John H. Rains IV
How Judge Rains rules, drawn from 4 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Rains
John H. Rains IV is a United States magistrate judge for the Northern District of Georgia in Rome. He joined the court in August 2025 after practicing at Bondurant Mixson & Elmore and clerking for a judge of the Eleventh Circuit.
Judge Rains's practices and standing orders
The court's website lists no individual practices or standing orders of Judge Rains's own (checked October 9, 2026), so the court's local rules and general orders are the place to look (court page ↗).
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 9, 2026).
How Judge Rains decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Procedural preferences
In Bryant's Section 2255 case, Rains recommended dismissing the motion to vacate and denying Bryant's related summary-judgment motions as moot. The district judge adopted his recommendation.
“movant’s Motions for Summary Judgment [103, 105] be DENIED AS MOOT”
In Miles v. Lewis Tree Service, Rains allowed a short discovery extension limited to a deposition and promised document production, while denying a late request to depose the defendant after the original discovery period.
“The defendant's motion to extend the discovery period through July 30, 2026 is GRANTED but only as to permit the deposition of the plaintiff to proceed as agreed and for the plaintiff to complete the document production promised during the parties' recent discovery conferrals.”
Cautions
In Bryant v. United States, Rains recommended dismissing the Section 2255 motion and denying a certificate of appealability. Chief Judge May later adopted his recommendation.
“The undersigned RECOMMENDS that (1) the government’s ‘Motion to Dismiss and Response’ [91] be GRANTED, (2) the Motion to Vacate [89] be DISMISSED, (3) a certificate of appealability be DENIED”
Recommended denying ineffective-assistance claims where the controlling appellate decision and sentencing record left counsel no non-frivolous objection and the movant could not show a reasonable probability of a lower sentence.
“A lawyer cannot be deficient for failing to raise a meritless claim. Therefore, movant fails to show that trial counsel performed deficiently by failing to object to the presentence investigation report, the government's sentencing memorandum, and the enhancement. Movant also fails to show prejudice because there is not a reasonable probability that he would have received a lower sentence if trial counsel had objected.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“RECOMMENDS that the Motion to Vacate be GRANTED IN PART AND”
“For the reasons stated above, the undersigned RECOMMENDS that (1) the Motion to Vacate [81] be DENIED, (2) a certificate of appealability be DENIED, and (3) civil action number 4:24-cv-176-SDG-JHR be CLOSED.”
“movant’s Motion to Hold Case in Abeyance [99] and Motion to Lift Stay [100] are DENIED AS MOOT.”
“Movant submitted two Motions to Supplement Pending 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion [101, 108], which are GRANTED.”
“Movant also submitted two Motions Requesting the Court to Address Pending 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion [102, 104], which are GRANTED.”
“Movant filed a Motion to Supplement Pending Motion for Summary Judgment [107], which is GRANTED.”
“The undersigned RECOMMENDS that (1) the government’s ‘Motion to Dismiss and Response’ [91] be GRANTED, (2) the Motion to Vacate [89] be DISMISSED, (3) a certificate of appealability be DENIED, (4) movant’s Motions for Summary Judgment [103, 105] be DENIED AS MOOT, and (5) civil action number 4:25-cv-7-LMM-JHR be CLOSED.”
“IT IS RECOMMENDED that the 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion [127] be DENIED and that no certificate of appealability issue.”
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 |
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 Northern District of Georgia, not for Judge Rains: 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 | 6,703 | 4 months |
| Closed with no court action | 640 | 3 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 4,138 | 1.6 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 1,901 | 11.6 months |
| Closed during trial | 24 | 31.4 months |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 6,703 | 4 months |
| Sep 2024 | 6,190 | 5.3 months |
| Sep 2023 | 8,614 | 13.7 months |
| Sep 2022 | 5,403 | 5.1 months |
| Sep 2021 | 4,908 | 6 months |
| Sep 2020 | 4,463 | 5.7 months |
| Sep 2019 | 4,954 | 6.2 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 Rains with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Rains, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Rains's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace