Thomas P. LeBlanc
How Judge LeBlanc rules, drawn from 9 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge LeBlanc
Thomas P. LeBlanc is a United States magistrate judge for the Western District of Louisiana. Appointed to the full-time position in 2024, the judge serves in the Lake Charles Division.
Judge LeBlanc's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge LeBlanc, 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
Magistrate Judge LeBlanc does not require courtesy copies.
“Magistrate Judge LeBlanc does not require courtesy copies.”
Motions
Contested motions have no routine motion date, though the court may order oral argument.
“Magistrate Judge LeBlanc does not maintain a 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).
- 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 LeBlanc decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In Andrus v. Spears, he denied the defendants’ summary judgment motion because they made no showing that the 2004 beneficiary form could be disregarded and cited no law supporting their position.
“the Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment [doc. 14] is DENIED ... Defendants are not entitled to summary judgment because defendants have made no showing that the 2004 Form could or should be disregarded. Defendants cite to no law in support of their arguments.”
Procedural preferences
At initial review of an immigration-detention habeas petition, allowed the claim to proceed and required the government to provide evidence and briefing on whether removal was reasonably foreseeable and continued detention lawful.
“A review of his petition and attachments suggests that his claims should survive this court's initial review. ... IT IS ORDERED that Respondents file an answer to the petition within sixty (60) days following the date of service. In the answer, Respondents shall provide the Court with summary judgment evidence indicating whether there is a significant likelihood of removal in the reasonably foreseeable future or whether Petitioner's detention is otherwise lawful.”
In Carroll v. Turner Industries, LeBlanc denied a motion to vacate an arbitration award. He found that the arbitrator had not exceeded her authority because the parties' agreement gave her exclusive authority to interpret and apply it.
“For the reasons set forth below, the motion is DENIED. ... Here, the arbitrator did not exceed her authority when issuing the arbitration award. First, the DRA gives the arbitrator 'the exclusive authority to resolve any dispute relating to the interpretation, applicability, or enforceability, of this DRA.'”
In Chaney, after repeated discovery filings lacked required conference certificates or the disputed requests and responses, he denied them without prejudice and directed the plaintiff to present one comprehensive motion complying with the discovery rules.
“motions [docs. 81, 86, 104, 107, 114, 120] is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.”
Cautions
In Chaney, five third-party motions to compel failed because the movant supplied no subpoenas, proof of service, place of compliance, or notice to the third parties.
“the court is unable to compel any listed third-party to produce documents”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“the Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment [doc. 14] is DENIED ... Defendants are not entitled to summary judgment because defendants have made no showing that the 2004 Form could or should be disregarded. Defendants cite to no law in support of their arguments.”
“Aaron and Kamryn Andrus' Motion for Summary Judgment [doc. 16] is GRANTED. Accordingly, the Court hereby orders and declares that plaintiff Aaron J. Andrus is entitled to the life insurance death benefit in this case.”
“For the reasons set forth below, the motion is DENIED. ... Here, the arbitrator did not exceed her authority when issuing the arbitration award. First, the DRA gives the arbitrator 'the exclusive authority to resolve any dispute relating to the interpretation, applicability, or enforceability, of this DRA.'”
Initial review of a pro se immigration-detention petition under 28 U.S.C. section 2241. The judge allowed the claim to proceed to an answer and directed the respondents to submit evidence addressing whether removal was reasonably foreseeable and whether continued detention was otherwise lawful: "A review of his petition and attachments suggests that his claims should survive this court's initial review."
Initial review of a pro se immigration-detention petition under 28 U.S.C. section 2241. The judge allowed the claim to proceed, ordered service, required an answer and legal memorandum, and gave the petitioner time to respond: "A review of the petition and attachments suggests that his claims should survive this court's initial review."
“motions [docs. 81, 86, 104, 107, 114, 120] is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.”
“[docs. 115 & 116] are also DENIED WIHTOUT PREJUDICE.”
“discovery is also DENIED WIHTOUT PREJUDICE.”
“Plaintiff’s Motions to Compel [docs. 87, 88, 89, 94, & 95] are DENIED.”
“ineffective assistance of counsel claim [doc. 48] is DENIED.”
“for Subpoenas [doc. 50] is DENIED AS MOOT.”
“is DENIED as unnecessary.”
“IT IS ORDERED that Petitioner’s Motion for Order to Show Cause (doc. 7) is GRANTED.”
“IT IS RECOMMENDED that the petition be GRANTED and Petitioner be RELEASED, subject to supervision”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Newly seated (2024) magistrate judge; the docket is short and weighted toward criminal duty and miscellaneous matters, with only a handful of civil merits dispositions to date. Case durations are not reported: the criminal -mj/-po matters are not civil-duration-meaningful, and the consent civil docket is too new and small for a defensible median.
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 | 4 |
| 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 | 1 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 4 | 1 |
| Sep 2025 | 4 | 1 |
| Mar 2025 | 8 | 1 |
| Sep 2024 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2024 | 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 United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana, not for Judge LeBlanc: 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 LeBlanc with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge LeBlanc, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge LeBlanc's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace