Panayotta Diane Augustin-Birch
How Judge Augustin-Birch rules, drawn from 31 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Augustin-Birch
Panayotta Augustin-Birch became a U.S. magistrate judge for the Southern District of Florida on September 30, 2022. Before taking the bench in Fort Lauderdale, she served as an assistant federal public defender. She earned degrees from Florida Atlantic University and the Thurgood Marshall School of Law at Texas Southern University.
Judge Augustin-Birch's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Augustin-Birch, 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
Discovery
After conferring, schedule a discovery hearing with chambers before filing a concise motion.
“If, after conferring, the parties are unable to resolve a discovery dispute without Court intervention, then a party may seek a hearing by contacting Chambers at (954) 769-5460 to place the matter on the Court’s calendar.”
Discovery
File a discovery motion of no more than three pages the same day the hearing date is finalized.
“On the same day that a party finalizes a hearing date, that party shall file through the Court’s electronic filing system (CM/ECF) a concise discovery motion of no more than three pages.”
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 Augustin-Birch decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In Jimenez v. O'Malley, Augustin-Birch recommended remand for the ALJ to reevaluate Dr. Castro's opinion and the claimant's subjective testimony, then reassess his residual functional capacity.
“the Court RECOMMENDS GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment [DE 19] ... insofar as the Court RECOMMENDS remanding the matter for the ALJ to reevaluate Dr. Castro's opinion and Plaintiff's subjective testimony and to reassess Plaintiff's RFC.”
In Sanchez-Toledo's habeas case, Augustin-Birch recommended granting the petition to require an individualized immigration bond hearing within five days or the petitioner's release.
“The Court therefore RECOMMENDS that the Petition [DE 1] be GRANTED insofar as Respondents be ordered to, within five days, either afford Petitioner an individualized bond hearing before an Immigration Judge or release him.”
Procedural preferences
In Stears v. Apple, Augustin-Birch recommended dismissal of the complaint without prejudice. The district judge adopted the recommendation and allowed the plaintiff twenty days to seek leave to amend.
“Magistrate Judge Panayotta Augustin-Birch's Report and Recommendation on Defendants' Motions to Dismiss, [ECF No. 27], is AFFIRMED AND ADOPTED ... Defendant Apple, Inc.'s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint, [ECF No. 9], is GRANTED; The Complaint, [ECF No. 1], is hereby DISMISSED without prejudice; Plaintiff may seek leave to amend his complaint within twenty (20) days of this Order.”
In Pena v. Wells Fargo Bank, Augustin-Birch recommended granting the bank's arbitration motion and staying the case under 9 U.S.C. § 3. She found the agreement's delegation clause enforceable and declined the additional relief the bank first requested in reply.
“the Court RECOMMENDS GRANTING Defendant's Motion [DE 45]. Furthermore, in accordance with 9 U.S.C § 3, the Court additionally recommends staying this matter pending arbitration. Lastly, the Court does not recommend granting any of the relief Defendant requests in its reply”
In a subpoena dispute, she ordered nonprivileged production after finding that the arbitration protective order permitted production under a subpoena.
“the protective order is not a barrier to compliance with Movant Funding Circle’s subpoenas.”
In a trade-secret discovery dispute, she denied a motion to compel where the plaintiff had not briefed why the requested responses were required.
“Plaintiff again did not brief why a further response to any request should be compelled”
In Hylton, Augustin-Birch recommended dismissal with prejudice after the plaintiff failed to cure pleading deficiencies in a second amended complaint.
“As Plaintiff was given a prior opportunity to amend and did not remedy the pleading deficiencies, the Court recommends that the dismissal be WITH PREJUDICE and without further leave to amend.”
In the police officers’ discovery dispute, she sustained a proportionality objection to disclosing text messages whose privacy was the subject of the suit.
“Under these circumstances, requiring Petitioners to disclose the content of the text messages is disproportional to the needs of this case, and thus the disproportionality objection is sustained.”
Cautions
In Hybrid Pharma v. Knispel, Augustin-Birch recommended summary judgment for the defendants on a Section 1983 class-of-one claim because the plaintiff had not identified sufficient comparators. The district judge adopted her recommendation.
“Magistrate Judge Augustin-Birch's Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 167] is AFFIRMED AND ADOPTED. Defendant's Joint Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 127] is GRANTED. ... Judge Augustin-Birch recommended to this Court that Summary Judgment be granted in favor of the Defendants on the grounds that Hybrid Pharma failed to identify sufficient comparators for a 'class of one' claim.”
