Lewis Thornton Babcock
How Judge Babcock rules, drawn from 33 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Babcock
Lewis Thornton Babcock is a judge of the United States District Court for the District of Colorado. Appointed by President Ronald Reagan, Judge Babcock received a commission on October 17, 1988. Judge Babcock assumed senior status on April 4, 2008.
Judge Babcock's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Babcock, as published on the court's website (checked October 9, 2026). Judges revise these often, so confirm the current version on the court's site before you file.
Key rules
Filing
Submit witness and exhibit lists through the electronic case filing system.
“Submit the witness and exhibit lists using the Electronic Case Filing System (ECF)”
Trial
A witness omitted from the pretrial order needs a stipulation or good cause to appear on the final trial preparation list.
“Witnesses not listed in the pretrial order may not be listed at the final trial preparation conference absent stipulation or a showing of good cause.”
Trial
Trial exhibits must appear on the final exhibit lists presented at the final trial preparation conference.
“Only those exhibits listed on the final exhibit lists presented at the final trial preparation conference may be presented at trial.”
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 9, 2026).
How Judge Babcock decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Cautions
In a challenge to an annuity transfer, allegations that the new insurer was riskier than alternatives did not establish imminent nonpayment where benefits had continued and guaranty protections remained; the judge required a concrete injury for federal standing.
“At best, these allegations show that Athene may be more likely to fail than other annuity providers.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) [ECF No. 47] is GRANTED; ... Judgment shall enter in favor of Defendant University of Colorado on Plaintiff's claims for Title IX retaliation ... and violation of Title II of the ADA; and ... in favor of Defendant Leslie Lange on Plaintiff's claim for [the] Section 1983 claim for First Amendment retaliation”
“Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's four retaliation claims [Doc #8] is DENIED AS MOOT; ... Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's constructive discharge claim is DENIED”
“Defendant's request for a more definite statement is GRANTED; and ... Plaintiff shall file an amended complaint within 14 days that substantially conforms to the guidelines described above.”
“The Plan's Partial Motion to Dismiss Amended Complaint [Doc #19] is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART as follows: a) The portion ... seeking dismissal of Plaintiff's Second Claim for Relief is DENIED; b) ... Fifth Claim for Relief is GRANTED and ... DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; and c) ... Fourth Claim for Relief is GRANTED and ... DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“RCI's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings [Doc #25] is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART as follows: a) The portion ... regarding Plaintiff's Third Claim for Relief is DENIED; and b) The portion ... regarding Plaintiff's Sixth Claim for Relief is GRANTED and the Sixth Claim for Relief is therefore DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“I conclude that Mr. Ramirez’s claim for relief is within the scope of the appellate waiver he knowingly and voluntarily agreed to when he pleaded guilty. I further conclude that enforcing the waiver would not result in a miscarriage of justice. I accordingly DENY the petition. (ECF No. 54.)”
“Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss USAA Casualty Insurance Company and Garrison Property and Casualty Association [Doc. # 22] is GRANTED. Mr. Slavin’s claims against USAA Casualty Insurance Company and Garrison Property and Casualty Association are DISMISSED.”
“For the foregoing reasons, Allstate’s Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. # 51] is DENIED.”
“ORDERED that the Letter (ECF No. 5), which the Court has construed liberally as a request for preliminary injunctive relief, is DENIED without prejudice.”
“IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Remand to the District Court for Jefferson County Colorado [Doc #32 ] is DENIED.”
“ORDERED that the ‘Motion for Preliminary Injunction and Temporary Restraining Order Pursuant to C.R.Civ.P. 65’ (ECF No. 8) is DENIED.”
“ORDERED that the habeas corpus application is denied and the action is dismissed for lack of statutory jurisdiction because Applicant fails to demonstrate that the remedy available to him in the sentencing court is inadequate or ineffective.”
“For the reasons described above, I DENY Western Distributing’s motion to dismiss (ECF No. 23).”
“For the reasons described below, I GRANT IN PART and DENY IN PART Mr. Sanchez’s motion to dismiss the amended complaint (Sanchez’s Mot. Dismiss, ECF No. 70.)”
“I GRANT IN PART and DENY IN PART Adams’s Motion to Dismiss Amended Complaint (Adams’s Mot. Dismiss, ECF No. 71.)”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Durations shown are short pro-se screening terminations (days to weeks), which reflect his senior-judge screening role, not contested-merits case length. The counseled Szeto merits case (filed 2022-06-27) was still pending at last review. This is not a representative merits-duration distribution; a counseled terminated-civil sample would be needed before reading it as one.
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 | 7 |
| Bench trials submitted more than six months | 0 |
| Bankruptcy appeals pending more than six months | 1 |
| Social Security appeals pending more than six months | 3 |
| Civil cases pending more than three years | 1 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 7 | 1 |
| Sep 2025 | 2 | 1 |
| Mar 2025 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2024 | 6 | 1 |
| Mar 2024 | 3 | 2 |
| Sep 2023 | 1 | 3 |
| Mar 2023 | 2 | 2 |
| Sep 2022 | 2 | 1 |
| Mar 2022 | 0 | 1 |
| Sep 2021 | 4 | 1 |
| Mar 2021 | 2 | 1 |
| Sep 2020 | 0 | 1 |
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 District of Colorado, not for Judge Babcock: 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 | 2,669 | 7.7 months |
| Closed with no court action | 497 | 7.6 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 2,076 | 7.2 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 63 | 26.2 months |
| Closed during trial | 33 | 39.3 months |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 2,669 | 7.7 months |
| Sep 2024 | 2,704 | 7.4 months |
| Sep 2023 | 2,560 | 8.5 months |
| Sep 2022 | 2,614 | 9 months |
| Sep 2021 | 2,637 | 8.1 months |
| Sep 2020 | 2,637 | 7.6 months |
| Sep 2019 | 2,577 | 7.5 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 Babcock with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Babcock, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Babcock's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace