Anthony E. Porcelli
How Judge Porcelli rules, drawn from 26 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Porcelli
Anthony E. Porcelli has served as a United States Magistrate Judge in the Tampa Division of the Middle District of Florida since August 2009. A graduate of Stetson University College of Law, he previously clerked for District Judge Harvey E. Schlesinger and served as an Assistant United States Attorney.
Judge Porcelli's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Porcelli, as published on the court's website (checked October 8, 2026). Judges revise these often, so confirm the current version on the court's site before you file.
Key rules
Trial
Electronically file exhibit and witness lists by the morning of trial or an evidentiary hearing.
“Exhibit and witness lists shall be electronically filed no later than the morning of trial or evidentiary hearing.”
Trial
File trial briefs, proposed voir dire, jury instructions, and special verdict forms five days before trial.
“Trial briefs, proposed voir dire questions, proposed jury instructions, and any special verdict forms should be filed five days in advance of the scheduled trial date.”
Trial
At the start of trial, provide the courtroom deputy the original and two copies of the exhibit list, copies of exhibits, and the witness list.
“On the date each trial commences, each party shall file with the courtroom deputy clerk the original and two copies of their respective exhibit list, as well as copies of all exhibits and the witness list.”
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 10, 2026).
How Judge Porcelli decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
Brand-versus-generic pharmaceutical liability: follows the majority and Florida rule that a brand-name manufacturer owes no duty to a plaintiff injured by a competitor's generic version that it never made or sold, and expressly declines to follow the broader duty rule in California's Conte v. Wyeth. Product identification ('the product which allegedly caused the injury was manufactured or sold by the defendant') is treated as fundamental, defeating negligence, strict-liability, warranty, and fraud theories together.
“The Court cannot impose a duty of care on Defendants here where the generic manufacturers are responsible for the contents of their label, and where the Defendants lacked direct control as to the contents of that label.”
Procedural preferences
In Tyler v. Commissioner of Social Security, he reversed the Commissioner’s decision and remanded the case for further administrative proceedings.
“The decision of the Commissioner is REVERSED and the matter is REMANDED pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. 405(g) to the Commissioner for further administrative proceedings consistent with this Order.”
Medical-improvement cases require an actual comparison between the evidence supporting the prior favorable disability determination and the current evidence. A passing reference to the earlier record does not permit a finding that medical severity decreased.
“the ALJ errored in determining a medical improvement had occurred the case is reversed and remanded for application of the correct legal standard.”
Residual-functional-capacity explanations must resolve material limitations rather than merely acknowledge the underlying evidence. Porcelli has remanded where the ALJ did not explain the effect of visual disturbance, a non-severe urinary impairment, or medically necessary cane use on the claimant's ability to work.
“the ALJ never affirmatively rejects (or adopts) Claimant's need to use a cane for ambulation. Without such a determination, it is not possible for this Court to determine whether the decision is supported by substantial evidence.”
Record development is driven by evidentiary sufficiency and prejudice. Porcelli does not require another consultative opinion when the existing record supports an informed decision and contains no unfair evidentiary gap; the claimant retains the burden to establish disability.
“an ALJ is not required to order a consultive examination when the record contains sufficient evidence for the ALJ to make an informed decision.”
Childhood-disability domains are evaluated separately within the whole-child analysis. A marked limitation in attending and completing tasks does not automatically require a marked limitation in acquiring and using information when the broader record supports different findings.
“There is no such requirement that a finding of marked limitation in one functional domain mandates a similar finding in another functional domain.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“On January 13, 2010, the Honorable Anthony E. Porcelli, United States Magistrate Judge, issued a Report and Recommendation (Doc. # 76), recommending that the motion be granted in favor of Defendants. ... Defendants’ Motion for Summary-Judgment (Doc. # 44) is GRANTED.”
“The decision of the Commissioner is REVERSED, and the matter is REMANDED to the Commissioner for further administrative proceedings.”
“Plaintiff’s Petition for Attorney’s Fees (Doc. 29) is GRANTED.”
“The decision of the Commissioner is AFFIRMED.”
“The decision of the Commissioner is REVERSED, and the matter is REMANDED to the Commissioner for further administrative proceedings.”
“The decision of the Commissioner is AFFIRMED.”
“Plaintiff’s Unopposed Motion for Attorney’s Fees (Doc. 20) is GRANTED.”
“The decision of the Commissioner is affirmed.”
“Plaintiff’s Unopposed Motion for Attorney’s Fees (Doc. 29) is GRANTED.”
“The decision of the Commissioner is affirmed.”
“The decision of the Commissioner is REVERSED, and the matter is REMANDED to the Commissioner for further administrative proceedings.”
“The decision of the Commissioner is REVERSED, and the matter is REMANDED to the Commissioner for further administrative proceedings.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
The sampled civil docket is dominated by consent Social Security appeals, with additional attorney-fee matters and occasional referred civil recommendations. It is descriptive rather than comprehensive, and no authoritative case-disposition baseline was available for the period.
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 | 0 |
| 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 | 0 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2025 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2025 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2024 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2024 | 0 | 1 |
| Sep 2023 | 0 | 1 |
| Mar 2023 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2022 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2022 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2021 | 0 | 2 |
| Mar 2021 | 0 | 2 |
| 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 Middle District of Florida, not for Judge Porcelli: 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 | 6,896 | 5.5 months |
| Closed with no court action | 49 | 3.5 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 6,492 | 5.2 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 319 | 14.7 months |
| Closed during trial | 36 | 24.2 months |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 6,896 | 5.5 months |
| Sep 2024 | 7,115 | 5.6 months |
| Sep 2023 | 6,777 | 5.5 months |
| Sep 2022 | 6,781 | 6.7 months |
| Sep 2021 | 6,749 | 6.2 months |
| Sep 2020 | 6,392 | 6.2 months |
| Sep 2019 | 6,830 | 5.7 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 Porcelli with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Porcelli, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Porcelli's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace