Kayla D. McClusky
How Judge McClusky rules, drawn from 9 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge McClusky
Kayla D. McClusky is a United States magistrate judge for the Western District of Louisiana. Appointed to the full-time position in 2021, the judge serves in the Monroe Division.
Judge McClusky's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge McClusky, 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.
- Magistrate Judge Kayla D. McClusky ↗
- Pretrial Order Form ↗
- Exhibit List Form ↗
- Witness List Form ↗
- Prisoner Civil Rights Pretrial Memorandum Instructions ↗
- Plaintiff Pretrial Memorandum Form ↗
- Defendant Pretrial Memorandum Form ↗
Key rules
Filing
Email Word courtesy copies of contested motion papers; manually deliver attachments longer than 15 pages.
“Magistrate Judge McClusky requires courtesy copies of contested motions, supporting memorandum, and responses. Copies should be e-mailed in Microsoft Word format to chambers at the following address: [email protected] . If attachments to the motion exceed 15 pages, copies should be manually delivered to chambers at the address indicated above.”
Filing
Use her listed forms only for consent and prisoner civil-rights cases.
“THE FORMS BELOW ARE FOR MAGISTRATE JUDGE McCLUSKY CONSENT AND PRISONER CIVIL RIGHTS CASES ONLY!”
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).
- General Order 0001-2025: Procedures for Access and Management of Sealed or Restricted Documents ↗
- General Order 0001-2024: Procedures for Requesting, Filing, and Management of Highly Sensitive Documents ↗
- SO 1.74 Service and Scheduling of Immigration Habeas Cases ↗
- SO 1.75 Regarding Third-Party Litigation Funding ↗
How Judge McClusky decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In Griffin v. Adams, she found that the prisoner's speculative fear of adverse consequences did not excuse his failure to use the available grievance procedure, and recommended dismissal for failure to exhaust administrative remedies.
“Griffin's speculative fear that adverse consequences might result from submitting a grievance is not sufficient to excuse his failure to comply with the ARP. He has not shown that he lacked access to or was otherwise prevented from discovering the grievance procedures at UPDC.”
In DiTullio v. State Farm Fire & Casualty, McClusky recommended remand because the removing defendant had not shown by clear and convincing evidence that the plaintiff acted in bad faith to prevent removal.
“Rover has failed to establish by clear and convincing evidence (or by a preponderance, for that matter) that DiTullio acted in bad faith to prevent it from removing the action.”
In Perveen, after more than six months of post-removal-order detention, she recommended habeas relief because the pending travel-document request and lack of removal plans did not rebut the petitioner’s showing that removal was not reasonably foreseeable.
“Respondents fail to rebut Petitioner’s arguments.”
Procedural preferences
In Griffin v. Adams, she found failure to exhaust dispositive and expressly declined to reach the merits of the prisoner's claims.
“Having determined that Griffin's claims are subject to dismissal for failure to exhaust administrative remedies, the Court does not reach the merits of his claims.”
In Hovhannisyan v. Jackson Parish Correctional Center, McClusky recommended dismissing without prejudice a Zadvydas claim filed before six months had elapsed after the removal order became final.
“Petitioner's claim is premature because when he filed this proceeding, he was not detained more than six months following the date his order of removal became final.”
Cautions
A prisoner-plaintiff who jumps the grievance process risks not just dismissal but dismissal WITH PREJUDICE to refiling in forma pauperis (Underwood v. Wilson): exhaust the ARP fully before filing, or forfeit IFP status.
“DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE on the merits but DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE for purposes of proceeding in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915.”
Warns that parties remain responsible for verifying authorities produced with generative AI; nonexistent or mischaracterized citations may violate Rule 11 and support sanctions even for pro se litigants.
“It appears that Plaintiffs likely used generative artificial intelligence ('GenAI') to assist in research and failed to check whether the GenAI-generated content was accurate.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“IT IS RECOMMENDED that the Motion for Summary Judgment [doc. #14] filed by Defendant Warden Donnie Adams be GRANTED and that Plaintiff... claims be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE on the merits but DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE for purposes of proceeding in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915.”
“the Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) [Doc. No. 92] filed by Defendant Sheriff Gary Gilley is GRANTED... Plaintiff Glen Stewart's Monell liability claims pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and his claim under Louisiana Revised Statute § 44:1 against Defendant Sheriff Gary Gilley is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.”
“IT IS ORDERED that Defendant Davis Premier Estates, L.L.C.'s motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted [Doc. No. 14] is hereby DENIED.”
“IT IS RECOMMENDED that to the extent Petitioner Mihrdat Hovhannisyan seeks release under Zadvydas, his Petition be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE to his right to re-file the claim should his confinement become unconstitutional. IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that Petitioner's claims concerning his conditions of confinement and medical care be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE here but WITHOUT PREJUDICE to his right to raise them in a separate civil rights action. IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that Petitioner's claim that the Government failed to afford him a bond hearing and claim under the Administrative Procedure Act be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“IT IS RECOMMENDED that the motion to remand [doc. # 12] filed by Plaintiff William DiTullio be GRANTED, and that this matter be remanded to the First Judicial District Court for the Parish of Caddo, State of Louisiana, whence it was removed.”
“IT IS ORDERED that the request for oral argument [doc. # 12-7] is DENIED AS MOOT.”
“IT IS ORDERED that the Motion for Leave to File Second Amended Complaint [doc. #18] filed by Plaintiffs Travis C. Mills and Regina Harrell Mills is GRANTED.”
“IT IS RECOMMENDED that the Motion to Remand [docs. #5, 16, 20] filed by Defendants Rocket Mortgage and Herschel Adcock be DENIED.”
“IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that the Rule 12(b)(1) Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction [docs. #5, 16, 20] filed jointly by Defendants Rocket Mortgage and Herschel Adcock be GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.”
“IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT Counts 3, 5, 6, 7, and 8, be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that the Rule 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim [docs. #5, 16, 20] filed jointly by Defendants Rocket Mortgage and Herschel Adcock be GRANTED and the claims against all Defendants be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“IT IS RECOMMENDED that Judge Caldwell's 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss be GRANTED, and the claims be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“IT IS RECOMMENDED that Sheriff Tubbs' motion to dismiss for improper service of process be GRANTED, and the claims against Sheriff Tubbs be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.”
“IT IS RECOMMENDED that the 1 and 16 Petitions for Writ of Habeas Corpus be Granted on the basis of her procedural due process claim. It is further recommended that Respondents be prohibited from re-detaining Petitioner until she has had a reasonable opportunity to submit her biometrics to USCIS.”
“IT IS RECOMMENDED that the petition be Denied and Dismissed Without Prejudice.”
“petition for habeas corpus be GRANTED: Respondents, and the Warden of South Louisiana ICE”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 89 days (N = 6).
Median motion-to-ruling time: 83 days (N = 4).
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 | 1 |
| Mar 2021 | 0 | 1 |
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 Western District of Louisiana, not for Judge McClusky: 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 | 1,541 | 13.4 months |
| Closed with no court action | 287 | 8.9 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 832 | 13.2 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 398 | 16.1 months |
| Closed during trial | 24 | 27.6 months |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 1,541 | 13.4 months |
| Sep 2024 | 3,194 | 16.5 months |
| Sep 2023 | 3,966 | 10.5 months |
| Sep 2022 | 3,186 | 8.8 months |
| Sep 2021 | 1,330 | 8.6 months |
| Sep 2020 | 1,064 | 11.3 months |
| Sep 2019 | 1,190 | 11.5 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 McClusky with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge McClusky, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge McClusky's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace