Alicia O. Valle
How Judge Valle rules, drawn from 1 signed order. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Judge Valle no longer sits on this court. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled here.
About Judge Valle
Alicia O. Valle served as a United States Magistrate Judge for the Southern District of Florida in Fort Lauderdale. She began her duties on August 12, 2013, after practicing as an Assistant U.S. Attorney, and later retired.
How Judge Valle decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In a challenge to a federal agency's administrative process, Valle recommended granting the defendants' motion to dismiss the second amended complaint and denying the plaintiff's cross-motion for summary judgment. The district judge adopted the recommendation after reviewing the plaintiff's objections.
“recommending the grant of Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint [ECF No. 55] and the denial of Plaintiff’s Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 62].”
Procedural preferences
In Frank v. AGA Enterprises, Valle recommended striking the Gonzalez firm’s charging lien and denying enforcement without prejudice because the firm had no contract with the party that recovered the settlement proceeds.
“the Gonzalez firm's Motion to Enforce Charging Lien (ECF No. 160) be DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE”
For civil contempt, Valle requires clear and convincing evidence of a violated, lawful, clear order and an ability to comply. In Guenther she relied on circumstantial proof of actual notice, repeated noncompliance, and the absence of evidence that the respondent could not appear.
“A finding of civil contempt must be supported by clear and convincing evidence.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Magistrate Judge Valle's R&R [ECF No. 74] is ADOPTED AND AFFIRMED ... Defendants' Motion to Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint [ECF No. 55] is GRANTED. The Second Amended Complaint [ECF No. 50] is DISMISSED with prejudice. ... Plaintiff's Objections [ECF No. 77] are OVERRULED.”
“Plaintiff's Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 62] is DENIED.”
“Magistrate Judge Alicia O. Valle's Report and Recommendation (DE 75) on Defendant's motion for summary judgment (DE 35). The Report recommends that Defendant's motion for summary judgment be granted. ... The conclusions in the Report (DE 75) are AFFIRMED AND ADOPTED. Defendant's motion for summary judgment (DE 35) is GRANTED.”
“the undersigned respectfully RECOMMENDS that the Notice of Charging Lien (ECF No. 103) be STRICKEN, the Gonzalez firm's Motion to Enforce Charging Lien (ECF No. 160) be DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE, and the Franks' Motion for Summary Judgment or to Adjudicate (ECF No. 161) be GRANTED.”
“the Gonzalez firm's Motion to Enforce Charging Lien (ECF No. 160) be DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE”
“(viii) GRANT the Motion (ECF No. 3) and issue a new TRO to expire within 14 days of the date of issuance”
“(i) find Respondent Elizabeth Macpherson and maternal grandmother Kathy Horsford in CIVIL CONTEMPT for failure to obey this Court’s Orders”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 172 days (N = 18).
Median motion-to-ruling time: 9 days (N = 20).
- This caseload description is not a base rate.
- Valle serves in two roles: she issues recommendations to district judges on referred matters, and she signs final orders in cases where the parties consent to her jurisdiction.
- Her consent docket is dominated by FLSA wage-and-hour suits that resolve quickly at settlement conferences, where her recurring dispositive task is reviewing settlements for fairness under Lynn's Food.
Pending matters in the official report
Judge Valle was last listed in the Civil Justice Reform Act report as of September 30, 2025.
| 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2025 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2024 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2024 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2023 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2023 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2022 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2022 | 5 | 0 |
| Sep 2021 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2021 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2020 | 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.
A historical record
Judge Valle no longer sits on this court. This profile stays available as a record of how they ruled here. If you're preparing for a matter, start from the court's current bench.