In Fox v. Bank of America, Augustin-Birch recommended denying a motion to reopen because the plaintiff still had not filed a complaint establishing subject-matter jurisdiction.
“Plaintiff still has not filed any Complaint that demonstrates the Court's subject matter jurisdiction over this case. Therefore, it is recommended that Plaintiff's Motion to Reopen Case [DE 21] be DENIED.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Magistrate Judge Panayotta Augustin-Birch's Report and Recommendation on Defendants' Motions to Dismiss, [ECF No. 27], is AFFIRMED AND ADOPTED ... Defendant Apple, Inc.'s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint, [ECF No. 9], is GRANTED; The Complaint, [ECF No. 1], is hereby DISMISSED without prejudice; Plaintiff may seek leave to amend his complaint within twenty (20) days of this Order.”
“Magistrate Judge Augustin-Birch's Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 167] is AFFIRMED AND ADOPTED. Defendant's Joint Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 127] is GRANTED. ... Judge Augustin-Birch recommended to this Court that Summary Judgment be granted in favor of the Defendants on the grounds that Hybrid Pharma failed to identify sufficient comparators for a 'class of one' claim.”
“the Court RECOMMENDS GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment [DE 19] ... insofar as the Court RECOMMENDS remanding the matter for the ALJ to reevaluate Dr. Castro's opinion and Plaintiff's subjective testimony and to reassess Plaintiff's RFC.”
“the Court RECOMMENDS ... DENYING Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment [DE 17].”
“In her R&R, Magistrate Judge Augustin-Birch recommends that Plaintiff's Motion be granted and that the Court award $10,900 in attorney's fees. ... the Court AFFIRMS and ADOPTS Judge Augustin-Birch's R&R [ECF No. 23]. ... Plaintiff's Unopposed Petition for Attorney Fees [ECF No. 22] is GRANTED. Plaintiff is awarded $10,900 in attorney's fees pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. 2412(d).”
In this pro se screening matter, Judge Augustin-Birch denied leave to proceed without prepaying fees after the plaintiff failed to appear and establish indigency. She later recommended dismissal for failure to pay the fee, comply with court orders, and prosecute; District Judge Darrin P. Gayles adopted the recommendation and dismissed without prejudice.
“Plaintiff still has not filed any Complaint that demonstrates the Court's subject matter jurisdiction over this case. Therefore, it is recommended that Plaintiff's Motion to Reopen Case [DE 21] be DENIED.”
“As Plaintiff has failed to demonstrate that the Court has subject matter jurisdiction to grant any relief in this case, it is recommended that Plaintiff's Motion for Affidavit of Truth [DE 20] be DENIED.”
“The Court therefore RECOMMENDS that the Petition [DE 1] be GRANTED insofar as Respondents be ordered to, within five days, either afford Petitioner an individualized bond hearing before an Immigration Judge or release him.”
“In accordance with Florida law, the Court recommends that Plaintiff's Motion for Continuing Writ of Garnishment Against Salary, Wages and Director's Fees [DE 27] be GRANTED.”
“For the foregoing reasons, the Court RECOMMENDS GRANTING Defendant's Motion [DE 45]. Furthermore, in accordance with 9 U.S.C § 3, the Court additionally recommends staying this matter pending arbitration.”
“Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss [DE 4; DE 5] and Motion for Sanctions [DE 15] are DENIED.”
“Plaintiff’s Verified Motion for Attorney’s Fees and Costs [DE 45] be GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART.”
“Defendant’s Motion for Leave to Respond to Plaintiff’s Second Requests for Admissions [DE 86] is GRANTED.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median motion-to-ruling time: 28 days (N = 2).
Descriptive, not a base rate. Her civil dispositive work reaches the record via district-judge adoption orders (she is the referral magistrate). Her direct docket is criminal-duty plus pro se civil.
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 | 0 |
| Sep 2023 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2023 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2022 | 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 Southern District of Florida, not for Judge Augustin-Birch: 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 | 8,196 | 3.4 months |
| Closed with no court action | 848 | 3 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 7,287 | 3.5 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 16 | 10.1 months |
| Closed during trial | 45 | 17.1 months |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 8,196 | 3.4 months |
| Sep 2024 | 7,755 | 3.6 months |
| Sep 2023 | 20,408 | 0 months |
| Sep 2022 | 8,287 | 3.7 months |
| Sep 2021 | 8,536 | 3.2 months |
| Sep 2020 | 8,657 | 3.4 months |
| Sep 2019 | 9,471 | 3.7 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 Augustin-Birch with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Augustin-Birch, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Augustin-Birch's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace