Marco A. Hernandez
How Judge Hernandez rules, drawn from 21 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Hernandez
Marco Antonio Hernandez is a judge of the United States District Court for the District of Oregon. Appointed by President Barack Obama, Judge Hernandez received a commission on February 9, 2011. Judge Hernandez assumed senior status on August 21, 2024.
Judge Hernandez's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Hernandez, 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.
- Senior United States District Judge Marco A. Hernández ↗
- Example 2 - Joint List of Exhibits and Objections to Exhibits ↗
- Example 4 - Exhibit List ↗
- Example 1 - Proposed Jury Instructions ↗
- Example 3 - Joint Submissions of Motions in Limine ↗
Key rules
Filing
Do not file proposed orders or judgments unless Judge Hernández requests them, except protective or pretrial orders.
“Please do not file proposed orders (except for protective order or pretrial order) or judgments in ECF unless requested by Judge Hernández.”
Motions
File extension motions at least seven days before the existing deadline.
“Motions seeking an extension of time should be filed no less than seven days before the existing deadline.”
Discovery
Request a court conference before moving for a discovery order.
“a party must request a conference with the Court before moving for an order relating to a discovery dispute.”
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 Hernandez decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Procedural preferences
In Butler v. Oregon Health & Science University, Hernández granted an unopposed summary-judgment motion after finding the plaintiff had not given the required Oregon Tort Claims Act notice and had filed outside the limitations period.
“Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment [21] is GRANTED and this case is DISMISSED.”
In White v. United Heritage Property & Casualty Co., Hernández reviewed the parties’ objections to a magistrate judge’s recommendation de novo and adopted it with a modification. He granted dismissal of the negligence per se claim after finding that Oregon law did not then support the claim against the insurer.
“The Court has carefully considered Plaintiff’s and Defendant’s objections and has reviewed the pertinent portions of the record de novo. The Court adopts the Findings & Recommendation with the following modification: Defendant’s motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s negligence per se claim is granted.”
In Healy v. Marion County Jail, Hernández granted the county defendants summary judgment after finding the plaintiff had not exhausted grievances addressing the claims in his suit.
“The Court concludes County Defendants have established that Plaintiff did not exhaust his administrative remedies.”
Cautions
In White v. United Heritage Property & Casualty Co., Hernández dismissed the negligence per se claim after finding that Oregon law had not definitively recognized it for the insurer’s alleged claim-settlement practices, and that the plaintiff could not recover emotional-distress or punitive damages.
“The Court finds that the ruling by Oregon Court of Appeals in Moody ... has not definitively changed Oregon law to allow a plaintiff to bring a negligence per se claim against an insurer for impermissible claim settlement practices in violation of O.R.S. 746.230. Additionally, because Plaintiff cannot recover either emotional distress damages or punitive damages, his negligence per se claim fails.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment [21] is GRANTED and this case is DISMISSED.”
“Plaintiff's motion to dismiss portions of Defendants' third counterclaim [22] is denied.”
“Plaintiff's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment [26] is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part, and Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment [33] is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.”
“Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File an Amended Complaint [54] is GRANTED as to the dismissal of Defendant Countrywide and DENIED in all other respects.”
“The Court GRANTS Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF 21.”
“The Court DENIES Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to Amend Jurisdictional Allegations Per 28 U.S.C. § 1653, ECF 34;”
“GRANTS Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Pursuant to FRCP 12(b)(1), ECF 42; and dismisses this matter for lack of jurisdiction.”
“the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (#2) is denied.”
“the Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (#32) is dismissed, with prejudice.”
“Because this case is untimely, Petitioner's pending Motion to Vacate Judgment (#38) is denied.”
“The Court DENIES Plaintiff's Motion for Relief from Judgment and Leave to Amend or Supplement with Alternative State Legal Theories, ECF 130 (Case No. 3:20-cv-01740-HZ), ECF 38 (Case No. 3:24-cv-00764-HZ).”
“the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (#1) is denied.”
“Because the Petition does not entitle Petitioner to relief, his pending Motion for Summary Judgment (#13) is denied.”
“The Court GRANTS Defendant Randy LL Corporation's Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF 29.”
“Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorney Fees Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 406(b) is hereby GRANTED, and Plaintiff’s counsel is awarded $21,632.70 in attorney’s fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b).”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 444 days (N = 4).
The 2019-2021 case sample is weighted toward Social Security appeals, criminal matters, prisoner civil-rights and habeas cases, and commercial disputes involving trade secrets, contracts, and insurance. 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 | 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 | 2 | 2 |
| Mar 2025 | 2 | 3 |
| Sep 2024 | 0 | 2 |
| Mar 2024 | 6 | 8 |
| Sep 2023 | 15 | 3 |
| Mar 2023 | 6 | 7 |
| Sep 2022 | 25 | 6 |
| Mar 2022 | 8 | 20 |
| Sep 2021 | 27 | 24 |
| Mar 2021 | 21 | 16 |
| Sep 2020 | 39 | 6 |
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 Hernandez: 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 Hernandez with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Hernandez, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Hernandez's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace