Richard G. Seeborg
How Judge Seeborg rules, drawn from 18 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
How Judge Seeborg decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
At summary judgment, a defamation plaintiff must produce evidence creating a genuine dispute over truth; derivative claims may fall with the defamation theory.
“Plaintiffs having failed to produce evidence of any genuine dispute of fact as to the truth of Defendants' statements, their defamation claims necessarily fail as a matter of law--and with them, Plaintiffs' derivative claims also fail. Defendants' summary judgment motion is therefore granted.”
Procedural preferences
When a prior ruling and a stipulation create an apparent ambiguity, he expects counsel to seek clarification by stipulation rather than file a redundant motion.
“it should have sought a further stipulation to clarify that the ruling on the motion for judgment on the pleadings remained in effect, rather than burdening the court and defendant with a motion to dismiss.”
Cautions
He treats an argument raised for the first time in a reply brief as forfeited.
“[Defendant] forfeited its Rule 12(b)(6) argument by raising the argument for the first time in the reply brief. Accordingly, the motion to dismiss is denied as to both Rule 12(b)(1) and Rule 12(b)(6).”
A preliminary-injunction request fails when the developing record does not establish likely success; he may deny relief without reaching the remaining factors.
“Accordingly, a preliminary injunction is not warranted. In light of the insufficiency with respect to success on the merits, the other injunctive factors such as irreparable harm need not be reached.”
Even when a summary-judgment motion is unopposed, the supporting papers must independently establish the absence of a genuine factual dispute.
“The Court may, however, grant an unopposed motion for summary judgment if the movant’s papers are themselves sufficient to support the motion and do not on their face reveal a genuine issue of material fact.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“The TAC has remedied the deficiencies previously identified in the FAC and now includes sufficient details to aver a fraudulent scheme under the FCA and the CFCA... Relator has stated colorable claims. The motion to dismiss is therefore denied.”
“For the foregoing reasons, Defendants' motion to dismiss is granted with leave to amend only with regard to quiet title, breach of contract, negligence, and negligent misrepresentation.”
“Plaintiffs having failed to produce evidence of any genuine dispute of fact as to the truth of Defendants' statements, their defamation claims necessarily fail as a matter of law--and with them, Plaintiffs' derivative claims also fail. Defendants' summary judgment motion is therefore granted.”
“[Defendant] forfeited its Rule 12(b)(6) argument by raising the argument for the first time in the reply brief. Accordingly, the motion to dismiss is denied as to both Rule 12(b)(1) and Rule 12(b)(6).”
“For the aforementioned reasons, KLG's special motion to strike is denied.”
“Its motion to dismiss the fifth claim in plaintiffs' complaint is granted as to plaintiffs' allegations of malpractice without leave to amend, and with leave on the claim that KLG aided and abetted breach of fiduciary duty.”
“Firsov’s complaint fails to allege facts sufficient to support his other damage claims. Accordingly, the motion to dismiss is granted.”
“Firsov has shown no valid basis for reconsideration. Again, even assuming any technical defect in service, Firsov was given extra and ample time to file opposition. The motion for reconsideration is denied.”
“Accordingly, the motion for leave to amend to add parties is denied, without prejudice to renewal if Firsov ultimately is able to state a claim against American Airlines.”
“Plaintiffs have satisfied the requirements for injunctive relief at this stage with regard to their trade secrets claims but have not as to the rest. Accordingly, their motion is granted in part and denied in part as set forth below.”
“In short, the present record does not demonstrate the requisite likelihood of success on the merits on Scola’s claim for trademark infringement, notwithstanding how that claim may be developed in the course of this litigation. Accordingly, a preliminary injunction is not warranted.”
“For the foregoing reasons, the choice of law to be applied is North Carolina and the standard of review is abuse of discretion. Defendant’s motion is granted.”
“The motion to dismiss is denied as unnecessary. The order on the motion for judgment on the pleadings remains in effect, and Choice’s third and fourth counterclaims cannot go forward to the extent based on allegations regarding warranty practices, but may otherwise proceed.”
“Neither party in the above captioned matter disputes that the case should be remanded to state court. Accordingly, Defendant’s motion to remand is granted.”
“Plaintiff also was seemingly unaware that service had occurred. The request for fees is denied.”
“Upon review of the motion brought by Haynes and good cause appearing, Sheet Metal Workers Local 104 and the administrator of its Pension Plan are prohibited from distributing Pension funds to Timothy Tanisaki prior to July 17, 2026.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
- Seeborg's docket caseload. His San Francisco docket is broad: civil rights (Barrera v. Oakland PD), ADA access (Goodwin v. 7-Eleven), habeas (Chavez v. Matteson), False Claims Act qui tam (US v. 1850 Bryant Land), copyright (Crisman v. Celona), fraud (Graham-Loy v. Clear Recon), trade secrets (Osborne Partners v. Whisler), and SEC enforcement (SEC v. Mata; SEC v. Block Bits Capital).
- A large share of his civil docket, ADA-access, wage-and-hour, consumer, ERISA and insurance matters, resolves by stipulated dismissal or mediated settlement rather than a dispositive-motion ruling.
- Durations below are from a sample of terminated dockets.
Draft for Judge Seeborg with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Seeborg, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Seeborg's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace