Thomas J. Whelan

How Judge Whelan rules, drawn from 14 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

Court
United States District Court for the Southern District of California
Position
district
Status
Senior status
Appointed by
Bill Clinton (Democratic)
Commissioned
1998-10-22
Education
San Diego College for Men (now University of San Diego), B.A. (1961); University of San Diego School of Law, J.D. (1965)
Signed orders read
14

How Judge Whelan decides

Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

Procedural preferences

Enforces a freely-negotiated forum-selection clause that splits forum by work location rather than dismissing, and is reluctant to apply Colorado River abstention.

“the Court DENIES Defendants' motion to dismiss [Doc. 4], Plaintiffs' motion for judgment on the pleadings [Doc. 5], and Plaintiffs' ex parte application [Doc. 18].”

Cautions

Denies qualified immunity at the Rule 12(b)(6) stage where the complaint shows no probable cause, distinguishing QI cases decided at summary judgment, and refuses judicial notice of a police report's contents on a motion to dismiss.

“the Court DENIES Defendant's motion to dismiss [Doc. 3], but ORDERS the request for punitive damages against Defendant City of La Mesa STRUCK from the Complaint.”

Enforces TILA's one-year damages limitations period strictly where the deceptive documents were facially evident, while preserving the three-year rescission claim, and dismisses repleaded fraud without leave after a second failed try.

“the Court GRANTS IN-PART and DENIES IN-PART GMACM's Motion (Doc. 20) and ORDERS as follows: 1. The TILA-damage claims are DISMISSED without leave to amend. 2. The fraud-based claims (causes of action 8 and 9) are DISMISSED without leave to amend. 3. The claim to quiet title is DISMISSED with leave to amend.”

Treats completely preempted labor claims as federal from inception and dismisses them with prejudice when the employee did not exhaust the collective bargaining agreement's grievance and arbitration procedures.

“Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Defendant Bulwark Construction’s motion to dismiss all claims WITH PREJUDICE. (Mtn. to Dismiss [Doc. 4].)”

He expects counsel to reproduce judicial language exactly; in Estate of Brandon Yates he cautioned the county after its brief attributed wording to a cited decision that the decision did not contain.

“the County is cautioned that quotations should be exact replications of the court’s language.”

Signed rulings

A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.

Johnston and Dickins v. Irontown Housing Company, Inc.
3:13-cv-00523-W-BLM · 2013-07-17
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied

“the Court DENIES Defendants' motion to dismiss [Doc. 4], Plaintiffs' motion for judgment on the pleadings [Doc. 5], and Plaintiffs' ex parte application [Doc. 18].”

Judgment on the pleadings (plaintiff) Moot / procedural

“the Court finds an exception to Rule 12(c) is not warranted. Accordingly, the Court finds Plaintiffs' motion is premature.”

Titus v. City of La Mesa
3:13-cv-01909-W-KSC · 2014-05-13
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied

“the Court DENIES Defendant's motion to dismiss [Doc. 3], but ORDERS the request for punitive damages against Defendant City of La Mesa STRUCK from the Complaint.”

Moses v. GMAC Mortgage, LLC
3:09-cv-01961-W-BLM · 2010-07-14
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted in part

“the Court GRANTS IN-PART and DENIES IN-PART GMACM's Motion (Doc. 20) and ORDERS as follows: 1. The TILA-damage claims are DISMISSED without leave to amend. 2. The fraud-based claims (causes of action 8 and 9) are DISMISSED without leave to amend. 3. The claim to quiet title is DISMISSED with leave to amend.”

Motions to strike (defendant) Granted in part

“4. The requests for monetary damages under TILA, and Business & Professions Code Sec. 17200 are STRUCK. 5. The request for punitive damages is STRUCK. 6. The prayer for a preliminary injunction is STRUCK. ... GMACM's request to strike the request for rescission and attorney's fees is denied.”

Pates v. Quality Loan Service Company
3:10-cv-00296-W-NLS · 2010-05-28
Motion for reconsideration (plaintiff) Denied

“In light of the foregoing, Plaintiffs' motion to reconsider is DENIED.”

Bennett v. Navy Federal Credit Union
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“the Court GRANTS the motion [Doc. 44].”

Rose v. Selene Finance, LP
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted in part

“GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART Selene's motion to”

Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“GRANTS Trustee Corp.'s motion to dismiss”

Lee v. United States Department of the Navy
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“the Court GRANTS the Motion [Doc. 6] without leave”

Reel v. City of El Centro
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted in part

“the first cause of action WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND and DENIES”

The Estate of Valeria Tachiquin Alvarado v. Tackett
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted in part

“Specifically, it is GRANTED as to claims one”

Summary judgment (defendant) Granted in part

“The United States' motion is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART.”

Ton v. New York Life Insurance Company
3:23-cv-02200-W-AHG · 2026-03-05
Motion to vacate (plaintiff) Moot / procedural

“Plaintiff’s pending motions [Doc. 24, 25, 26] are denied without prejudice to her raising them in an appropriate court”

Motion to withdraw or substitute counsel (plaintiff) Moot / procedural
Motion for leave to amend (plaintiff) Moot / procedural
Bach v. County of San Diego
3:24-cv-01687-W-BJW · 2026-01-14
Motions to dismiss (third-party defendant) Granted in part

“For the reasons stated above, the Court GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART Correctional Healthcare’s motion to dismiss [Doc. 43]. To the extent the TPC seeks indemnity and contribution for liability under Plaintiff’s section 1983 causes of action, such claims are barred. The motion is denied as to liability under the Bane Act.”

Diaz Hernandez v. United States
3:25-cr-00966-W / 3:25-cv-02221-W · 2026-02-05
Motion to vacate sentence under 2255 (petitioner) Denied

“For the foregoing reasons, the Court DENIES the Petition [Doc. 36].”

Motion for status (petitioner) Moot / procedural

“The Clerk of the Court shall close the district court file and TERMINATE the motion for a status [Doc. 40].”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 103.5 days (N = 10).

Median motion-to-ruling time: 84 days (N = 1).

Judge Whelan's post-senior-status docket includes a high-volume, fast-settling group of ADA Title III accessibility cases and FCRA or FDCPA consumer-finance suits. His earlier active-era merits docket also included mortgage and TILA disputes, Section 1983 civil-rights actions, and consumer-construction cases. This describes caseload composition, not motion outcomes.

Draft for Judge Whelan with the record in hand

Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Whelan, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Grounded in Judge Whelan's own signed orders
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace