Wes Reber Porter
How Judge Porter rules, drawn from 22 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Porter
Wes Reber Porter has served as a United States magistrate judge in the District of Hawaii since May 2019. He earned his law degree from the Catholic University of America and previously worked as a Navy legal officer, federal prosecutor, and securities enforcement attorney.
Judge Porter's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Porter, 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.
- Pretrial Procedures ↗
- Civil Jury Instructions ↗
- Criminal Jury Instructions ↗
- Trial Procedures for Magistrate Judges ↗
- Emergency Discovery Telephone Conferences ↗
- Standing Order Regarding Settlement Conferences ↗
- Form Stipulated Protective Order ↗
Key rules
Discovery
Certify a good faith meet and confer in a declaration when filing a discovery motion.
“If a party files a discovery motion, they also must certify compliance with this requirement with a declaration.”
Discovery
Emergency discovery telephone conferences are reserved for narrow, discrete disputes.
“The dispute must concern a narrow and discrete issue”
Conferences
Exchange settlement demands, offers, and concrete counterproposals before a settlement conference.
“A good faith effort to settle includes, at the very least, exchanged demands and offers, as well as specific proposals and counter proposals with respect to the key terms of settlement.”
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 Porter decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
Asked to enforce a DMCA subpoena against an internet-service provider that merely routed peer-to-peer traffic, the judge required proof that the provider itself could remove or disable access to infringing material, proof a conduit ISP can never supply, before he would treat the subpoena as valid, regardless of the underlying copyright claim's merits.
“a conduit ISP cannot comply with a 512(c)(3)(A) notice as there is no infringing material to be removed or to disable access to, and, further, the 512(c)(3)(A) notice provision was not intended to apply to ISPs acting as mere conduits.”
On Handa’s default-judgment motion, Porter found that the complaint did not allege any representation by MAS One, defeating the fraudulent-inducement element, while the unjust-enrichment claim was sufficiently pleaded.
“Without alleging that any representations were made by MAS One, Handa fails to allege facts supporting the first element of fraudulent inducement.”
Procedural preferences
In Semper v. Hawaii Life Real Estate Services, Porter recommended dismissing the pro se plaintiff’s first amended complaint with prejudice after three attempts to plead a viable claim.
“Despite these multiple opportunities, Plaintiff has failed to plausibly state a claim for relief.”
In Hawaii Tapers' Trust Funds v. Leite, Porter capped an attorney-fee award at the collective bargaining agreement's 25 percent limit, below the larger amount counsel requested.
“the Agreement limits attorneys' fees to 25% of the total amount of unpaid contributions and liquidated damages due. ... the Court finds that Plaintiffs are entitled to an award of $11,272.01 in attorneys' fees.”
Cautions
Porter recommended denying Handa’s default-judgment motion against MAS One after considering its active defense, the absent fraud allegation, uncertain damages, and the policy favoring decisions on the merits.
“The Court finds that the totality of the factors weighs in favor of denying entry of default judgment against MAS One.”
In Capstone Studios, Corp. v. Oswald, Porter recommended cutting 10.25 hours of block-billed work from an unopposed attorney-fee request before calculating the award.
“The Court RECOMMENDS that these entries, totaling 10.25 hours, be stricken from the award.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“the Court FINDS AND RECOMMENDS that Plaintiffs' Motion be DENIED and that this action be dismissed.”
“the Court FINDS AND RECOMMENDS that the Petition be GRANTED.”
“The Court therefore RECOMMENDS that the District Court DENY the Shuck Defendants' Motion.”
“the Court FINDS AND RECOMMENDS that the district judge award $140,558.30 in attorneys' fees.”
“The Court FINDS and RECOMMENDS that Handa's Motion for Default Judgment Against MAS One USA LLC be DENIED.”
“The Court FINDS and RECOMMENDS that Plaintiffs' Motion for Default Judgment against Defendant be GRANTED as follows.”
“the Court FINDS that Plaintiffs' allegations, taken as true, are sufficient to establish that Plaintiffs owe no duty to defend or indemnify Defendant with respect to the Underlying Lawsuit.”
“For the foregoing reasons, Defendant United States' Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED.”
“the Court recommends that Plaintiffs' Motion for Default Judgment against Defendant be GRANTED IN PART AND DENY IN PART as follows... $66,529.92 in special damages and $20,000 in general damages, plus prejudgment and post judgment interest... DENY Plaintiffs' request for punitive damages.”
“The Court FINDS and RECOMMENDS that Plaintiff's Motion for Default Judgment Against Mockingbird Tiny Homes LLC and Chad Unrein as to All Counts of the Complaint be GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART... awarding Plaintiff damages in the amount of $314,379.45.”
“The Court FINDS and RECOMMENDS that Plaintiff's Motion for Default Judgment against Defendants be GRANTED.”
“the Court FINDS and RECOMMENDS that the complaint be DISMISSED without leave to amend and that Plaintiff's fourth IFP application, ECF No. 11, be DENIED as moot.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
The sampled consent matters include benefit-fund collections, insurance, personal-injury and federal tort claims, employment and civil-rights disputes, wage-and-hour enforcement, copyright suits, and Social Security appeals. Most ended by settlement or stipulated dismissal before a contested motion was decided.
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 |
| Mar 2022 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2021 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2021 | 0 | 1 |
| 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 Porter: 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 Porter with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Porter, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Porter's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace