Jolie A. Russo
How Judge Russo rules, drawn from 15 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Russo
Jolie A. Russo has served as a United States Magistrate Judge for the District of Oregon since February 2016. Before joining the bench, she worked for the same court as a staff attorney and senior staff attorney for 28 years and taught at Oregon law schools.
Judge Russo's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Russo, 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
Motions
File extension motions at least seven days before the current deadline.
“Any subsequent motion seeking an extension of time should be filed no less than seven days before the existing deadline.”
Discovery
Use formal motions to compel instead of emailing informal discovery disputes.
“Judge Russo is no longer accepting informal discovery disputes by e-mail and instead requests that the parties' follow formal motion practice in compelling discovery.”
Conferences
Submit the joint Rule 26(f) report and discovery plan before the Rule 16 conference.
“Ahead of the conference, the parties shall submit their formal joint Rule 26(f) Report and Discovery Plan.”
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).
How Judge Russo decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
On cross-motions for summary judgment in a detainee medical-care claim she recommended granting the defense motion and denying the plaintiff's, applying the deliberate-indifference framework to conditions of confinement.
“The Court ADOPTS IN PART Judge Russo's Findings and Recommendation, ECF 125. The Court GRANTS Defendants' motion for summary judgment (ECF 106) and DENIES Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment (ECF 110).”
Procedural preferences
In Stade v. Oregon Department of Human Services, Russo recommended dismissing the pro se complaint for insufficient factual allegations and limitations problems. She appointed counsel for a three-hour consultation about a possible amendment; the district judge reviewed the objections and adopted her recommendation.
“The Court ADOPTS Judge Russo's Findings and Recommendation. ECF 36. The Court GRANTS Defendants' Motion to Dismiss. ECF 27.”
Cautions
After repeated failures to comply with discovery and court warnings, she recommended terminating sanctions when lesser measures had not secured compliance. The district judge adopted the recommendation.
“The Court has also, in lieu of sanctions, explicitly warned plaintiff that continued noncompliance could result in dismissal.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“The Court ADOPTS Judge Russo's Findings and Recommendation. ECF 36. The Court GRANTS Defendants' Motion to Dismiss. ECF 27.”
“The Court ADOPTS IN PART Judge Russo's Findings and Recommendation, ECF 125. The Court GRANTS Defendants' motion for summary judgment (ECF 106) and DENIES Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment (ECF 110).”
“The Court ADOPTS Judge Russo's Findings and Recommendation, ECF [55], in full. Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File Third Amended Complaint, ECF [52], is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.”
Russo's September 9, 2021 F&R recommended sua sponte dismissal with prejudice and without leave to replead of a pro se in forma pauperis complaint. With no objections, District Judge Michael H. Simon reviewed for clear error, found none, and adopted the recommendation on October 12, 2021. Grounding quote: 'the Court ADOPTS Judge Russo's Findings and Recommendation, ECF 4. The Court DISMISSES Plaintiff's complaint with prejudice. ECF 2.'
Russo's May 8, 2026 F&R recommended sua sponte dismissal of a pretrial detainee's complaint under Younger v. Harris abstention and, separately, Heck v. Humphrey. The pro se plaintiff objected only that her state criminal case was expected to be dismissed. District Judge Michael H. Simon adopted in part, dismissing without prejudice under Younger because the critical date was when the federal action was filed, but declined the Heck portion because Wallace v. Kato holds that Heck does not bar a pre-conviction challenge. Grounding quote: 'The Court ADOPTS IN PART Judge Russo's Findings and Recommendation, ECF 10. The Court DISMISSES WITHOUT PREJUDICE Plaintiff's Complaint, ECF 1.'
“For the reasons stated above, the Commissioner’s decision is AFFIRMED, and this case is DISMISSED.”
“This case is hereby REMANDED to the Multnomah County Circuit Court”
“Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorney Fees Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 406(b) is hereby GRANTED, and Plaintiff’s counsel is awarded $30,088.00 in attorney’s fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b).”
“defendant’s Motion for Terminating Sanctions (doc. 196) should be granted and judgment should be prepared dismissing this case.”
“the Commissioner’s decision is REVERSED, and this case is REMANDED for the immediate payment of benefits from April 5, 2017, through November 30, 2024.”
“the Commissioner’s decision is REVERSED, and this case is REMANDED for further proceedings.”
“the Commissioner’s decision is AFFIRMED, and this case is DISMISSED.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
- The civil sample includes Social Security appeals, prisoner and employment civil-rights matters, disability claims, insurance, consumer-protection, and personal-injury cases.
- As a magistrate judge, Russo enters final judgments when the parties consent to her jurisdiction and issues recommendations in referred cases.
- Reported durations measure the life of each case, not the time taken to decide a motion.
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 | 7 |
| 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 | 10 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 7 | 10 |
| Sep 2025 | 0 | 7 |
| Mar 2025 | 5 | 11 |
| Sep 2024 | 5 | 8 |
| Mar 2024 | 3 | 9 |
| Sep 2023 | 3 | 8 |
| Mar 2023 | 2 | 6 |
| Sep 2022 | 2 | 11 |
| Mar 2022 | 0 | 11 |
| Sep 2021 | 0 | 12 |
| Mar 2021 | 0 | 10 |
| Sep 2020 | 3 | 8 |
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 District of Oregon, not for Judge Russo: 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 | 1,647 | 9.8 months |
| Closed with no court action | 300 | 5.2 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 1,316 | 10.4 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 9 | not reported |
| Closed during trial | 22 | 33.6 months |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 1,647 | 9.8 months |
| Sep 2024 | 1,633 | 10.2 months |
| Sep 2023 | 1,472 | 11.6 months |
| Sep 2022 | 1,620 | 13.7 months |
| Sep 2021 | 1,501 | 11.8 months |
| Sep 2020 | 1,536 | 11.8 months |
| Sep 2019 | 1,596 | 11.6 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 Russo with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Russo, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Russo's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace