Susan Yvonne Illston
How Judge Illston rules, drawn from 24 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Illston
Susan Yvonne Illston is a judge of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. Appointed by President William J. Clinton, Judge Illston received a commission on May 26, 1995. Judge Illston assumed senior status on July 1, 2013.
Judge Illston's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Illston, as published on the court's website (checked October 8, 2026). Judges revise these often, so confirm the current version on the court's site before you file.
Key rules
Motions
Check the court’s scheduling notes before setting a hearing; do not select a closed date.
“Parties MUST NOT set hearing dates on days where the Court has indicated dates are 16 closed for further settings. Before setting a hearing, parties MUST check the Court’s 17 scheduling notes where dates closed for further settings are listed.”
Discovery
After an unresolved discovery meet and confer, file a concise joint statement of at most five pages.
“If, after a good faith effort, the parties have not resolved their dispute, they shall prepare a 6 concise joint statement of 5 pages or less, stating the nature and status of their dispute.”
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 8, 2026).
How Judge Illston decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In Ray's civil-rights case, she entered judgment for the defendants after granting their summary-judgment motions.
“Defendants’ motions for summary judgment are granted.”
In the reviewed detainee-death suit, uncertainty over which jail officer performed particular safety checks was left for discovery rather than treated as a reason to dismiss the pleaded claim.
“Such allegations are more appropriately fleshed out through discovery.”
In the Enovix securities case, she denied class certification after finding that defendants had shown the challenged August 2021 statement had no price impact, leaving reliance to be proved individually.
“presumption of reliance by showing through a preponderance of the evidence that the August 10, 2021 statement had no price impact.”
Procedural preferences
In Starski v. corePHP, LLC, she denied a motion to dismiss a counterclaim for defective service and ordered the defendant to serve a paper copy within ten days.
“Therefor, the Court hereby DENIES plaintiff's motion to dismiss and ORDERS defendant to properly serve plaintiff with a paper copy by mail within 10 days of the date of this order.”
In Balu's case, she granted the plaintiff's request to amend the complaint by January 5, 2009, and denied his remaining motions as without merit.
“The Court GRANTS plaintiff’s request to amend the complaint”
In Delgado v. Meta Platforms, she denied a request to disqualify the plaintiff’s expert after weighing the prior relationship with Meta and the prejudice of losing the expert at that stage.
“In sum, disqualification of Dr. Singh at this stage would prejudice plaintiff, and the Court does not find that the relationship between Meta and Dr. Singh was of such a nature that allowing Dr. Singh to testify for plaintiff would undermine the integrity of the adversarial process.”
Cautions
A plaintiff who obtained citizenship documents was denied statutory fees because the government had a substantially justified basis to seek discovery amid conflicting agency evidence.
“Given this history, defendants’ positions during the agency proceedings and the instant litigation were substantially justified.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Summary judgment is granted for defendants and against plaintiff. Judgment is entered accordingly.”
“Defendants' motions for summary judgment are granted. Judgment is entered accordingly in favor of defendants and against plaintiff.”
“Therefor, the Court hereby DENIES plaintiff's motion to dismiss and ORDERS defendant to properly serve plaintiff with a paper copy by mail within 10 days of the date of this order.”
“The Court GRANTS plaintiff’s request to amend the complaint”
“the Court GRANTS defendants’ motion as to the Lanham Act claim without leave to amend and DENIES defendants’ motion as to the copyright infringement and trade dress misappropriation claims.”
“the motions to exclude the reports and offered testimony of experts Malek, Putnam, Kong, and Kelly are DENIED. Dkt Nos. 625, 627, 634, 642. The motions to exclude the reports and offered testimony of experts Shamos, Jones, Almeroth, Pooley, and Teece are DENIED in part and GRANTED in part, as explained above.”
“the Court hereby GRANTS plaintiff’s motion to remand this case Alameda County Superior Court, DENIES AS MOOT Target’s motion to dismiss, and DENIES plaintiff’s request for fees.”
“For the reasons stated above, plaintiff’s motion for a TRO (Dkt. No. 24) is DENIED.”
“The Court DENIES MEBA’s motion to dismiss the claims against it from the Third Amended Complaint.”
“The motions to exclude the reports and offered testimony of experts Goodall and Diaz are DENIED in part and GRANTED in part, as explained above.”
“The Court now GRANTS IN PART AND DENIES IN PART the motions to dismiss.”
“the Court GRANTS defendants’ motion for summary judgment on the Saxton plaintiffs’ § 1983 claims against Sheriff Essick on the basis of qualified immunity, and GRANTS defendants’ motion for summary judgment on the Estate’s negligence claims for failure to file a tort claim. The Court DENIES the balance of defendants’ motion, finding there are triable issues of fact.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
- Although Illston took senior status in 2013, she continues to carry a broad San Francisco caseload that includes police and other civil-rights matters, copyright and patent disputes, employment, product liability, consumer credit, immigration and administrative-review cases, and federal criminal matters.
- The durations below come from terminated cases in a 2021 filing sample rather than a complete count.
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 | 5 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 0 | 5 |
| Sep 2025 | 0 | 4 |
| Mar 2025 | 0 | 7 |
| Sep 2024 | 0 | 9 |
| Mar 2024 | 0 | 11 |
| Sep 2023 | 0 | 8 |
| Mar 2023 | 0 | 7 |
| Sep 2022 | 0 | 6 |
| Mar 2022 | 0 | 6 |
| Sep 2021 | 0 | 6 |
| Mar 2021 | 0 | 6 |
| Sep 2020 | 0 | 5 |
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 Northern District of California, not for Judge Illston: 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 | 6,017 | 7.7 months |
| Closed with no court action | 2,955 | 5.5 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 1,978 | 7.6 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 1,052 | 15 months |
| Closed during trial | 32 | 36.9 months |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 6,017 | 7.7 months |
| Sep 2024 | 9,248 | 20.6 months |
| Sep 2023 | 5,452 | 7 months |
| Sep 2022 | 9,464 | 11.4 months |
| Sep 2021 | 6,437 | 6.3 months |
| Sep 2020 | 6,881 | 11.4 months |
| Sep 2019 | 5,640 | 8.7 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 Illston with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Illston, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Illston's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace