Reggie B. Walton

How Judge Walton rules, drawn from 38 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

Court
United States District Court for the District of Columbia
Position
district
Appointed by
George W. Bush (Republican)
Commissioned
2001-09-24
ABA rating
Unanimously Well Qualified
Education
West Virginia State College, B.A. (1971); American University, Washington College of Law, J.D. (1974)
Signed orders read
38

How Judge Walton decides

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

What persuades

At the pleading stage, he allows an Equal Pay Act claim to proceed when the alleged jobs are plausibly comparable, even if discovery may later reveal meaningful differences in skill or responsibility.

“the Court cannot dismiss [the plaintiff’s] equal pay claims before giving her an opportunity to make [her] case”

A government's voluntary change does not moot a challenge when its assurance is qualified and leaves a realistic possibility of recurrence; saying there are merely 'no plans' to repeat the challenged action was insufficient in a SEVIS-record case.

“Rather than ‘requiring’ or ‘mandating’ a change, Mr. Watson’s declaration states only that ICE currently has ‘no plans’ to re-terminate the plaintiff’s SEVIS record”

He will enforce a final international arbitral award against a sovereign at the pleadings stage where the defendant cannot contest jurisdiction: a 22 U.S.C. 1650a / ICSID Convention enforcement action gets judgment on the pleadings for the award creditor once any time-bar defense fails and the sovereign concedes subject-matter jurisdiction.

“Upon careful consideration of the parties’ submissions, the Court concludes for the following reasons that it must grant the plaintiff’s motion.”

In FOIA and agency cases he is exacting on jurisdiction and standing: an APA or constitutional challenge that does not clear Article III standing or statutory subject-matter jurisdiction is dismissed under Rule 12(b)(1) before any merits analysis (Medicare Star-Ratings methodology; pre-enforcement SAVE Act challenge).

“the Court concludes that it must grant the government’s motion to dismiss this action for lack of subject matter jusrisdiction pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1).”

Procedural preferences

He distinguishes pleadings from proof: fact-intensive comparator questions can survive dismissal even when the same record might not survive summary judgment after discovery.

“Although these cases may be more persuasive at a later point in the litigation, they do not defeat the plaintiff’s claims at this point”

In FOIA summary-judgment practice, generalized declarations and a sparse Vaughn index may be insufficient. He denied withholding without prejudice and required a fuller, document-specific explanation before reconsidering the issue.

“The Court directs the defendant to supplement its motion for summary judgment regarding the full withholding of these four pages pursuant to Exemption 5”

He issues Fox/Neal-style orders warning pro se litigants of their obligation to respond, and will treat an unopposed dispositive motion as CONCEDED if the plaintiff misses the stated deadline. Do not let a response deadline lapse before him.

“that Order expressly warned the plaintiff that, if he failed to file his opposition by February 3, 2012, the Court would treat the motion as conceded. ... Accordingly, the Court will treat this motion as conceded.”

He grants press/third-party access to sealed records: a media intervenor seeking to unseal court filings (here charging-lien materials) can obtain leave to intervene and access where the public-access interest is shown.

“the Court concludes for the following reasons that it must grant the CIR’s motion.”

Cautions

This written-opinion sample skews defendant/government-favorable, but his higher-profile record cuts differently and should not be over-read: he secured the United States v. Libby perjury/obstruction conviction (2007), declared a mistrial and then accepted an acquittal in United States v. Roger Clemens (2011-2012), ruled FOR the plaintiff rocketry organizations in Tripoli Rocketry Ass'n v. ATF (2009), and was openly skeptical of DOJ/AG Barr over the Mueller-report redactions in 2020: ordering an in camera review and calling Barr's public statements 'misleading.'

“On March 5, 2020, Walton described Attorney General William Barr's public statements about the Mueller report as ‘misleading,’ and said that Barr's representations regarding DOJ redactions from the report could not be credited.”

Signed rulings

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

Webuild S.p.A. v. Argentine Republic
1:21-cv-02464 · 2025-04-04
Motion for judgment on pleadings (plaintiff) Granted

“Upon careful consideration of the parties’ submissions, the Court concludes for the following reasons that it must grant the plaintiff’s motion.”

Zing Health, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
1:24-cv-00855 · 2025-09-30
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“the Court concludes for the following reasons that it must grant the defendants’ motion to dismiss.”

Gatore v. United States Department of Homeland Security
1:15-cv-00459 · 2025-03-06
Motion for attorney fees (plaintiff) Denied

“the Court concludes for the following reasons that it must deny the plaintiffs’ motion for attorney’s fees as to Ms. Gatore.”

Emanuel v. U.S. Department of Justice
1:11-cv-01514 · 2012-02-23
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“To date, the plaintiff neither has filed an opposition nor requested additional time to do so. Accordingly, the Court will treat this motion as conceded.”

True the Vote, Inc. v. Internal Revenue Service
1:13-cv-00734 · 2024-05-31
Motion to intervene (intervenor) Granted

“Upon careful consideration of the CIR’s submissions, the Court concludes for the following reasons that it must grant the CIR’s motion.”

Silver v. United States
1:22-cv-00013 · 2023-01-30
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“Upon careful consideration of the parties’ submissions, the Court concludes for the following reasons that it must grant the government’s motion.”

Younes v. U.S. Department of State
1:21-cv-00544 · 2025-08-15
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“the Court concludes for the following reasons that it must grant the defendants’ motion for summary judgment and deny the plaintiffs’ motion for summary declaratory judgment.”

Summary judgment (plaintiff) Denied
Larson v. Mayorkas
1:24-cv-00808 · 2025-09-23
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“Upon careful consideration of the parties’ submissions, the Court concludes for the following reasons that it must grant the defendant’s motion.”

Searcy v. Smith
1:19-cv-00921 · 2023-02-24
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“the Court concludes for the following reasons that it has subject matter jurisdiction over the plaintiff’s claims against the defendants and dismisses these claims consistent with the reasoning articulated in its May 6, 2020 Memorandum Opinion.”

Jones v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority
1:21-cv-01952 · 2023-10-11
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“Upon careful consideration of the parties’ submissions, the Court concludes for the following reasons that it must grant the defendant’s motion.”

backpage.com, LLC v. Lynch
1:15-cv-02155 · 2016-10-24
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“the Court concludes that it must grant the government’s motion to dismiss this action for lack of subject matter jusrisdiction pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1).”

ConverDyn v. Moniz
1:14-cv-01012 · 2016-05-11
Motion for judgment on pleadings (defendant) Granted in part

“the Court concludes that it must grant in part and deny in part the defendants’ motion.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

  • The available case-level records are not a counted distribution.
  • His current civil docket includes substantial public-records litigation, employee-benefit and health-program matters, consumer-credit disputes, other statutory actions, and a criminal calendar.
  • The written-opinion sample also includes federal employment, agency review, tax disclosure, immigration, arbitration-award enforcement, and private commercial disputes.
  • His longer-term caseload has included nationally prominent criminal, surveillance, habeas, and government-transparency matters.

Draft for Judge Walton with the record in hand

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

Opens in Ezel Pro.

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