Patricia Sullivan
How Judge Sullivan rules, drawn from 6 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Sullivan
Patricia Sullivan has served as a part-time United States Magistrate Judge for the District of Oregon in Pendleton since September 2005. Before joining the federal bench, she practiced civil litigation in Oregon and worked in legal services and legislative research in Georgia.
Judge Sullivan's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Sullivan, 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
Trial
Turn off mobile devices before entering the courtroom.
“Mobile devices must be turned off before entering the courtroom.”
Trial
Give advance notice if teleconferencing or courtroom video displays will be needed.
“Please provide advance notice when you require teleconferencing, intend to utilize the courtroom's video displays, or have other presentation technology questions.”
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 Sullivan decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In United States v. Edlefsen, she recommended granting the government’s summary-judgment motion, and the district judge adopted her recommendation.
“The Court adopts Magistrate Judge Sullivan's Findings and Recommendation (Dkt # 78). Therefore, Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment (Dkt # 59) is granted.”
Procedural preferences
In Wallender v. Harney County, she recommended granting an unopposed dismissal motion with prejudice, and the district judge adopted her recommendation.
“the Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Sullivan's Findings and Recommendation, ECF 35. Defendant Harney County District Attorney's Office's Unopposed Motion to Dismiss (ECF 15) is GRANTED. Claims against Defendant Harney County District Attorney's Office are dismissed with prejudice.”
Cautions
In Marquez v. Harper School District No. 66, she recommended denying the plaintiff’s partial summary-judgment motion and granting the defendants’ motion only in part; the district judge adopted her recommendation.
“The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Sullivan's Findings and Recommendation (#51), DENIES Plaintiff's Motion (#30) for Partial Summary Judgment, and GRANTS in part and DENIES in part Defendants' Motion (#27) for Summary Judgment.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“The Court adopts Magistrate Judge Sullivan's Findings and Recommendation (Dkt # 78). Therefore, Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment (Dkt # 59) is granted.”
“the Court ADOPTS Judge Sullivan's Findings and Recommendation, Dkt. 75. The individual defendants' motion for summary judgment (Dkt. 57) is GRANTED. The United States' motion for summary judgment (Dkt. 58) is GRANTED. This case is DISMISSED.”
“the Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Sullivan's Findings and Recommendation, ECF 35. Defendant Harney County District Attorney's Office's Unopposed Motion to Dismiss (ECF 15) is GRANTED. Claims against Defendant Harney County District Attorney's Office are dismissed with prejudice.”
“Magistrate Judge Sullivan's Findings and Recommendation (ECF No. 6) is adopted in full. As noted in the recommendation, petitioner is not 'in custody' for purposes of challenging the 2000 Burglary conviction. Therefore, the petition (ECF No. 1) is DENIED.”
“The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Sullivan's Findings and Recommendation (#51), DENIES Plaintiff's Motion (#30) for Partial Summary Judgment, and GRANTS in part and DENIES in part Defendants' Motion (#27) for Summary Judgment.”
“The Findings and Recommendation (ECF 46) is ADOPTED IN PART. The Court does not adopt the recommendation to dismiss the claims against Defendant Hughes with prejudice. The Motions to Dismiss by the County Defendants (ECF 18) and Defendant ADA Ryan Hughes (ECF 16) are GRANTED.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
- The Eastern Oregon sample includes Social Security, prisoner habeas and other petitions, land-related claims against the United States, federal tax enforcement, consumer-protection, petty-offense, and criminal matters.
- Sullivan generally issues recommendations in referred cases, which a district judge then reviews.
- 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 | 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 | 1 | 4 |
| Sep 2020 | 1 | 3 |
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 Sullivan: 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 Sullivan with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Sullivan, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Sullivan's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace