James Edward Simmons Jr.
How Judge Simmons rules, drawn from 39 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
How Judge Simmons decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In immigration habeas cases involving re-detention after prior release, Simmons requires meaningful notice and an opportunity to be heard; when those safeguards are absent, he has ordered release under the petitioner's earlier conditions.
“Petitioner alleges that he was arrested and re-detained without notice or opportunity to be heard regarding the loss of his liberty interest. Accordingly, the Court finds that Respondents violated Petitioner’s due process rights when they re-detained him on December 25, 2025.”
In a contested post-removal-order detention case, Simmons treated the lack of concrete evidence of a foreseeable removal as grounds for release, particularly after an earlier unsuccessful re-detention.
“History has repeated itself. ICE re-detained Petitioner on December 18, 2025, stating a flight was ‘imminent,’ produced no evidence of any removal effort for five months, and now asks this Court to defer to a BIA proceeding of indeterminate length.”
Procedural preferences
At the pleading stage, Simmons distinguishes whether a claim is sufficiently alleged from whether the plaintiff can ultimately prove it.
“Here, the Court is called to evaluate a motion to dismiss, which tests only the allegations in the complaint and not the proof of each element put forth by the parties.”
Cautions
A reconsideration or interlocutory-appeal request must identify more than disagreement or recycled briefing; he looks for new evidence, clear error, manifest injustice, or a change in controlling law.
“One party's strong disagreement with a court's ruling does not suffice to establish a substantial ground for difference of opinion.”
A counseled habeas petition must state consistent, individualized facts; contradictory detention dates and generic allegations resulted in denial without prejudice with an opportunity to amend.
“Without more information, the Court cannot find that Petitioner states a claim in the petition as it stands.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“the Court GRANTS the motion to dismiss Defendant PharmaCare Laboratories for lack of personal jurisdiction and DENIES the request for jurisdictional discovery. Defendant PharmaCare Laboratories is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.”
“the Court GRANTS Defendant's motion to dismiss each cause of action with leave to amend. Plaintiff has 21 days from the date of this order to file an amended complaint to address the deficiencies noted above.”
“the Court DISMISSES the first amended complaint in its entirety for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The Court also GRANTS in part and DENIES in part Defendants' Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 27. Plaintiffs will have one final opportunity to amend their complaint without claims asserted against diversity-destroying defendants”
“the Court GRANTS Plaintiff's Motion to Remand (ECF No. 16), and REMANDS this case to the Superior Court of California, County of San Diego”
“the Court DENIES Richman's Motion to Transfer or in the Alternative, Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 7), as moot.”
“This Court hereby approves the proposed Settlement set forth in the Settlement Agreement and finds that the proposed Settlement is, in all respects, fair, adequate and reasonable.”
“After due consideration and for the reasons discussed above, the Court GRANTS the motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. ... Accordingly, the Court DISMISSES the Second Amended Complaint with prejudice and without leave to amend. The Clerk is directed to close this case.”
“Having reviewed the Parties' submissions and the applicable law, the Court GRANTS Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment and DIRECTS the Clerk of the Court to enter judgment in favor of Defendants and to close the case.”
“For the reasons above, the Court DENIES Petitioner's Motion for Reconsideration.”
“ORDER: 1) DENYING THIRD AMENDED PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS (ECF No. 13); 2) DENYING MOTIONS FOR ENLARGEMENT OF THE RECORD (ECF No. 47) JUDICIAL NOTICE (ECF No. 51), JOINDER (ECF Nos. 53, 54, 58), and SUMMARY JUDGMENT (ECF Nos. 55, 57); and 3) DENYING CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY”
“ORDER DENYING FIRST AMENDED PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS AND GRANTING A LIMITED CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY”
“After considering the parties' submissions, the administrative record, and the applicable law, for the reasons stated below, the Court GRANTS IN PART AND DENIES IN PART Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 14), REVERSES the Commissioner's decision, and REMANDS the matter to the Commissioner for further administrative action consistent with the findings presented herein.”
“The Court has reviewed the Petition, Respondent's Motion to Dismiss, the relevant documents filed in this case, and the legal arguments presented. For the reasons discussed below, the Court GRANTS Respondent's Motion to Dismiss and DENIES a certificate of appealability.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 222 days (N = 10).
Median motion-to-ruling time: 235 days (N = 1).
His early federal docket includes patent, insurance, trademark, copyright, video-privacy, Social Security, prisoner civil-rights, automotive-warranty, trade-secret, and wage-and-hour matters.
Draft for Judge Simmons with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Simmons, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Simmons's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace