Amir H. Ali
How Judge Ali rules, drawn from 36 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Ali
Amir Hatem Mahdy Ali is a judge of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. Appointed by President Joseph R. Biden, Judge Ali received a commission on November 22, 2024.
Judge Ali's practices and standing orders
The court's website lists no individual practices or standing orders of Judge Ali's own (checked October 8, 2026), so the court's local rules and general orders are the place to look (court page ↗).
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).
How Judge Ali decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In the Federal Public Defender’s records suit, he found that the Justice Department had not explained how its proposed withholdings fit the FOIA exemption’s text.
“An agency bears the burden to explain why its proposed withholdings are justified under FOIA, yet Defendants make no effort to explain how their withholdings fall within the textual limit”
In Freeman v. Amtrak, he denied the employer’s summary-judgment motion after finding that a reasonable jury could regard its stated justification as pretext for discrimination.
“a reasonable jury could conclude that Amtrak’s asserted justification was pretext for discrimination”
In Robert F. Kennedy Center v. McMahon, he vacated a rule excluding certain nonprofit employers from public-service loan-forgiveness eligibility because the statute required credit for work at section 501(c)(3) organizations and gave the Secretary no power to narrow that category.
“Because the challenged rule is contrary to and exceeds the Secretary’s authority under the Higher Education Act, the court must vacate the rule.”
In Poe’s transit injury case, he left conflicting eyewitness and expert accounts for a jury rather than crediting WMATA’s expert at summary judgment.
“WMATA’s expert testimony may undermine Poe’s and his witness’s accounts, but that does not mean the court can simply credit it in place of the jury.”
In Davis v. Giant of Maryland, Judge Ali denied a partial judgment-on-the-pleadings motion against an overtime claim. The employee’s statutory claim did not depend on a disputed interpretation of the collective bargaining agreement, even though its pay terms might be consulted.
“Davis’s claim does not turn on any disputed interpretation of these terms or argument that he was underpaid under the CBA.”
In Harper v. Bessent, he granted summary judgment and permanent relief to two removed credit union board members after finding that the President had removed them outside the statute’s for-cause conditions.
“President terminated the plaintiffs outside those circumstances.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Defendants’ motion to dismiss is accordingly DENIED.”
28 U.S.C. 2254 state habeas petition. The court sua sponte transferred the case to E.D.N.Y.: the petitioner was neither in custody nor convicted in this district (a Queens County conviction). It resolved no party motion and is recorded as a sua sponte transfer order.
Pro se in-forma-pauperis screening. The court granted the in-forma-pauperis application and sua sponte dismissed the complaint without prejudice for failure to satisfy Rule 8(a) ('Plaintiff's cryptic pleading fails to give the defendants fair notice'). It resolved no party motion and is recorded as a screening order. The dismissal was without prejudice.
“the Court grants the motion to dismiss, the motion for summary judgment in the alternative is denied as moot and the complaint is dismissed without prejudice.”
“the motion for summary judgment in the alternative is denied as moot”
“The Court accordingly denies Philpot’s motion for summary judgment, ECF No. 6,”
“and grants the District’s cross-motion for summary judgment, ECF No. 9.”
“Defendants’ motion for summary judgment is granted in part and denied in part.”
“OFPD’s cross motion for summary judgment is granted in part and denied in part.”
“the Secretary’s motion to transfer, ECF No. 9, is granted. ... The Court transfers this case to the Eastern District of Virginia.”
“The Secretary’s motion to dismiss, ECF No. 9, is denied as moot without prejudice to being refiled and considered by the transferee court.”
“Amtrak’s motion for summary judgment, ECF No. 24, is denied.”
“the defendants’ motions to dismiss, ECF Nos. 41 and 47, are granted.”
“Fox’s motion for summary judgment is granted.”
“the court grants in part and denies in part WMATA’s motion for summary judgment, ECF No. 21.”
“The court accordingly grants Defendants’ motion for reconsideration, ECF No. 30, in part and denies it in part.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
His docket includes False Claims Act matters, public-records and agency-review cases, federal-employment discrimination, habeas and immigration cases, international arbitration, special-education disputes, and criminal matters.
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 | 0 |
| Social Security appeals pending more than six months | 0 |
| Civil cases pending more than three years | 17 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 7 | 17 |
| Sep 2025 | 0 | 4 |
| Mar 2025 | 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 District of Columbia, not for Judge Ali: 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 | 3,347 | 7.7 months |
| Closed with no court action | 876 | 5.4 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 2,449 | 8.8 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 13 | 53.2 months |
| Closed during trial | 9 | not reported |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 3,347 | 7.7 months |
| Sep 2024 | 3,290 | 6.2 months |
| Sep 2023 | 3,288 | 4.7 months |
| Sep 2022 | 3,044 | 5.6 months |
| Sep 2021 | 3,408 | 4.8 months |
| Sep 2020 | 2,947 | 5.8 months |
| Sep 2019 | 2,963 | 5.1 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 Ali with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Ali, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Ali's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace