Kevin F. McDonald
How Judge McDonald decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
On prisoner excessive-force claims he applies the Whitley v. Albers malicious-and-sadistic standard and recommends summary judgment for the defendant officers on qualified-immunity and merits grounds where the force was not shown to be malicious.
“ORDERED that Defendants' motion for summary judgment, docket number 38, is granted.”
Procedural preferences
McDonald takes a lenient view of Rule 4(m) service-deadline extensions, reading Henderson v. United States to afford discretion to extend the service period even absent good cause; on this point a district judge has declined to adopt his recommendation, holding good cause required.
“The Report recommends denying Defendant's Motion to Dismiss. However, the Court declines to adopt the Report and grants the Motion to Dismiss for the reasons discussed herein.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“The Report recommends denying Defendant's Motion to Dismiss. However, the Court declines to adopt the Report and grants the Motion to Dismiss for the reasons discussed herein.”
Serial pro se patent plaintiff Larry Golden v. Google (three patents). McDonald's first recommendation (April 9, 2021) recommended dismissal, was adopted November 2, 2021, then vacated and remanded by the Federal Circuit (the allegations were not facially frivolous). On remand his operative recommendation (November 14, 2022) recommended dismissal without prejudice as duplicative of Golden's parallel N.D. Cal. case; Judge Dawson adopted it without objection. As a screening dismissal it resolved no pending party motion.
Pro se prisoner 1983 civil-rights complaint. McDonald's recommendation (December 3, 2024) recommended summary screening dismissal under 1915/1915A with prejudice, without issuance and service of process; District Judge Austin accepted it and dismissed with prejudice. As a screening dismissal it resolved no pending party motion. The recommendation is not separately available in the record; it is grounded through Austin's adoption order.
“ORDERED that Defendants' motion for summary judgment, docket number 38, is granted.”
“ORDERED that Bacchus' motion for entry of default, docket number 83, is denied.”
Put Judge McDonald's record to work
Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge McDonald actually rules, not a generic AI guess.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge McDonald's own signed orders and cites them.