Royce C. Lamberth

United States District Court for the District of Columbia district Appointed by Ronald Reagan (Republican) 8 signed orders read

How Judge Lamberth decides

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

What persuades

In FOIA cases he holds the agency to its burden and will rule for the requester: where USPS failed to justify its withholdings/search he denied the agency's summary judgment and granted the requester's cross-motion in part.

“the Court will DENY WITHOUT PREJUDICE USPS's motion for summary judgment and GRANT IN PART AFFT's cross-motion for summary judgment.”

At the pleading stage he construes a discrimination/retaliation complaint in the plaintiff's favor and will deny a 12(b)(6) motion without requiring a full prima facie case, so long as a plausible inference of liability is alleged.

“an employment discrimination plaintiff is not required to plead every fact necessary to establish a prima facie case to survive a motion to dismiss”

Procedural preferences

He enforces arbitration agreements: a signed contract with arbitration clauses sends the signatory's claims to arbitration, and he will grant a motion to compel in full.

“the Court will grant the Motion in full and order that Clifford Pearson’s claims be submitted to arbitration.”

Cautions

He is unforgiving of missed deadlines and lack of diligence: untimely, unjustified filings can sink both a plaintiff's own motion and its opposition to the other side's motion.

“Ultimately, the disposition of both motions turns on the lack of diligence of the plaintiff.”

Repeated noncompliance with court orders and pretrial obligations leads to dismissal with prejudice plus fee-shifting sanctions -- here under Rule 16(f) after four earlier sanctions orders.

“the Court will GRANT defendants’ motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(f) and ORDERS plaintiffs’ counsel to pay defendants’ reasonable expenses.”

Motion outcomes

Counted from classified signed orders only. Percentages are shown only where the sample is large enough to be meaningful; smaller samples are reported as raw counts.

Summary judgment
N = 6
Granted: 4Granted in part: 1Denied: 1 counts only
Motions to dismiss
N = 2
Granted: 1Denied: 1 counts only
Motion to compel arbitration
N = 1
Granted: 1 counts only
Motion for leave to amend
N = 1
Denied: 1 counts only

A "1 of 1" is one ruling, not a tendency. Treat small samples as illustrative, not predictive.

Signed rulings

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

Gebretsadike v. District of Columbia
1:22-cv-01951 · 2025-07-09
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“For the reasons explained herein, the Court will GRANT the District’s Motion and DISMISS WITH PREJUDICE the plaintiff's remaining Title VI retaliation claim.”

Pearson v. Sunnova Energy International
1:25-cv-00251 · 2025-08-14
Motion to compel arbitration (defendant) Granted

“For the reasons that follow, the Court will grant the Motion in full and order that Clifford Pearson’s claims be submitted to arbitration.”

Americans for Fair Treatment v. United States Postal Service
1:22-cv-01183 · 2025-08-11
Summary judgment (defendant) Denied

“the Court will DENY WITHOUT PREJUDICE USPS's motion for summary judgment and GRANT IN PART AFFT's cross-motion for summary judgment.”

Summary judgment (plaintiff) Granted in part

“the Court will DENY WITHOUT PREJUDICE USPS's motion for summary judgment and GRANT IN PART AFFT's cross-motion for summary judgment.”

Maughan v. United States Department of Justice
1:20-cv-03199 · 2022-12-12
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“Before the Court is the Department's Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 20. For the reasons that follow, the Court will GRANT that motion and ENTER JUDGMENT for defendants.”

Cox v. Bureau of Prisons
1:20-cv-00887 · 2021-09-24
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“In consideration of defendant’s motion, the opposition, and the record therein, this Court will GRANT defendant’s motion for summary judgment.”

Urquhart-Bradley v. Cushman & Wakefield, Inc.
1:18-cv-02213 · 2020-07-28
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied

“Upon consideration of that motion, the opposition (ECF No. 71), and the reply (ECF No. 74), the Court will DENY the motion.”

Reiter Consulting Services, Inc. v. Hildenbrand
1:23-cv-02805 · 2025-09-30
Motion for leave to amend (plaintiff) Denied

“Because of these missteps, the plaintiff's motion for leave to amend will be DENIED and Sandra Hildenbrand’s motion for summary judgment will be GRANTED.”

Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“Because of these missteps, the plaintiff's motion for leave to amend will be DENIED and Sandra Hildenbrand’s motion for summary judgment will be GRANTED.”

Hillman v. American Federation of Government Employees
1:18-cv-00999 · 2022-07-19
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“the Court will GRANT defendants’ motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(f) and ORDERS plaintiffs’ counsel to pay defendants’ reasonable expenses.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

Sampled recent assignments (filed 2025-2026, all pending) are heavy on FOIA (895 -- National Student Legal Defense Network v. Dept of Education, Cole v. DOJ, Center for Investigative Reporting v. BOP), APA / 'Other Statutory Actions' incl. an OFFSHORE-WIND cluster (890/893 -- Sunrise Wind LLC v. Burgum, Green Oceans v. BOEM, State of New York v. Burgum; consistent with his Jan-2026 Revolution Wind preliminary-injunction ruling), MEDICARE-recovery contract disputes (151 -- Cape Canaveral Hospital / St. Marys Regional Medical Center v. Kennedy), FSIA foreign-state/terrorism actions (Estate of Yigal Wachs v. Syrian Arab Republic), immigration, and insurance/property matters. This is a qualitative character sample, NOT a counted nature-of-suit distribution.