Thomas Woodrow Thrash Jr.
How Judge Thrash rules, drawn from 20 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Thrash
Thomas W. Thrash, Jr. is a judge of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. Appointed by President William J. Clinton, Judge Thrash received a commission on August 1, 1997. Judge Thrash assumed senior status on May 8, 2021.
Judge Thrash's practices and standing orders
The court's website lists no individual practices or standing orders of Judge Thrash'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 Thrash decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In Everett v. Cobb County, Georgia, Thrash dismissed the malicious-prosecution claim against a private citizen because the complaint did not show that her statements materially influenced the officer’s independent decision to seek a warrant.
“a party merely relays facts to an official who then makes an independent decision to arrest or prosecute ... in the latter case there is not [potential liability]”
Procedural preferences
Challenges to an expert's data limitations may go to cross-examination and weight rather than admissibility when the underlying sources and method reflect accepted professional practice.
“Datasets may be imperfect at times, but that is not grounds to render an entire analysis unreliable.”
In the Equifax data-breach litigation, Thrash left certain state-law claims unresolved, explaining that the transferor courts were better placed to assess arguments under their own jurisdictions' laws.
“the transferor courts, each of which is familiar with the state law of their respective jurisdictions, are in a better position to assess the parties' state law arguments”
In Everett v. Cobb County, Georgia, he declined to address a malicious-abuse-of-process claim raised for the first time in the plaintiffs’ response brief because the complaint had not pleaded that claim.
“that does not mean that a plaintiff can surreptitiously attempt to add a wholly new claim in a response briefing. The Court will not address these arguments.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“the Defendants' Motion to Dismiss [Doc. 1220] is GRANTED with respect to Douglas Adams ... [and seven other opt-out plaintiffs]. The Court GRANTS in part and DENIES in part the Defendants' Motion to Dismiss [Doc. 1220] with respect to Audella Patterson, Brett Joshpe, Richard Khalaf, and Anna Lee.”
“The Defendant Miller's Motion to Dismiss [Doc. 29] is GRANTED. The Plaintiffs' state claims against the Defendant Miller are DISMISSED.”
“The Plaintiffs' Motion for Partial Summary Judgment [Doc. 41] is granted on those issues.”
“The Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 35] is DENIED.”
“The Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 42 & 45] is GRANTED.”
“The Defendants' Motion to Dismiss [Doc. 28] is GRANTED.”
“Motion to Dismiss [Doc. 64] is DENIED”
“Motion to Dismiss [Doc. 65] is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part”
“Motion to Dismiss [Doc. 66] is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part”
“Motion to Dismiss [Doc. 74] is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part”
“Motion for Partial Summary Judgment [Doc. 125] is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part”
“Motion to Dismiss [Doc. 118] is GRANTED without prejudice to refiling a Second Amended Complaint”
“Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED [Doc. 22]”
“Motion to Dismiss [Doc. 17] is DENIED”
“Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings [Doc. 25] is DENIED as premature without prejudice to refile within thirty days of any responsive pleading filed by Hampton Court”
“Motion to Dismiss the First Amended Complaint [Doc. 43] is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part”
“Motion to Dismiss the Class Action Complaint [Doc. 33] is DENIED as moot”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 528 days (N = 9).
Mix from case-level docket records; most carry no administrative case-closure row (2020-21 filings). General civil docket plus the Equifax multidistrict litigation reflected in his published orders.
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 | 3 |
| 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 | 7 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 3 | 7 |
| Sep 2025 | 0 | 6 |
| Mar 2025 | 0 | 5 |
| Sep 2024 | 0 | 3 |
| Mar 2024 | 0 | 1 |
| Sep 2023 | 0 | 2 |
| Mar 2023 | 0 | 2 |
| Sep 2022 | 0 | 10 |
| Mar 2022 | 0 | 5 |
| Sep 2021 | 0 | 3 |
| Mar 2021 | 0 | 2 |
| Sep 2020 | 0 | 8 |
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 U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia (Atlanta Division), not for Judge Thrash: 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 Thrash with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Thrash, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Thrash's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace