Raymond Paul Moore
How Judge Moore rules, drawn from 17 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Moore
Raymond Paul Moore is a judge of the United States District Court for the District of Colorado. Appointed by President Barack Obama, Judge Moore received a commission on March 26, 2013. Judge Moore assumed senior status on June 20, 2023.
Judge Moore's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Moore, 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
Send proposed orders on routine nonsubstantive matters to chambers in editable Word or WordPerfect.
“Proposed orders on non-substantive matters such as motions for extensions of time, to exceed page limitations, or to restrict documents should also be sent in Word or WordPerfect via e-mail to Chambers”
Motions
Most civil motions and responses are limited to twenty pages; replies to fifteen.
“Except motions for summary judgment, all motions, objections (including objections to the recommendations or orders of United States Magistrate Judges), responses, and briefs shall not exceed twenty (20) pages.”
Motions
In criminal cases, motions and responses are limited to fifteen pages; replies to ten.
“All motions, objections, responses, and briefs shall not exceed fifteen pages. Replies shall not exceed ten pages.”
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 Moore decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Procedural preferences
In Johnson v. Pelle, he overruled the defendants' objection, adopted the magistrate judge's recommendation, and granted the motion to dismiss only in part.
“the Court OVERRULES Defendants' objection (ECF No. 36), ACCEPTS and ADOPTS the recommendation (ECF No. 35), and GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART Defendants' motion to dismiss (ECF No. 20).”
In Travelers Indemnity v. Luna Gourmet, he granted summary judgment to the insurers on the remaining breach-of-contract counterclaim after giving Rule 56(f) notice.
“summary judgment is granted in favor of Plaintiffs and against Defendants on Defendants' counterclaim for breach of contract”
On objections to nondispositive discovery orders, Moore applies the clearly-erroneous-or-contrary-to-law standard and requires evidence that the magistrate judge made a definite mistake before intervening.
“The Court must have ‘a definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.’”
Cautions
In Johnson v. Correct Care Solutions, he granted the dismissal motions in part, dismissing the Sheriff's Department claim with prejudice and the remaining claims without prejudice.
“the motions to dismiss (ECF Nos. 131, 135) are GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART as follows: (1) Plaintiff's claims against Defendant Arapahoe County Sheriff's Department are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; (2) Plaintiff's remaining claims are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“the motions to dismiss (ECF Nos. 131, 135) are GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART as follows: (1) Plaintiff's claims against Defendant Arapahoe County Sheriff's Department are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; (2) Plaintiff's remaining claims are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE”
“Defendant McDonald's Restaurant of Colorado's motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 156) is DENIED AS MOOT”
“the Court OVERRULES Defendants' objection (ECF No. 36), ACCEPTS and ADOPTS the recommendation (ECF No. 35), and GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART Defendants' motion to dismiss (ECF No. 20).”
After ruling on the parties' cross-motions in a separate April 7 order, Moore gave notice under Rule 56(f) that he might enter judgment for the insurers on the insured's remaining breach-of-contract counterclaim. This April 29 order granted judgment on that counterclaim and closed the case. No party motion on the counterclaim was before the court.
“Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 191) is GRANTED, and Plaintiff's Motion (ECF No. 196) is DENIED AS MOOT.”
“Plaintiff's Motion (ECF No. 196) is DENIED AS MOOT.”
“Therefore, the Court OVERRULES Plaintiff’s Objections (ECF Nos. 202, 215).”
“Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 74) is GRANTED”
“the other pending Motions (ECF Nos. 65, 66, 72, 73, 76) are DENIED AS MOOT”
The court accepted an unobjected recommendation and dismissed the remaining claims without prejudice for failure to comply with court orders. Because no party motion prompted the disposition, it is retained for context but excluded from motion statistics.
“Travelers Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 24) is GRANTED”
“Defendants’ Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 30) is DENIED”
“GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART defendant’s motion to dismiss (ECF No. 22)”
“for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 438) is GRANTED”
“Plaintiff’s Motion (ECF No. 440) is DENIED AS MOOT.”
“Plaintiff’s pending Motion for an Extension (ECF No. 500) is DENIED AS MOOT.”
“GRANTS the Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 21). This case is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.”
“the Court DENIES the Petition (ECF No. 1)”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Recency windows (2019-2021) are criminal-dominated; the four contested 2018 civil durations (462-1337 days) run far longer than the criminal/2255 bulk. This is a small illustrative set, not a duration distribution.
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 | 1 |
| 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 | 8 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 1 | 8 |
| Sep 2025 | 6 | 10 |
| Mar 2025 | 11 | 8 |
| Sep 2024 | 11 | 9 |
| Mar 2024 | 17 | 15 |
| Sep 2023 | 47 | 19 |
| Mar 2023 | 50 | 19 |
| Sep 2022 | 51 | 21 |
| Mar 2022 | 33 | 18 |
| Sep 2021 | 30 | 16 |
| Mar 2021 | 9 | 14 |
| Sep 2020 | 8 | 13 |
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 Moore: 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 Moore with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Moore, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Moore's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace