Annie T. Christoff
How Judge Christoff rules, drawn from 25 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Christoff
Annie T. Christoff became a United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of Tennessee in July 2020 and sits in Memphis. Before her appointment, she clerked for District Judge Jon P. McCalla, practiced commercial litigation, and served as an Assistant United States Attorney. She earned degrees from Tulane University and Georgetown University Law Center.
Judge Christoff's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Christoff, 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.
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 Christoff decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In a sprawling pro se suit that named dozens of defendants including several sitting and former federal judges, the judge dismissed the claims against the judicial defendants with prejudice on judicial-immunity grounds without treating the plaintiff's other claims the same way, applying the immunity doctrine narrowly to the parties it actually protects rather than using it to clear the whole docket.
“his 'claims against judges in Texas are barred by judicial immunity,' therefore warranting dismissal with prejudice ... This Court concludes the same.”
On a Title VII/ADEA comparator analysis, the judge required that a plaintiff point to colleagues whose conduct was substantially identical to her own, not merely similar in kind, before their different treatment could support an inference of discriminatory pretext: a demanding but concrete evidentiary bar.
“the actions of Powell's fellow employees who were not terminated, including Buyny and the subordinate nurses, cannot be said to have been substantially identical to the conduct Powell engaged in. Unlike any of those comparators, Powell admitted to being the source of the answers to the questions from the blood glucose competency tests.”
Procedural preferences
On a Rule 41(b) motion to dismiss for discovery noncompliance, the judge weighed a pro se plaintiff's good-faith (if imperfect) effort to comply against the moving party's inconvenience, and declined dismissal where the record showed an attempt at compliance rather than willful disregard: favoring a warning and the threat of lesser sanctions over ending the case outright.
“Weighing each of these factors, and considering in particular that Coleman has attempted to comply with the Court's Order and has not willfully disregarded his discovery obligations, the Court recommends that Kellogg's Motion to Dismiss be denied.”
Facing a defendant that had repeatedly missed motion-response deadlines across an entire case, the judge stopped short of the plaintiff's requested sanctions of default and case-ending relief, instead ordering the noncompliant party to reimburse the pro se plaintiff's actual expenses: a proportionate remedy calibrated to the harm rather than the most severe sanction requested.
“The City's repeated noncompliance, even after admonishment, justifies an award of sanctions ... The Court will, however, require the City to reimburse Price for any expenses she has incurred due to the City's dilatory conduct.”
In a Fair Credit Billing Act dispute, she separated time-barred claims from alleged later conduct and left the defendant’s challenge to factual sufficiency for summary judgment.
“Its arguments are best reserved for summary judgment.”
Cautions
In United States v. Neal, the district judge adopted Christoff's recommendation in part and denied suppression. On de novo review, the district judge found insufficient probable cause linking the alleged drug dealing to the home but applied the good-faith exception to the search warrant.
“Defendant has shown that there was insufficient probable cause to support this warrant. ... The standard for the good-faith exception is therefore met in the instant case.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“For the foregoing reasons, this Court recommends that this case be dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(b) for failure to prosecute.”
“it is recommended that the Defendants' Motions to Dismiss (ECF Nos. 9, 10, 13, 16, 24) and the Motion to Strike the Amended Complaint (ECF No. 32) be granted and that this case be dismissed.”
“Bey's Motion to compel discovery pursuant to Rule 26 (ECF No. 39) ... these Motions are DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE AS MOOT.”
“Motion to compel discovery pursuant to Rule 37 (ECF No. 55) ... these Motions are DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE AS MOOT.”
“it is recommended that MSCS's Motion to Dismiss be DENIED and that Ford be ordered to amend her complaint to provide factual support for her allegations of discriminatory acts on October 18, 2021, and May 6, 2022.”
“this Court recommends that summary judgment be granted as to all Ford's Title VII and THRA claims, other than her claim of retaliation related to her removal as team lead, for which summary judgment should be denied.”
“this Court recommends that Methodist's motion for partial summary judgment be GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART.”
“it is recommended that Price's Motion to Amend be denied as futile.”
“it is recommended that Price's requests for entry of default and default judgment be denied at this time.”
“Price's Motion to Strike is DENIED.”
“Price's First Motion for Sanctions (ECF Nos. 49, 65) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.”
“Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the R&R (ECF No. 39), DENIES Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 33), and GRANTS Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 37).”
“the Court recommends that Kellogg's Motion to Dismiss be denied. However, Coleman is warned that failure to comply with any future orders or his discovery obligations will result in sanctions.”
“it is recommended that Coleman's Motion for Summary Judgment be denied.”
“the Court has reviewed Judge Christoff's R&R and finds no clear error. And so, the Court ADOPTS the R&R and DISMISSES this case WITHOUT PREJUDICE.”
“recommending that the Court dismiss Plaintiff's case for failure to prosecute under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b), that the Court should dismiss as moot the Second Motion to Compel.”
“That the Motion to Dismiss Drake's Amended Complaint (ECF No. 19) be GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART... That all claims against the judicial defendants be DISMISSED.”
“That the Motion to Strike (ECF No. 20) and the Supplemental Motion to Strike (ECF No. 31) be GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART.”
“That the Motion for Sanctions (ECF No. 22) be DENIED.”
“The Motion for Leave to Take Depositions In-Person and or by Zoom, Prior to Ruling on Dispositive Motion and Request Evidentiary Hearing (ECF No. 15) is DENIED.”
“The Motion for Leave to Offer Evidence and Proof (ECF No. 14) is DENIED.”
“The Motion to Extend Time to Serve Defendants (ECF No. 12) is GRANTED only as to Defendants Scot Graydon, Warren Lloyd Vavra, and Unnamed Clerk in Travis County.”
“The Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 11) is DENIED AS MOOT.”
“Upon de novo review, the Court ADOPTS IN PART the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge. Accordingly, Defendant's Motion to Suppress is DENIED.”
“this Court recommends that Baptist be granted summary judgment as to all of Powell's claims.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Christoff's consent docket is dominated by Social Security disability appeals and also includes employment, premises-liability, contract, and wage-and-hour matters. She handles criminal-duty matters such as search-warrant applications and initial appearances, while much of her civil work consists of recommendations in cases referred by district judges.
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 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2020 | 0 | 0 |
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 U.S. District Court for the Western District of Tennessee, not for Judge Christoff: 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 | 893 | 8.6 months |
| Closed with no court action | 381 | 8.6 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 489 | 8.3 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 10 | 25.8 months |
| Closed during trial | 13 | 26.7 months |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 893 | 8.6 months |
| Sep 2024 | 737 | 9.4 months |
| Sep 2023 | 755 | 9.9 months |
| Sep 2022 | 782 | 10.3 months |
| Sep 2021 | 792 | 10 months |
| Sep 2020 | 766 | 8.7 months |
| Sep 2019 | 780 | 9.7 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 Christoff with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Christoff, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Christoff's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace