Edward M. Chen
How Judge Chen rules, drawn from 14 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
How Judge Chen decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
Reads associational standing generously, allowing a trade association to prove ERISA preemption through a single 'test' member and treating disgorgement as a simple accounting question, and denies a partial motion to dismiss on that basis.
“For the aforementioned reasons, the Court DENIES the Defendant's partial motion to dismiss certain of Plaintiff's claims and its request for monetary relief.”
Reads an arbitration agreement's carveout together with its delegation clause. Where retaliation claims were expressly excluded and the delegation language began with an exception, he required clear and unmistakable delegation before sending the scope question to an arbitrator.
“At the very least, the language of the agreement does not express a ‘clear and unmistakable’ intent to delegate gateway arbitration questions for ‘claims for harassment, discrimination, retaliation, workers compensation, state disability insurance or unemployment insurance benefits, or representative actions for civil penalties filed under the California Private Attorneys General Act.’”
Procedural preferences
On a Rule 12 motion he dismisses claims claim-by-claim (some under 12(b)(1) with leave to amend, others with prejudice) and denies a premature partial-summary-judgment cross-motion without prejudice.
“Uber's motion to dismiss is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Specifically, (1) Diva's complaint is dismissed under Rule 12(b)(1) for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, with leave for Diva to amend ...; (2) Diva's UPA claim is dismissed with prejudice; and (3) Diva's claim under the ‘unfair’ prong of the UCL unfairness claim is dismissed to the extent it is predicated on Sherman Act violations, with leave for Diva to amend within 30 days.”
When deciding whether to set aside default, he weighs culpability, a potentially meritorious defense, and prejudice at the case's current stage; a short delay alone did not justify preserving default.
“Nothing indicates that Defendant’s failure to answer was intentional. Defendant also has meritorious defenses available: Defendant asserts that it does not own the property on which Plaintiff currently alleges the vehicle robbery occurred. Finally, the case is still in its very initial stages. There is no prejudice to Plaintiff from reopening the case beyond a slight delay, which is legally insufficient under the Ninth Circuit’s precedent.”
Cautions
On FLSA and California wage-and-hour summary judgment he dismisses a Labor Code 226 wage-statement penalty as time-barred (finding substitution of a plaintiff futile) and a Section 203 waiting-time penalty where a good-faith classification dispute precludes willfulness, while denying the balance.
“For the foregoing reasons, and as discussed on the record, the Court GRANTS in part and DENIES in part Vector's motion for partial summary judgment.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Uber's motion to dismiss is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Specifically, (1) Diva's complaint is dismissed under Rule 12(b)(1) for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, with leave for Diva to amend ...; (2) Diva's UPA claim is dismissed with prejudice; and (3) Diva's claim under the ‘unfair’ prong of the UCL unfairness claim is dismissed to the extent it is predicated on Sherman Act violations, with leave for Diva to amend within 30 days.”
“Diva's motion for partial summary judgment is DENIED without prejudice.”
“For the aforementioned reasons, the Court DENIES the Defendant's partial motion to dismiss certain of Plaintiff's claims and its request for monetary relief.”
“For the foregoing reasons, and as discussed on the record, the Court GRANTS in part and DENIES in part Vector's motion for partial summary judgment.”
“The Court GRANTS Defendants ASCO and Tya Modeste’s motion to dismiss with prejudice. The Court GRANTS Defendant Razan Ghishan’s motion to dismiss with prejudice.”
“Plaintiff’s motion for leave to file a motion for reconsideration is DENIED.”
“the Court hereby DENIES the motion to dismiss or compel arbitration.”
“The Court therefore denies the motion to reconsider.”
“Because the Court is denying Mr. Firsov’s motion to reconsider, his motion to transfer (to the District of New Jersey) is moot.”
“Defendant’s motion to vacate entry of default is therefore GRANTED.”
“Defendant’s motion to dismiss is GRANTED. Plaintiff is granted leave to file a third amended complaint”
“The Court accordingly grants CFO Rick’s motion to dismiss the counterclaims.”
“Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion for a TRO is DENIED.”
“Plaintiff’s Motion to Vacate and Recuse is DENIED.”
“the Court grants in part and denies in part Mr. Campbell’s fee motion. Mr. Campbell is awarded $3,412.00 in attorneys’ fees.”
“Neuron’s summary judgment motion is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part”
“Blue Cubed’s motion for summary judgment is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
The sample covers cases filed from 2016 through 2019 during Chen's district-judge service. It includes aviation torts, racketeering, post-conviction and prison-conditions matters, civil-rights claims, fraud, and criminal cases. The durations measure filing to termination, not motion-to-ruling time.
Draft for Judge Chen with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Chen, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Chen's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace