Helen W. Gillmor
How Judge Gillmor rules, drawn from 20 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Gillmor
Helen W. Gillmor is a judge of the United States District Court for the District of Hawaii. Appointed by President William J. Clinton, Judge Gillmor received a commission on October 11, 1994. Judge Gillmor assumed senior status on June 30, 2009.
Judge Gillmor's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Gillmor, as published on the court's website (checked October 9, 2026). Judges revise these often, so confirm the current version on the court's site before you file.
- Civil Jury Instructions ↗
- Criminal Jury Instructions (female) ↗
- Criminal Jury Instructions (male) ↗
- Memo Regarding Concise Statement ↗
- Trial Procedures ↗
- Rule 404B Notice Requirements ↗
- Electronic Devices ↗
- Standing Order Regarding Motions to Continue ↗
Key rules
Motions
Highlight or otherwise emphasize the relevant portions of documents cited in summary judgment fact statements.
“The relevant portions of each document shall be highlighted, or otherwise emphasized.”
Motions
Keep argument out of the separate concise statement of facts.
“Do not include argument in your separate Concise Statement.”
Trial
Judge Gillmor hears motions to continue trial filed within 30 days of the trial date.
“all Motions to Continue Trial, within 30 days of the Trial date in cases before District Court Judge Helen Gillmor, will be heard before Judge Gillmor.”
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 Gillmor decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In a mass employment action over a vaccination mandate, generic invocations of Christianity or of the body as a religious 'temple' do not plausibly plead a Title VII religious-accommodation claim; a plaintiff must identify the specific belief and how it actually conflicts with the employment duty.
“General references to Christianity do not meet the fairly minimal burden at the pleading stage to demonstrate an actual conflict with an employer's vaccination requirement.”
In Taylor v. City and County of Honolulu, Gillmor granted dismissal with leave to amend because the plaintiffs’ opposition brief supplied details about Runge that were missing from the operative complaint.
“The specificity provided in Plaintiffs' Opposition regarding Defendant Runge is missing from the First Amended Complaint.”
Procedural preferences
In Cooper v. Vigor Marine, Gillmor decided a civil motion on the papers without a hearing under the district's local rule.
“The Court elects to decide the Motion without a hearing pursuant to District of Hawaii Local Rule 7.1(c).”
In United States v. Inouye, Gillmor reviewed a magistrate judge’s release order de novo and ordered the defendant detained pending trial after considering the evidence of flight risk and danger to witnesses.
“In reviewing the Magistrate Judge's release order under 18 U.S.C. 3145, this Court applies a de novo standard of review.”
For airline workers’ accommodation claims, Gillmor asked whether the collective-bargaining agreement could arguably resolve a claim or defense, not whether an accommodation would ultimately be permitted; disputes requiring interpretation belonged in the Railway Labor Act process.
“The question, for purposes of the RLA, is whether a provision of the CBA could ‘arguably’ dispose of a claim or defense.”
Cautions
Intentional spoliation of evidence central to a case can end the case outright as a terminating sanction, particularly once the destruction has already occurred and a lesser sanction or warning would be futile.
“The evidence has already been destroyed. Any warning by the Court that Plaintiff's case would be dismissed if he did not produce the evidence would be futile.”
A prisoner who files repetitive, substantially identical lawsuits against overlapping defendants risks having the later-filed duplicates dismissed with prejudice as frivolous, generating a 28 U.S.C. 1915(g) strike, rather than being allowed to proceed on parallel tracks.
“It is clear that he is nonetheless abusing the state and federal court systems.”
In United States v. Bactad, Gillmor denied compassionate release sought to care for the defendant's minor children. She found insufficient evidence that Bactad was the only available caregiver, rather than someone who could provide preferable care.
“It is Defendant’s burden to establish that she is the only available caregiver and not simply that she would be a better caregiver.”
A government plaintiff seeking to preempt a state fossil-fuel tort suit must show a concrete, redressable injury; a chain of possible effects from future success in the state case did not establish standing.
“The long chain of contingencies is too speculative and attenuated to establish Article III standing.”
A broad common-interest privilege claim over group-chat communications failed on review where the objecting parties supplied no evidence that the disputed communications served legal advice or joint strategy.
“Plaintiffs have provided no evidence in their Objections to establish any error in the Magistrate Judge’s ruling.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Plaintiff Mystiana Victorino's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (ECF No. 59) is DENIED.”
“Defendant Ouansafi's Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 76) is GRANTED.”
“DEFENDANT STATE OF HAWAII DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY’S MOTION TO DISMISS (ECF No. 6) is GRANTED. Plaintiff is GRANTED leave to file an amended complaint.”
“Defendants Lockheed Martin Operations Support, Inc. and Richard T. Dunn's MOTION FOR DISMISSAL SANCTION DUE TO PLAINTIFF'S INTENTIONAL SPOILATION OF EVIDENCE (ECF No. 63) is GRANTED. This case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE as to all remaining Defendants.”
“Plaintiff Landon Robinson's Motion to Remand (ECF No. 17) is GRANTED. The case and all files herein are REMANDED to the Circuit Court of the First Circuit, State of Hawaii for further proceedings.”
“Kanae's retaliation claims against Mock and Jinbo in Count I state plausible claims for relief, shall be served, and require a response. Kanae's due process claim against John Doe is DISMISSED without prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2) and 1915A(b)(1).”
“The Court GRANTS the appeal of the Government and ORDERS Defendant Inouye BE DETAINED pending trial. Defendant Inouye is remanded to the custody of the United States Marshal.”
“Defendant's Motion To Reduce Sentence Under The First Step Act (ECF No. 163) is GRANTED, IN PART, AND DENIED, IN PART. Defendant's Motion for a reduction in sentence to time-served and seeking immediate release is DENIED. Defendant's Motion is GRANTED to the extent his sentence is reduced from a term of life imprisonment down to 300 months imprisonment.”
“The Complaint is DISMISSED with prejudice as frivolous. This action may be counted as a ‘strike’ under 28 U.S.C. 1915(g).”
“Defendant Bryant Kazuyoshi Iwai's Motion to Suppress Evidence and Statements (ECF No. 24) is DENIED.”
“Defendant Runge’s Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 27) is GRANTED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND.”
“DEFENDANTS HAWAIIAN AIRLINES, INC. AND HAWAIIAN HOLDINGS, INC.’S MOTION TO PARTIALLY DISMISS FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT (ECF No. 44) is GRANTED. Plaintiffs are given LEAVE TO AMEND consistent with the rulings set forth in this Order.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
The sampled matters include employment and disability claims, personal-injury and product-liability suits, maritime disputes, prisoner litigation, insurance and contract cases, copyright claims, benefit-fund collections, and criminal prosecutions.
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 | 1 |
| 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 | 1 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 1 | 1 |
| Sep 2025 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2025 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2024 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2024 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2023 | 1 | 3 |
| Mar 2023 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2022 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2022 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2021 | 0 | 2 |
| Mar 2021 | 0 | 3 |
| 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.
How long civil cases take in this court
For the whole of U.S. District Court for the District of Hawaii, not for Judge Gillmor: 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 | 570 | 4.9 months |
| Closed with no court action | 152 | 3.5 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 398 | 5.8 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 12 | 28.9 months |
| Closed during trial | 8 | not reported |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 570 | 4.9 months |
| Sep 2024 | 624 | 4.8 months |
| Sep 2023 | 502 | 6.5 months |
| Sep 2022 | 472 | 9.6 months |
| Sep 2021 | 496 | 9.4 months |
| Sep 2020 | 523 | 7.1 months |
| Sep 2019 | 511 | 9.1 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 Gillmor with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Gillmor, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Gillmor's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace