Raymond E. Patricco
How Judge Patricco rules, drawn from 9 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Patricco
Raymond E. Patricco became a United States magistrate judge in the District of Idaho in June 2021 and serves as chief magistrate judge in Boise. He previously spent more than two decades as a federal prosecutor in Idaho and Virginia.
Judge Patricco's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Patricco, 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.
Key rules
Motions
A lawyer less than seven years out of law school or pro bono counsel can request oral argument on a contested substantive motion.
“A request for oral argument on a contested substantive motion may be filed, and the Court will schedule oral argument, if the request indicates a lawyer of less than seven years out of law school, or pro bono counsel, will conduct the oral argument (or at least a majority).”
Motions
The court prefers one dispositive motion per side; seek permission for a longer brief if necessary.
“The Court prefers only one dispositive motion per side.”
Discovery
After meeting and conferring, contact chambers and notify the assigned law clerk of a discovery dispute before filing a motion.
“the parties MUST contact Chambers at (208) 334-9150 and inform the law clerk assigned to the case of the existence of the dispute prior to filing a motion.”
Conferences
File a litigation plan and discovery plan one week before the scheduling conference.
“Each party should complete a litigation plan and a discovery plan and file it with the Court one week prior to the scheduling conference.”
Sealing
A sealing request in a criminal matter must include a motion, supporting briefing, and a proposed order.
“A request to seal must be made by motion and accompanied by supporting briefing and a proposed order.”
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 Patricco decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Procedural preferences
Denies a Rule 59 motion to alter or amend the judgment, holding the movant to the narrow grounds for post-judgment relief.
“Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion to Alter or Amend Judgment (Dkt. 77) is DENIED.”
Cautions
Grants a defendant's motion for summary judgment where the record does not support the plaintiff's claims.
“For the reasons set forth above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 92) is GRANTED.”
A firearm prohibition covering a federal medical facility survived a Second Amendment challenge because federal buildings and hospitals are sensitive places with a historical tradition of weapons restrictions.
“There is no basis to find that 38 C.F.R. § 1.218(a)(13) is unconstitutional.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion to Alter or Amend Judgment (Dkt. 77) is DENIED.”
“For the reasons set forth above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 92) is GRANTED.”
“Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 194) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part”
“Plaintiff’s Motion to Amend the Complaint (Dkt. 191) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part”
“The three outstanding Motions to Seal (Dkts. 193, 195, & 202) are GRANTED.”
“Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 47) is DENIED;”
“Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 50) is DENIED;”
“Plaintiffs’ Motion to Strike David Magnani Declaration (Dkt. 57) is DENIED, WITHOUT PREJUDICE.”
“the decision of the Commissioner is AFFIRMED, that Plaintiff’s Complaint for Review of a Social Security (Dkt. 1) is DENIED, and this action is DISMISSED in its entirety, with prejudice.”
“the decision of the Commissioner is AFFIRMED, that Plaintiff’s Complaint for Review of a Social Security (Dkt. 1) is DENIED, and this action is DISMISSED in its entirety, with prejudice.”
“Defendant’s Motion to Exclude Expert Testimony and Evidence of Rebecca Bohn, MA and Rebecca Tallent (Dkt. 102) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part”
“Plaintiff’s Motion for Entry of Protective Order (Dkt. 110) is GRANTED.”
“Plaintiff’s Motion in Limine (Dkt. 111) is GRANTED.”
“Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. 14) is DENIED.”
“Defendant’s Motion to Suppress the Ada County Sheriff’s Office Complaint (Dkt. 15) is DENIED.”
“Defendant’s Motion to Suppress the firearm (Dkt. 16) is DENIED.”
“Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss for Forum Non Conveniens and to Dismiss Count Five for Lack of Particularity (Dkt. 8) is DENIED in its entirety.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
The reviewed consent docket consists of twenty-three Social Security disability appeals and one employment and wage dispute decided on cross-motions for summary judgment. In consent cases under 28 U.S.C. 636(c), Patricco enters final judgment rather than issuing a recommendation to a district judge.
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 | 2 |
| Civil cases pending more than three years | 2 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 0 | 2 |
| Sep 2025 | 0 | 2 |
| Mar 2025 | 0 | 1 |
| Sep 2024 | 0 | 3 |
| Mar 2024 | 0 | 2 |
| Sep 2023 | 0 | 1 |
| Mar 2023 | 0 | 2 |
| Sep 2022 | 0 | 2 |
| Mar 2022 | 0 | 4 |
| Sep 2021 | 0 | 4 |
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 District of Idaho, not for Judge Patricco: 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 | 405 | 10.3 months |
| Closed with no court action | 53 | 3.8 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 322 | 10.4 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 27 | 23.5 months |
| Closed during trial | 3 | not reported |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 405 | 10.3 months |
| Sep 2024 | 389 | 10.4 months |
| Sep 2023 | 363 | 11.5 months |
| Sep 2022 | 381 | 12.5 months |
| Sep 2021 | 352 | 14.3 months |
| Sep 2020 | 348 | 11.3 months |
| Sep 2019 | 365 | 10.4 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 Patricco with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Patricco, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Patricco's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace