Terry Alvin Doughty

How Judge Doughty rules, drawn from 20 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

Court
United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana
Position
District judge
Appointed by
Donald Trump (Republican)
Commissioned
March 7, 2018
ABA rating
Well Qualified
Education
B.S., Louisiana Tech University (1981); J.D., Paul M. Hebert Law Center, Louisiana State University (1984)
Signed orders read
20

About Judge Doughty

Terry Alvin Doughty is a judge of the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana. Appointed by President Donald J. Trump, Judge Doughty received a commission on March 7, 2018.

Judge Doughty's practices and standing orders

Rules for cases before Judge Doughty, 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

Filing

Email Word courtesy copies of contested motion papers; manually deliver attachments longer than 50 pages.

“Judge Doughty requires courtesy copies of contested motions, supporting memorandum, and responses. Copies in Word should be e-mailed to chambers at: [email protected] . If attachments to the motion exceed 50 pages, copies should be manually delivered to chambers at the address above.”

Motions

The court has no regular motion date but may order oral argument.

“Judge Doughty does not maintain a regular motion date, but may order oral argument.”

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).

Key rules from these orders · The court's local rules ↗

How Judge Doughty decides

Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

What persuades

In a challenge to the CMS vaccine mandate, he granted the plaintiff states a preliminary injunction after finding that the federal defendants lacked authority to implement the mandate.

“Finding that the Government Defendants do not have the authority to implement the CMS Mandate, this Court GRANTS Plaintiff States' Motion for Preliminary Injunction [Doc. No. 2] and IMMEDIATELY ENJOINS and RESTRAINS the Government Defendants from implementing the CMS Mandate.”

In McWilliams’s employment case, Doughty let her disability-discrimination claims proceed to a jury because the record left a factual dispute over the employer’s stated performance reasons.

“resolution of McWilliams’ claim of discrimination is not appropriate on summary judgment and the genuine disputes of material fact must be resolved by the jury.”

Procedural preferences

In a pro se employment suit, he granted a Rule 12(b)(5) motion and dismissed the complaint without prejudice after the plaintiff failed to serve the complaint.

“For the foregoing reasons, Cleco's Motion to Dismiss [Doc. No. 12] is GRANTED, and Gray's Complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.”

Cautions

In an ADA termination suit, he denied the employer’s summary-judgment motion because factual disputes remained about the worker’s disability, the employer’s perception of it, and the reason for discharge.

“For the reasons set forth, Mid South's Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. No. 25] is DENIED.”

Signed rulings

A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.

LCP West Monroe, LLC v. United States
3:17-cv-00372 · 2018-07-12
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“For the reasons set forth above, FEMA's Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED, and LCP's claims against it are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”

U.S. Equal Emp't Opportunity Comm'n v. Mid S. Extrusion Inc.
3:17-cv-01229 · 2018-10-18
Summary judgment (defendant) Denied

“For the reasons set forth, Mid South's Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. No. 25] is DENIED.”

Aguillard v. Louisiana College
· 2018-09-19
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“Accordingly, LC's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment [Doc. No. 21] is GRANTED. Aguillard's religious discrimination and retaliation claims are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”

Rideau v. Lafayette Health Ventures, Inc.
6:18-cv-00473 · 2019-05-17
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted in part

“For the following reasons, Defendants' motion is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.”

Supreme Home Health Servs., Inc. v. Azar
· 2019-04-23
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted in part

“IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction [Doc. No. 26] filed by Defendants Alex Azar, II and Seema Verma, is GRANTED-IN-PART, as to each Plaintiff”

Motions to dismiss (defendant) Moot / procedural

“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the motion to dismiss [Doc. No. 28] filed by Palmetto GBA, L.L.C., is DENIED, as moot.”

Louisiana v. Biden (federal oil & gas leasing 'Pause')
2:21-cv-00778 · 2021-06-15
Preliminary injunction (plaintiff) Granted

“Having considered the pleadings, the record, the applicable laws, evidence, and oral arguments of counsel, for the reasons set forth herein, this Court finds Plaintiff States have satisfied the requirements for a preliminary injunction. Accordingly, Plaintiff States' Motion for Preliminary Injunction is GRANTED.”

Louisiana v. Becerra (CMS COVID-19 healthcare-worker vaccine mandate)
3:21-cv-03970 · 2021-11-30
Preliminary injunction (plaintiff) Granted

“Finding that the Government Defendants do not have the authority to implement the CMS Mandate, this Court GRANTS Plaintiff States' Motion for Preliminary Injunction [Doc. No. 2] and IMMEDIATELY ENJOINS and RESTRAINS the Government Defendants from implementing the CMS Mandate.”

Missouri v. Biden (social-media censorship)
3:22-cv-01213 · 2023-07-04
Preliminary injunction (plaintiff) Granted in part

“IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction [Doc. No. 10] is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.”

Class certification (plaintiff) Denied

“JUDGMENT granting in part and denying in part 10 Motion for Preliminary Injunction; denying Plaintiffs' request for class action certification. Signed by Judge Terry A Doughty on 7/4/2023.”

Wade v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc.
3:18-cv-00739 · 2018-09-12
Motion to compel arbitration (defendant) Granted

“the motion is GRANTED. The claims for breach of contract are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE, and to the extent Wade seeks to assert them, she is compelled to do so in arbitration.”

Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“Wade's claims based in negligence (Count 2 and part of Count 4) are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE, and to the extent Counts 1 and 4 cover conduct prior to January 21, 2016, those Claims are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”

Gray v. Cleco Power, LLC
5:19-cv-00706 · 2020-05-04
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“For the foregoing reasons, Cleco's Motion to Dismiss [Doc. No. 12] is GRANTED, and Gray's Complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.”

Louisiana v. Becerra (Head Start COVID-19 vaccine & mask mandate)
3:21-cv-04370 · 2022-01-01
Preliminary injunction (plaintiff) Granted

“MEMORANDUM ORDER granting 2 Motion for Preliminary Injunction; denying as moot 6 Motion for TRO and 7 Amended Motion for TRO. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Resources, the Administration for Children and Families, and the Office of Head Start, along with their Secretary, directors, administrators, and employees are hereby ENJOINED and RESTRAINED from implementing the Head Start Mandate set forth in 86 Fed. Reg. 68052 (November 30, 2021), as to all Head Start staff, volunteers, contractors, students, and all others covered by said Head Start Mandate. Signed by Judge Terry A Doughty on 1/1/2022.”

Brick v. Biden
2:21-cv-04386 · 2022-01-03
Preliminary injunction (plaintiff) Moot / procedural

“Because the scope of the Preliminary Injunction includes Louisiana and Ohio, the pending Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed by Brick and Trenn is moot. ... IT IS ORDERED that the Motion for Preliminary Injunction [Doc. No. 4] filed By Brick and Trenn is DENIED AS MOOT.”

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 months0
Bench trials submitted more than six months0
Bankruptcy appeals pending more than six months0
Social Security appeals pending more than six months0
Civil cases pending more than three years4
ReportMotions over six monthsCases over three years
Mar 202604
Sep 2025312
Mar 2025713
Sep 2024712
Mar 202435
Sep 202337
Mar 202346
Sep 202227
Mar 202214
Sep 202174
Mar 202103
Sep 202014

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 Doughty: 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.

CasesMedian time
All civil cases closed1,54113.4 months
Closed with no court action2878.9 months
Closed before pretrial83213.2 months
Closed during or after pretrial39816.1 months
Closed during trial2427.6 months
12 months endingCases closedMedian time
Sep 20251,54113.4 months
Sep 20243,19416.5 months
Sep 20233,96610.5 months
Sep 20223,1868.8 months
Sep 20211,3308.6 months
Sep 20201,06411.3 months
Sep 20191,19011.5 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 Doughty with the record in hand

Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Doughty, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Grounded in Judge Doughty's own signed orders
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace