Michael M. Anello
How Judge Anello decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
Construes pro se filings liberally but will not grant a prisoner’s summary-judgment motion filed before discovery on unsupported assertions; denies without prejudice as premature.
“Plaintiff’s motion is unsupported by evidence and premature and must be denied on these grounds.”
Procedural preferences
Strict issue-preservation: denies sur-replies unless the reply genuinely raised a NEW argument (rebuttal of the opposition is not 'new'), and denies Rule 59(e) reconsideration that raises arguments which could have been made earlier. Put every argument in the principal brief.
“the Court finds that Defendant did not raise new arguments that would warrant granting Plaintiff leave to file a sur-reply. ... an alleged mischaracterization of the law alone cannot justify supplemental briefing, or every party would be entitled to the last word.”
Enforces Rule 16(b) diligence strictly: denies eleventh-hour leave to amend (esp. after a dispositive motion is pending) and awards Rule 16(f)(2) expenses against the dilatory party’s counsel.
“Plaintiff fails to meet her burden under Rule 16(b) to demonstrate good cause for amendment of her complaint at this stage of the proceedings.”
Dismisses unserved/unprosecuted defendants under Rule 41(b)/4(m) after weighing the five Ferdik/Pagtalunan factors; once all federal claims are gone, declines supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining state-law claims and dismisses them without prejudice to state-court refiling.
“The Court DECLINES to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiff's state law claims against Defendant City. ... Plaintiffs' claims are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE to being refiled in state court.”
Enforces contractual fee-shifting (Cal. Civ. Code 1717) for a prevailing defendant after a with-prejudice dismissal, but independently audits the hours and trims what is excessive for cookie-cutter briefing rather than rubber-stamping the request.
“the Court finds the 21.5 hours O. Andrew Wheaton billed to prepare the motion to dismiss excessive ... the Court reduces that time to 15 hours ... the Court awards Moving Defendants attorneys' fees in the amount of $7,373.”
Cautions
Failing to oppose a dispositive motion is treated as a concession -- an unopposed MTD led to dismissal with prejudice (Tyson), and unopposed aspects of a motion (e.g. Doe defendants under Rule 4(m)) are granted as a matter of course (Abdulkhalik).
“Plaintiff did not file a timely opposition to the motions and the Court ultimately granted all of Defendants' motions and dismissed Plaintiff's action with prejudice.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“the Court GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 44).”
“The Court also DENIES Plaintiff's Ex Parte Motion for Leave to File a Sur-Reply (Doc. No. 55).”
“Because Plaintiffs have failed to demonstrate grounds for reconsideration under Rule 59(e), the Court DENIES Plaintiffs' motion for reconsideration.”
“the Court GRANTS Moving Defendants' motion for attorneys' fees and AWARDS $7,373 in attorneys fees to Wells Fargo and O. Andrew Wheaton.”
“the Court GRANTS Target’s motion for summary judgment ... The Clerk of Court shall enter judgment in favor of Target as to all claims and terminate the case.”
“the Court denies Plaintiff leave to file an amended complaint.”
“GRANTS Target’s request for attorney’s fees pursuant to Rule 16(f)(2). The Court awards Target attorney’s fees in the amount of $2,250.00.”
“The Court DENIES Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. No. 22]”
“The Court GRANTS Defendant's Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. No. 23].”
“the Court DENIES Plaintiff’s motion for partial summary judgment without prejudice”
“the Court GRANTS Officer Defendants’ motion to dismiss.”
“DENIES IN PART and GRANTS IN PART Defendant City’s motion to dismiss ... the Court GRANTS Defendant City’s motion to dismiss all claims against Doe Defendants.”
“the Court DENIES AS MOOT Defendant City’s motion for summary judgment.”
“the Court AFFIRMS its tentative ruling and GRANTS DeRosa's motion for clarification. On the current record, Plaintiffs are limited to seeking injunctive relief with respect to their trade secret claims at trial.”
“for these reasons, the Court DENIES Plaintiff's motion for leave to file a sur-reply.”
“Thus, the Court GRANTS Aziyo's motion to compel arbitration.”
“Because Plaintiff's motion, at each factor, facially lacks sufficient support for a temporary or preliminary injunction, the Court DENIES the motion without prejudice.”
In a Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act suit against a tuna supplier, a non-party law professor moved ex parte for leave to file an amicus brief supporting the plaintiffs' opposition to a pending motion to dismiss. Although the parties consented, the Court denied leave, reasoning the parties were already well-represented by nearly a dozen attorneys, the professor had only minimal interest in the case, and his proposed brief merely retread the plaintiffs' existing arguments without adding unique material. Verbatim disposition: 'Thus, the Court determines Professor Dodge's participation would be of little assistance and DENIES his ex parte motion.' Excluded from party-motion statistics because the movant is a non-party amicus.
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 513 days (N = 10).
Median motion-to-ruling time: 136 days (N = 6).
Judge Anello's broad civil docket includes disability-access cases, Social Security appeals, telephone-consumer and debt-collection claims, real-property and foreclosure disputes, removed landlord matters, antitrust litigation, civil-rights suits, and habeas petitions. It also includes a large cluster of Midland Credit Management matters associated with multidistrict litigation. This describes the mix of sampled cases rather than how he tended to rule.
Put Judge Anello's record to work
Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Anello actually rules, not a generic AI guess.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Anello's own signed orders and cites them.