Jill L. Burkhardt
How Judge Burkhardt rules, drawn from 9 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Burkhardt
Jill L. Burkhardt has served as a United States Magistrate Judge for the Southern District of California since 2014 and became presiding magistrate judge in 2026. She earned degrees from the University of Minnesota and Harvard Law School.
Judge Burkhardt's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Burkhardt, 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.
- Burkhardt Civil Chambers Rules ↗
- Burkhardt Criminal Chambers Rules ↗
- Burkhardt Rule 26(f) Conference Checklist ↗
Key rules
Filing
Provide courtesy copies only when one filing, or multiple filings in one court day, exceeds 40 pages including exhibits.
“Courtesy copies shall only be provided in cases where any single filing or lodgment (or multiple filings or lodgments in a single court day), inclusive of exhibits, exceeds 40 pages.”
Filing
Deliver required courtesy copies directly to chambers within one court day of the filing or lodgment deadline.
“Courtesy copies shall be delivered directly to Judge Burkhardt’s Chambers, not the Clerk’s Office, within 1 court day of the filing or lodgment deadline.”
Conferences
The plaintiff must serve a specific written settlement demand at least 21 days before a mandatory settlement conference.
“No later than 21 days before the MSC, the plaintiff must serve on the defendant a written settlement proposal with a specific demand amount and any other material terms.”
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).
- General Order 514-E: Policy on Privacy and Public Access to Electronic Case Files ↗
- General Order 596: Pro Bono Plan ↗
- Chief Judge Order 144: Standard Procedures for Immigration Habeas Petitions ↗
- Chief Judge Order 134-A: Appointment of Counsel for Certain Immigration Detainees Seeking Habeas Relief ↗
How Judge Burkhardt decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In Greene v. Berryhill, she recommended reversing the benefits denial and remanding; the district judge adopted her recommendation.
“Magistrate Judge Jill L. Burkhardt has issued a Report and Recommendation ... recommending that Judgment be entered reversing the decision of the Commissioner denying benefits and remanding ... the Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Burkhardt's R&R in its entirety, REVERSES the decision of the Commissioner, and REMANDS this matter for further administrative action.”
Procedural preferences
In Turner v. George Bailey Detention Center, she recommended denying the plaintiff's summary judgment motion; the district judge adopted the recommendation.
“recommending this Court deny Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment ... Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED”
Cautions
In Najera v. Sherman, she recommended denying the habeas petition, and the district judge adopted that recommendation over the petitioner's objections.
“On August 19, 2016, United States Magistrate Judge Jill L. Burkhardt issued a Report and Recommendation (‘Report’) recommending that this Court deny the petition. ... the Court OVERRULES Petitioner's Objections ... APPROVES and ADOPTS the Report ... in its entirety ... and DENIES the Petition”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Magistrate Judge Jill L. Burkhardt has issued a Report and Recommendation ... recommending that Judgment be entered reversing the decision of the Commissioner denying benefits and remanding ... the Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Burkhardt's R&R in its entirety, REVERSES the decision of the Commissioner, and REMANDS this matter for further administrative action.”
“On March 8, 2019, United States Magistrate Judge Jill L. Burkhardt issued the Report and Recommendation, recommending that Plaintiff's Motion to Strike be denied. ... The Court adopts the Report and Recommendation in its entirety ... the Motion to Strike Affirmative Defenses (ECF No. 27) is DENIED.”
“On August 19, 2016, United States Magistrate Judge Jill L. Burkhardt issued a Report and Recommendation (‘Report’) recommending that this Court deny the petition. ... the Court OVERRULES Petitioner's Objections ... APPROVES and ADOPTS the Report ... in its entirety ... and DENIES the Petition”
“recommending this Court deny Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment ... Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED”
“and grant Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment ... Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED.”
“recommending that this Court deny Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment ... Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment is DENIED. (Docket No. 28).”
“and grant Defendant's cross-motion for summary judgment ... Defendant's cross-motion for summary judgment is GRANTED. (Docket No. 29).”
“Plaintiff's request for attorney's fees is GRANTED ... The Court RECOMMENDS that Plaintiff's request for sanctions in the form of coercive per diem fines be GRANTED ... The Court further RECOMMENDS, however, that Plaintiff's request for sanctions in the form of adverse inferences, issue preclusion, and entry of default judgment be DENIED.”
“the Court RECOMMENDS to the Honorable Gonzalo P. Curiel that the Court initiate civil contempt proceedings against Defendants and impose a contempt sanction in the form of a coercive $100 per diem fine. However, the Court RECOMMENDS that Plaintiff's request for attorney's fees and costs incurred preparing the instant Motion be denied.”
“the Court OVERRULES Defendants’ Objections (ECF No. 99) and ADOPTS the R&R IN ITS ENTIRETY (ECF No. 96). Accordingly, the Court DENIES Defendants’ motions for terminating sanctions (ECF Nos. 88, 89).”
“For the reasons discussed during the conference, the Court DENIES the Joint Motion to Stay (ECF No. 19)”
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 | 4 |
| 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 | 0 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 4 | 0 |
| Sep 2025 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2025 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2024 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2024 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2023 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2023 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2022 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2022 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2021 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2021 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2020 | 0 | 0 |
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 Southern District of California, not for Judge Burkhardt: 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 | 2,204 | 5.3 months |
| Closed with no court action | 642 | 3.3 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 1,066 | 5.3 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 484 | 10.4 months |
| Closed during trial | 12 | 38.3 months |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 2,204 | 5.3 months |
| Sep 2024 | 2,146 | 6.6 months |
| Sep 2023 | 2,133 | 6 months |
| Sep 2022 | 1,974 | 9 months |
| Sep 2021 | 2,381 | 7.4 months |
| Sep 2020 | 1,885 | 6 months |
| Sep 2019 | 2,265 | 6.2 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 Burkhardt with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Burkhardt, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Burkhardt's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace