Amy M. Baggio

How Judge Baggio rules, drawn from 27 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

Court
United States District Court for the District of Oregon
Position
district
Appointed by
Joe Biden (Democratic)
Commissioned
2024-08-22
ABA rating
Well Qualified
Education
Wake Forest University (B.A., speech communication, 1995); Lewis & Clark Law School (J.D., 2001)
Signed orders read
27

How Judge Baggio decides

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

What persuades

In Fair Housing Act emergency-relief disputes, requires the requested accommodation to be both necessary and reasonable; a service or support animal does not exempt a tenant from a neutral rule requiring the animal to remain under control.

“Here, the Court finds that Plaintiff has not shown a likelihood of success on the merits because she has not shown elements (3) or (4).”

Procedural preferences

Enforces the demanding preliminary-injunction standard: a PI is an extraordinary remedy and she denies it where the plaintiff seeks to enjoin conduct already in effect (no likely irreparable harm) or raises no serious questions on the merits.

“A preliminary injunction is ‘an extraordinary remedy that may only be awarded upon a clear showing that the plaintiff is entitled to such relief.’”

Cautions

On review of a magistrate judge's F&R she will not re-hear arguments already considered and rejected below; objections that merely relitigate are unpersuasive.

“Objections to a magistrate judge's F&R 'are not a vehicle to relitigate the same arguments carefully considered and rejected by the Magistrate Judge.'”

Signed rulings

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

Steininger v. Legacy Health
3:24-cv-01095-YY · 2025-05-27
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“The Court GRANTS Defendant's motion to dismiss (ECF 9) and dismisses Plaintiff's ORS 659A.030 failure-to-accommodate claim with prejudice.”

Clingman v. Clackamas County
3:25-cv-00750-JR · 2025-06-02
Preliminary injunction (plaintiff) Denied

“Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction (ECF 3) is DENIED.”

Rote v. New Jersey Judiciary
3:24-cv-01711-SB · 2025-08-08
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“Defendant New Jersey Judiciary's Motion to Dismiss [25] is GRANTED, Oregon Defendants' Motion to Dismiss [29] is GRANTED, Defendant Zweizig's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's federal claims [30] is GRANTED ... Defendant Gloucester County's Motion to Dismiss [49] is GRANTED”

Motion for entry of default (plaintiff) Denied

“Plaintiff's Motion for Entry of Default [36] is DENIED”

Motion for leave to amend (plaintiff) Denied

“Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to Amend [63] is DENIED.”

Winslow v. Hotbox Farms, LLC
2:24-cv-01002-HL · 2026-01-26
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied

“Accordingly, the Hotbox Defendants' Motion to Dismiss [44] is DENIED.”

Valdez v. Wells Fargo
3:24-cv-02111-AB · 2025-02-19
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“Defendant's Motion to Dismiss (ECF 3) is GRANTED. Plaintiff's Complaint (ECF 1-1) is dismissed with prejudice.”

Wilhite v. Expensify, Inc.
3:23-cv-01784-JR · 2025-03-24
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted in part

“Defendants' Motion to Dismiss, ECF 53, is GRANTED with respect to Plaintiff's claims related to the 2020 Email and violations of Items 105 and 303. Defendants' Motion is DENIED in all other respects.”

Burtness v. Legacy Health
3:24-cv-01256-AB · 2024-12-18
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“Because Plaintiff's ORS 659A.030 discrimination claim is time-barred, it is dismissed with prejudice.”

Ettling v. Teeny Foods Corporation
3:22-cv-02000-SB · 2024-12-13
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted in part

“Defendant Teeny Foods Corporation's Motion for Summary Judgment [27] is DENIED in part and GRANTED in part.”

American Family Mutual Insurance Company, S.I. v. Cosmo Investments, LLC
3:22-cv-02006-YY · 2024-10-03
Summary judgment (plaintiff) Granted

“Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment [22] is GRANTED, and Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment [24] is DENIED.”

Summary judgment (defendant) Denied
Vega v. BFS Asset Holdings LLC
3:23-cv-01036-JR · 2025-08-04
Summary judgment (defendant) Denied

“Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF 48) is DENIED.”

Rocket Software, Inc. v. CollegeNET, Inc.
3:22-cv-00327-AB · 2025-12-19
Motion to exclude (plaintiff) Granted in part

“Plaintiffs' Motion to Exclude Robert F. Held [120] is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.”

Dale v. WSCO Petroleum Corp.
3:24-cv-01545-JR · 2025-04-10
Motions to remand (plaintiff) Granted

“Plaintiff's motion to remand to Multnomah County Circuit Court (ECF 7) is GRANTED and his motion for attorney fees (ECF 7) is DENIED.”

Motion for attorneys fees (plaintiff) Denied

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

  • Reflects assignment mix rather than measured outcomes.
  • Baggio took the federal bench in August 2024, so her docket is a blend of her own newly filed 2026 cases (still pending) and older matters reassigned to her from predecessor judges that she carried to judgment in 2024-2025, including a Section 1983 prisoner civil-rights case she tried to a jury in November 2024 and a state habeas petition she denied.
  • Case durations are not reported because the terminated cases were filed years before her commission and span predecessor judges, so a filing-to-termination span would not reflect her own time on the case.

Draft for Judge Baggio with the record in hand

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

Opens in Ezel Pro.

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