Eumi K. Lee

How Judge Lee rules, drawn from 22 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

Court
United States District Court for the Northern District of California
Position
district
Appointed by
Joe Biden (Democratic)
Commissioned
2024-05-07
ABA rating
Well Qualified
Education
Pomona College (B.A.); Georgetown University Law Center (J.D.)
Signed orders read
22

How Judge Lee decides

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

What persuades

On venue transfer, she gives a plaintiff's forum choice less weight when neither the plaintiff nor the operative events are located in the chosen district, while still balancing the remaining convenience and justice factors.

“Here, the operative facts occurred exclusively in Missouri, not California.”

Procedural preferences

When overlapping putative class actions proceed in different courts, she applies the first-to-file rule and then separately weighs duplication, party hardship, judicial economy, and prejudice before staying the later case.

“Because the first to file rule applies, the Court finds that a stay is appropriate. In reaching this conclusion, the Court has also balanced competing interests”

Signed rulings

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

Concord Music Group, Inc. v. Anthropic PBC
5:24-cv-03811-EKL · 2025-03-26
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“For the foregoing reasons, Anthropic's motion to dismiss Counts II, III, and IV is GRANTED with leave to amend. Publishers may file an amended complaint within 30 days of this order.”

Gamboa v. Apple Inc.
5:24-cv-01270-EKL · 2025-06-16
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied

“For the foregoing reasons, Apple's motion to dismiss the second amended complaint is DENIED. Apple shall file an answer to the second amended complaint within 21 days of this Order.”

Access Optical Networks, Inc. v. Seagate Technology LLC
5:24-cv-03745-EKL · 2025-01-17
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted in part

“For the foregoing reasons, the Motion is GRANTED IN PART as to AON's breach of contract claim and is otherwise DENIED. Within fourteen days of this Order, AON may file an amended complaint to address the pleading deficiencies identified above.”

Clark v. Nordic Naturals, Inc.
5:24-cv-04058-EKL · 2025-06-05
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted in part

“Defendant's motion to dismiss is GRANTED as to Count 1 (various state consumer protection acts) and Count 3 (CLRA). ... Defendant's motion to dismiss is DENIED as to Count 2 (FAL), Count 4 (UCL), Count 5 (breach of express warranty), Count 6 (quasi-contract), Count 7 (negligent misrepresentation), and Count 8 (intentional misrepresentation).”

Panchenko v. Comenity Capital Bank
23-cv-04965-EKL · 2025-08-13
Motion to exclude expert (defendant) Granted in part

“For the foregoing reasons, the Court will exclude Hollon's proposed testimony as to whether Panchenko is a victim of identity theft. ... In all other respects, Comenity's motion is DENIED.”

TEEC Angel Management, LLC v. Tsingyuan Ventures LLC
24-cv-08991-EKL · 2025-08-13
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted in part

“Defendants' motion to dismiss is GRANTED IN PART as to the unfair competition claims asserted by TAM and Fund 4, with leave to amend, and DENIED on the remaining grounds.”

Nichols v. eHealthInsurance Services, Inc.
23-cv-06720-EKL · 2025-03-03
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“Accordingly, the Court GRANTS the Motion to Dismiss Count 1 without leave to amend because Matthews does not allege any facts that could state a claim under this theory of liability, and the claim was asserted in error.”

Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied

“Accordingly, eHealth's Motion to Dismiss Count 2 is DENIED.”

Motion to strike class allegations (defendant) Granted in part

“The Court GRANTS eHealth's Motion to Strike the class definition with leave to amend consistent with the discussion above ... The Court DENIES the Motion to Strike in all other respects.”

Moulton v. Paul
25-cv-04059-EKL · 2026-03-20
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“For the following reasons, the Court GRANTS WITH LEAVE TO AMEND Defendants' motions to dismiss.”

Turing Video Technology, Inc. v. AGI7 Inc.
24-cv-04606-EKL · 2025-02-21
Motion to compel arbitration (defendant) Granted

“Accordingly, AGI7 has demonstrated that both bases for invoking equitable estoppel apply here. Accordingly, the Court GRANTS AGI7's motion to compel arbitration.”

Motions to stay (defendant) Granted

“For the foregoing reasons, the Court GRANTS the motion to compel arbitration as to all claims, except for Turing's request for injunctive relief. Additionally, the Court GRANTS the motion to stay this action in its entirety until arbitration concludes.”

Thornhill v. McLane Foodservice, Inc.
25-cv-07475-EKL · 2026-01-16
Motions to remand (plaintiff) Denied

“Because Defendant has met its burden to show that more than $5 million is at stake in this case, the motion to remand is DENIED.”

Shugars v. Walmart Inc.
24-cv-02765-EKL · 2025-03-12
Motion to compel arbitration (defendant) Granted

“For the foregoing reasons, the Court GRANTS Walmart's motion to compel individual arbitration as to all claims, except for Shugars' representative PAGA claim.”

Motions to stay (defendant) Granted

“Additionally, the Court GRANTS Walmart's motion to stay this action in its entirety until arbitration concludes.”

Lee v. Plex, Inc.
24-cv-02386-EKL · 2025-03-28
Motion to compel arbitration (defendant) Denied

“Because these important elements are lacking, Plex has not met its burden to show the existence of an agreement to arbitrate. Accordingly, Plex's motion to compel arbitration is DENIED.”

Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“Plex's motion to dismiss Plaintiff's claims against Plex GmbH for lack of personal jurisdiction is GRANTED with leave to amend.”

Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied

“Plex's motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim is DENIED.”

Motion to strike class allegations (defendant) Denied

“Accordingly, Plex's motion to strike class allegations is DENIED.”

Motion to transfer venue (defendant) Denied

“Accordingly, Plex's motion to transfer is DENIED.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

  • Because Lee joined the court in May 2024, the sample is dominated by cases filed from 2024 through 2026.
  • It includes product-liability and warranty disputes, immigration-delay suits, consumer-protection matters, habeas and prisoner civil-rights petitions, and copyright, patent, and trademark cases.
  • Many late-2024 filings terminated within 60 to 130 days through voluntary dismissal, settlement, or remand; the durations below come from terminated 2024 cases.

Draft for Judge Lee with the record in hand

Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Lee, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Grounded in Judge Lee's own signed orders
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace