Rom A. Trader
How Judge Trader rules, drawn from 25 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Trader
Rom A. Trader became a United States magistrate judge in the District of Hawaii in January 2019. He previously served on Hawaii’s First Circuit Court and as a Honolulu deputy prosecuting attorney, and earned his law degree from the University of Hawaii.
Judge Trader's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Trader, 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.
- Trial Procedures for Magistrate Judges ↗
- Emergency Discovery Telephone Conferences ↗
- Civil Jury Instructions ↗
Key rules
Discovery
Emergency discovery telephone conferences are reserved for narrow, discrete disputes.
“The dispute must concern a narrow and discrete issue”
Discovery
Call chambers to arrange an emergency discovery telephone conference and how it will be recorded.
“Counsel must call chambers and make scheduling arrangements with the assigned judge’s staff, including how the telephone conference will be memorialized”
Trial
Counsel must provide hard and Word copies of proposed jury instructions in civil trials before a magistrate judge.
“Hard copies of proposed jury instructions and proposed special verdict forms must be submitted, along with electronic copies in Microsoft Word.”
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 Trader decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In Chavez v. Deutsche Bank, Trader reviewed the fee invoices and recommended a 5% reduction because redactions kept him from assessing some billed work.
“The Court is unable to determine whether the hours expended are reasonable if it does not know what task was performed. The Court has carefully reviewed each invoice submitted and finds that a 5% across-the-board reduction is reasonable to account for the missing information due to the redactions.”
In Privratsky v. Liberty Mutual, Trader recommended limiting the fee award to the statutory maximum and denying the requested general excise tax and non-taxable costs.
“The Court finds that the Defendant’s request for non-taxable costs in addition to attorneys’ fees exceed the statutory limit and must therefore be denied.”
Procedural preferences
In Rodrigues’s Social Security case, Trader recommended denying an incomplete fee-waiver application without prejudice and dismissing the complaint with leave to amend because its reference to “disability retirement” supplied no supporting facts.
“The Court thus recommends that the Complaint be dismissed without prejudice and that Plaintiff be permitted leave to file an amended complaint.”
In Hurst v. Dayton, Trader recommended terminating sanctions after the plaintiff repeatedly disobeyed discovery orders despite prior warnings and opportunities to comply.
“As to the first subfactor, the Court has previously tried to take less drastic action in the form of the countless previous warnings. ... Yet despite these previous admonitions, Plaintiff willfully and in bad faith continued to disobey court orders.”
Cautions
In Akana v. Rhea, Trader recommended denying default judgment without prejudice because the clerk had not entered default. He also explained that Akana could pursue his own claims without counsel but could not represent the business entity.
“The Motion for Default Judgment is thus premature as an entry of default must precede a motion for default judgment.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“the Court FINDS and RECOMMENDS that out of the total amount of attorneys' fees and general excise tax requested, $9,611.98 should be deducted due to a 5% across-the-board reduction for redactions to the billing statements.”
“The Court DENIES Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File First Amended Complaint.”
“the Court finds Plaintiff's arguments for remand unpersuasive and FINDS and RECOMMENDS that Plaintiff's request to remand be DENIED.”
“the Court FINDS AND RECOMMENDS that the district court dismiss the instant case against Defendant Dayton with prejudice.”
“Accordingly, pursuant to Local Rule 54.2(h), the Court DENIES the Second Fee Motion WITH PREJUDICE.”
“Plaintiffs' ... motions seeking the recusal of this Court, the magistrate judge, and the district court staff, are HEREBY DENIED in their entirety.”
“the Court RECOMMENDS that the IFP Application be DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.”
“the Court RECOMMENDS that the district court DENY the Application, and DISMISS the Complaint WITHOUT PREJUDICE and WITH LEAVE TO AMEND.”
“After careful review of the Application and relevant law, the Court recommends that the Application be DENIED.”
“The Court thus RECOMMENDS that the district court DENY the Application, and DISMISS the Complaint WITHOUT PREJUDICE and WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND.”
“the Court FINDS that the fees in the amount of $27,112.50 is reasonable and RECOMMENDS that the district court GRANT the Fee Motion.”
“the Court FINDS that an amendment of the Default Judgment to include the attorneys' fees awarded to Plaintiff is appropriate under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(1), and RECOMMENDS that the Motion to Amend be GRANTED.”
“the Court FINDS and RECOMMENDS that Defendants ... be GRANTED $1,357.00 in attorney's fees, $45.80 in costs, and $66.10 in GET ... The Court RECOMMENDS that the remaining $416.75 in attorney's fees, costs, and GET be DENIED.”
“The Court RECOMMENDS that the Corrected Motion for Default Judgment be DENIED.”
“the Court also FINDS that it lacks subject matter jurisdiction and RECOMMENDS that the Amended Complaint be dismissed without prejudice and without leave to amend.”
“the Court FINDS that the Application should be DENIED as moot.”
“The Court FINDS and RECOMMENDS that the district court DISMISS the Complaint with leave to amend and DENY as MOOT the Application WITHOUT PREJUDICE.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Among eleven sampled terminated consent cases filed from 2021 through 2024, one produced a classified ruling and the others ended by stipulated dismissal or judgment without a retained motion ruling.
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 | 1 | 1 |
| Mar 2025 | 2 | 1 |
| Sep 2024 | 0 | 1 |
| Mar 2024 | 0 | 1 |
| Sep 2023 | 0 | 1 |
| Mar 2023 | 0 | 1 |
| Sep 2022 | 0 | 1 |
| Mar 2022 | 0 | 1 |
| 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.
How long civil cases take in this court
For the whole of U.S. District Court for the District of Hawaii, not for Judge Trader: 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 Trader with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Trader, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Trader's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace