

“1. Plaintiff's motion to strike, construed as a motion to withdraw the erroneously-labeled duplicate filings (ECF No. 8) is GRANTED; 2. Plaintiff's erroneously-titled identical filings (ECF Nos. 6, 7) are both DEEMED WITHDRAWN”

Fane v. Commissioner of Social Security
1:23-cv-01762-SAB · 2024-10-03
Social security appeal (claimant) Denied

“Plaintiff’s appeal from the decision of the Commissioner of Social Security is DENIED.”

Gamboa v. Commissioner of Social Security
1:24-cv-01048-SAB · 2024-09-19
Motion to proceed ifp (plaintiff) Denied

“IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis be DENIED and Plaintiff be ordered to pay the $405.00 filing fee for this action.”

Mathison v. Shannon
1:24-cv-00427-KES-SAB · 2024-11-19

Following screening of a prisoner civil-rights complaint and the plaintiff's election to proceed, the court recommended the action go forward on a single excessive-force claim and that the remaining claims and one defendant be dismissed for failure to state a claim.

Murillo-Esparza v. Bar 20 Dairy Farms LLC
1:24-cv-01354-SAB · 2024-11-13

Screening a pro se employment complaint, the court found it failed to satisfy basic pleading requirements and did not establish jurisdiction, and granted the plaintiff thirty days to file an amended complaint.

Roman v. Jackson
1:23-cv-00671-KES-SAB · 2025-05-15
Motion for leave to amend (plaintiff) Denied

“Plaintiff’s motion to amend the complaint be denied.”

Jasso v. Matteson
1:24-cv-00133-KES-SAB · 2025-06-26
Petition for writ of habeas corpus (petitioner) Denied

“the Court HEREBY RECOMMENDS that the petition for writ of habeas corpus be DENIED.”

Jones v. Allen
1:25-cv-01088-SAB · 2025-09-03
Motion to proceed ifp (plaintiff) Denied

“it is HEREBY RECOMMENDED that, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), Plaintiff not be allowed to proceed in forma pauperis and instead be directed to pay the $405.00 filing fee in full if he wishes to proceed with this action.”

Tate v. Borla
1:25-cv-01583-SAB-HC · 2025-11-26
Petition for writ of habeas corpus (petitioner) Denied

“The petition for writ of habeas corpus be DISMISSED as an unauthorized successive petition;”

McCoy v. McCormick & Company, Inc.
1:25-cv-00231-JLT-SAB · 2026-02-09
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted in part

“IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that Defendant’s motion to dismiss (ECF No. 10) be GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

The sampled caseload is dominated by prisoner civil-rights referrals involving screening, dismissal, and summary judgment. It also includes trademark and consumer disputes in which Boone handled early proceedings or nondispositive motions, along with settlement-conference and criminal-duty matters.

Put Judge Boone's record to work

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

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