Tucker Lee Melançon
How Judge Melançon rules, drawn from 16 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Melançon
Tucker L. Melancon is a judge of the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana. Appointed by President William J. Clinton, Judge Melancon received a commission on February 11, 1994. Judge Melancon assumed senior status on February 14, 2009.
Judge Melançon's practices and standing orders
The court's website lists no individual practices or standing orders of Judge Melançon's own (checked October 9, 2026), so the court's local rules and general orders are the place to look (court page ↗).
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 ↗
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“ORDERED that plaintiff's Motion to Dismiss defendant's counterclaim [Rec. Doc. 288] is GRANTED.”
“ORDERED that defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment [Rec. Doc. 291], and his request for a hearing, are DENIED.”
“Brookhaven's Motion for Summary Judgment on plaintiff's claim under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is GRANTED with respect to discrimination (42 U.S.C. Sec 2000e-2(a)(1)), and DENIED with respect to retaliation (42 U.S.C. Sec 2000e-3(a))... Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment on plaintiff's claims under 42 U.S.C. Sec Sec 1981, 1983 and 1985 is GRANTED... Motion for Summary Judgment on plaintiff's claim under contract law is DENIED.”
“Plaintiff's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on her claims under 42 U.S.C. Sec 1983 is DENIED.”
“defendants' Motion will be DENIED AS MOOT IN PART and DENIED IN PART, and plaintiff's Motion will be DENIED.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff's Motion for Reconsideration [Rec. Doc. 50] is DENIED.”
“ORDERED that defendant Atlantic Hyundai's Motion for Summary Judgment [Rec. Doc. 39] is GRANTED with respect to plaintiff's claims for defamation and his claim arising from an alleged unauthorized credit check, and DENIED with respect to plaintiff's claim based on Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.”
“ORDERED that plaintiff Martal Cosmetics, Ltd.'s Second Motion for Summary Judgment [Rec. Doc. 417] is DENIED.”
“ORDERED that plaintiff's Motion in Limine to allow Sarner to testify remotely [Rec. Doc. 474] is DENIED.”
“defendants' August 9, 2010 motion to compel [Rec. Doc. 466], are DENIED as moot.”
Post-bench-trial findings of fact and conclusions of law in a Lanham Act trademark-counterfeiting case, not a motion ruling. Judgment for the plaintiff, a permanent injunction, and attorney fees/costs, but no prejudgment interest since statutory damages already fully compensated the plaintiff.
“Defendant Rosenbaum's motion to dismiss [Rec. Doc. 218] is DENIED”
“defendant Greenblatt's motion to dismiss [Rec. Doc. 219] is DENIED.”
“The Motion will be granted on all of plaintiff's claims: conversion, fraud, unjust enrichment, breach of fiduciary duty, quiet title, reformation, constructive trust, and punitive damages, and each of plaintiff's claims will be dismissed with prejudice.”
“Defendant's counterclaims based on plaintiff's alleged litigation misconduct, asserted for the first time in her Motion for Summary Judgment, will be denied.”
“Based on the foregoing, plaintiff's Motion in Limine will be granted and the Court will strike the defendants' unnecessary costs defense.”
“The Court having reviewed in camera the Yahoo database records, concludes that the records contain information relevant to the claims asserted by Indiaweekly in this matter. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Nehaflix produce the Yahoo database records to counsel for Indiaweekly within three days of the entry of this order.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
- The sampled senior-status civil docket is a mix of ERISA long-term-disability benefit disputes (administrative-record review), an insurance/unjust-enrichment coverage dispute, a state-court removal and remand fight, and a habeas corpus transfer to the court of appeals as a successive petition.
- Consistent with a senior judge's typically lighter, more curated caseload in a single division (Lafayette) rather than the full docket of an active 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 | 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 | 0 |
| 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 United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana, not for Judge Melançon: 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 Melançon with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Melançon, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Melançon's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace