Amos Louis Mazzant III
How Judge Mazzant rules, drawn from 44 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Mazzant
Amos Louis Mazzant, III is a judge of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. Appointed by President Barack Obama, Judge Mazzant received a commission on December 19, 2014.
Judge Mazzant's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Mazzant, 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
The court encourages opportunities for newer attorneys who helped draft a motion to argue it.
“the Court strongly encourages litigants to be mindful of opportunities for Newer Attorneys to conduct oral argument, particularly where a Newer Attorney drafted or contributed significantly to a motion or response.”
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 Mazzant decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Procedural preferences
In Garcia Delgado, Judge Mazzant denied a late request to reopen discovery under Rule 16. Even assuming discovery deficiencies explained the delay, the requested new dispositive motions would reset a case ready for trial, and a continuance would not cure that prejudice.
“In sum, one factor favors relief, and three do not. After a holistic review of all factors, the Court finds no good cause to modify the scheduling order.”
In Wapp Tech v. Wells Fargo, Judge Mazzant denied a patent-case stay under the customer-suit exception as premature. Discovery was needed to determine whether Wells Fargo was a customer or manufacturer of an accused system.
“additional discovery should be conducted by the parties to determine whether Defendant is a customer or manufacturer of an accused system.”
In Gibson’s application for litigation costs, Judge Mazzant excluded $2,307.33 for appeal travel and lodging because the opposing party had prevailed and received costs on appeal. He awarded the remaining $235,417.92.
“Because Defendant was declared the prevailing party on appeal and awarded its costs by the Fifth Circuit (Dkt. #652; Dkt. #653), the Court will not award Plaintiff its costs incurred during the appeal.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“the Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. #4) is GRANTED. Plaintiff Wealtr Investments, Inc.'s claims against Defendant WMC REI LLC are hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“It is therefore ORDERED that Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. #17) is hereby DENIED.”
“It is further ORDERED that all claims against Defendant Paide and Defendant Scott Bickell are hereby DISMISSED with prejudice.”
“Plaintiff's motion to dismiss (Dkt. #23) is self-effectuating and terminates the case in and of itself, and the case is DISMISSED without prejudice pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. 41(a)(1)(A),(B).”
“Defendant IoT.nxt USA, Inc.'s Rule 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Third Amended Complaint and Motion to Strike Exhibits (Dkt. #59) is hereby DENIED.”
“Plaintiffs' Motion for Leave to File Fourth Amended Complaint ... (Dkt. #63) and Plaintiffs' Motion for Leave to File Surrejoinder ... (Dkt. #70) are hereby DENIED as moot.”
“Caliber Home Loans' Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. #19) and U.S. Bank Trust, N.A., as Trustee for LSF9 Master Participation Trust's Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. #35) are GRANTED. Plaintiff's claims against Defendants are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“Health Care Service Corporation, a Mutual Legal Reserve Company, operating in Texas through its division Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Texas's Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. #35) and Motion to Strike (Dkt. #39) are each GRANTED, and the entirety of Plaintiff's claims against each of Defendants are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“Defendants' motion to dismiss (Dkt. #38) is GRANTED and this case should be DISMISSED as to Defendants Department of Housing and Urban Development, Patrick Banis, Garry Sweeney, and Gordon F. Patterson.”
“Defendant Celso Rodriguez, Jr.'s Motion to Dismiss the Indictment, or, in the alternative, For a Bill of Particulars (Dkt. #738) is DENIED.”
“Defendant's Motion to Dismiss the Indictment (Dkt. #32) is DENIED.”
“Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint (Dkt. #11) is GRANTED, and Plaintiff's claims are DISMISSED.”
“It is ORDERED that Plaintiff Michael Rutherford's Emergency Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction (Dkt. #2), which the Court construes as a Motion for Preliminary Injunction, is DENIED.”
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 | 6 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 0 | 6 |
| Sep 2025 | 17 | 8 |
| Mar 2025 | 78 | 7 |
| Sep 2024 | 31 | 6 |
| Mar 2024 | 23 | 9 |
| Sep 2023 | 20 | 2 |
| Mar 2023 | 4 | 2 |
| Sep 2022 | 1 | 3 |
| Mar 2022 | 0 | 2 |
| Sep 2021 | 0 | 5 |
| Mar 2021 | 1 | 2 |
| Sep 2020 | 0 | 1 |
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 Eastern District of Texas, not for Judge Mazzant: 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 | 2,854 | 7.3 months |
| Closed with no court action | 1,222 | 5.3 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 1,581 | 9 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 15 | 26 months |
| Closed during trial | 36 | 24.2 months |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 2,854 | 7.3 months |
| Sep 2024 | 2,345 | 7.5 months |
| Sep 2023 | 2,003 | 8.4 months |
| Sep 2022 | 1,968 | 8.8 months |
| Sep 2021 | 2,122 | 8.1 months |
| Sep 2020 | 1,956 | 8.9 months |
| Sep 2019 | 1,972 | 8.6 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 Mazzant with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Mazzant, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Mazzant's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace