William Joseph Haynes Jr.
How Judge Haynes rules, drawn from 10 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Judge Haynes no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.
How Judge Haynes decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
Haynes treated a narrowed keyword request as evidence that the requesting party had already taken reasonable steps to control electronic-discovery costs.
“Similarly, Plaintiffs here narrowed their search request to 50 terms that will produce relevant electronic responsive documents, so there is nothing else Plaintiffs can do to reduce the cost of production.”
Procedural preferences
Haynes enforced a forum-selection clause against the individual who founded the company and negotiated the contract, even though he was not merely treated as a remote nonparty.
“The Court concludes that Termini is bound by the forum selection clause.”
Cautions
Haynes did not treat an accounting restatement, standing alone, as enough to plead fraudulent intent in a securities case.
“The mere fact of a restatement of material accounting errors alone is insufficient to infer an intent to deceive investors.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Accordingly, the Court concludes that Defendant’s motion for summary judgment (Docket Entry No. 33) should be denied.”
“The Court further concludes that Plaintiffs motion for partial summary judgment (Docket Entry No. 36) should be granted as to her claim of disability discrimination under the ADA and retaliation claims and denied as to her claim of disability discrimination under the TDA.”
“For these reasons, Defendants’ motion to dismiss for improper venue should be granted.”
“Accordingly, for these reasons, the Court concludes that Plaintiffs motion for U Visa certification (Docket Entry No. 198) should be granted.”
“Accordingly, for these reasons, Metal Bulletin’s motion to dismiss (Docket Entry No. 11) should be granted.”
“Thus, the plaintiffs motion for appointment of his counsel as lead counsel is granted.”
“For the above reasons, Defendant’s motion to dismiss is granted in part and denied in part.”
“the Plaintiffs motion in li-mine (Docket Entry No. 146) is GRANTED”
“It is further ORDERED that the Defendant’s request for a jury trial is DENIED as contrary to the relevant statute and precedents.”
“Given these findings, PRS’s request for a stay of in-junctive relief will be denied.”
“For the above stated reasons, the Plaintiffs’ renewed motion to compel should be granted.”
After trial, Haynes found False Claims Act liability, imposed treble damages and civil penalties, and dismissed duplicative common-law claims.
Haynes's initial review allowed a prisoner's Eighth Amendment failure-to-protect claim to proceed; no party motion was decided.
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
The five sampled closed matters include False Claims Act, trademark, employment, securities, and copyright litigation. This purposeful sample does not describe the full caseload.
A historical record
Judge Haynes no longer hears cases. This profile stays available as a record of how they ruled. If you're preparing for a matter, start from the court's current bench.