Michael A. Hammer
How Judge Hammer decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
On a Rule 45 subpoena motion to compel he works request-by-request, granting compliance where the document is relevant to the operative claim and rejecting a non-party agency's blanket statutory-confidentiality objection -- but channeling any genuinely confidential material through a Paff-style sworn statement and privilege index rather than letting the agency simply withhold.
“because the statute clearly only protects 'information obtained from employers and employees,' a hearing notice is not considered confidential ... Plaintiff's motion to compel compliance with his request for production of the hearing notice is hereby GRANTED.”
Motion outcomes
Counted from classified signed orders only. Percentages are shown only where the sample is large enough to be meaningful; smaller samples are reported as raw counts.
| Involuntary dismissal failure to prosecute N = 2 |
Granted: 2 | counts only |
| Motions to compel N = 1 |
Granted in part: 1 | counts only |
A "1 of 1" is one ruling, not a tendency. Treat small samples as illustrative, not predictive.
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Plaintiff's motion to compel compliance with his subpoenas [D.E. 146] is DENIED IN PART AND GRANTED IN PART.”
“ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 66) is hereby adopted in its entirety ... ORDERED that Plaintiff's Complaints in these cases are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“the Report and Recommendation (DE 22) of Magistrate Judge Michael A. Hammer that the case be dismissed without prejudice, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) ... ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation is affirmed and adopted ... ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED with prejudice.”