John Campbell Barker
How Judge Barker rules, drawn from 25 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Barker
J. Campbell Barker is a judge of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. Appointed by President Donald J. Trump, Judge Barker received a commission on May 3, 2019.
Judge Barker's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Barker, 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.
- JCB Standing Order Regulating Practice in Civil Cases ↗
- JCB Standing Order Regulating Practice in Criminal Cases ↗
- JCB Scheduling Order Template ↗
- JCB Scheduling Order Template (for cases where mandatory disclosures are requested) ↗
- JCB Scheduling Order Template (for bench trials) ↗
- Form JCB-CV-5.1 - Order on Motion to Seal Documents ↗
- Form JCB-CR-32 Defendant's Waiver Before Sentencing Hearing ↗
- JCB Protective Order Template ↗
- JCB Model Order Regarding E-Discovery ↗
- Exhibit List Template ↗
- Sample Civil Pretrial Report ↗
- Witness List Template ↗
- Sample Criminal Pretrial Report ↗
- Civil Verdict Form Template ↗
- Criminal Verdict Form Template ↗
- Preliminary Jury Instructions Template ↗
- Final Jury Instructions Template ↗
Key rules
Filing
If Barker enters his model civil order in the case, proposed orders must state the precise relief requested.
“Every proposed order required by Local Rule CV-7(a) must contain the specific relief that the party wants the court to award, not simply ‘motion granted.’”
Filing
If Barker enters his model criminal order, defense counsel must file a sentencing memorandum stating the proposed sentence and waiver status.
“Before the sentencing hearing and by any other deadline set by the court, defense counsel must file a memorandum stating (1) the defendant’s position on the appropriate sentence and (2) whether the defendant and de- fense counsel have reviewed and signed a waiver using Form JCB-CR-32.”
Motions
If Barker enters his model civil order, serve motion papers and file a certificate of service before filing the papers after briefing.
“Any motion paper (i.e., a motion, response, or reply and any attachment thereto) shall not be filed with the court until the motion is fully briefed or the deadline for full briefing has passed.”
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 Barker decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Procedural preferences
In Campbell v. McLain, Judge Barker rejected untimely objections and evidence first offered with objections to the magistrate judge’s recommendation before dismissing claims against McLain.
“The court will not consider this attachment because plaintiff attempts to present this evidence for the first time in his objections to the report.”
In Campbell v. McLain, Barker dismissed the plaintiff’s individual-capacity claims against McLain with prejudice after concluding that the plaintiff had already alleged his best case. The failure-to-supervise allegations did not show McLain’s personal involvement or a causal connection.
“dismissal with prejudice is appropriate when plaintiff had opportunity to amend and ‘alleged his best case.’”
In Farhadinia v. U.S. Department of State, Judge Barker declined to consider a merits argument first raised in objections to the magistrate judge’s recommendation.
“a plaintiff is not entitled to raise new arguments in the written objections”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Because the remaining plaintiffs are entitled to judgment as a matter of law, the court enters summary judgment granting declaratory relief in their favor.”
“Defendant McLain's motion to dismiss (Doc. 13) is granted. Plaintiff's individual capacity claims against McLain are dismissed with prejudice.”
“Defendant's motion to dismiss is granted. Plaintiff's claims are dismissed without prejudice.”
In a pro se prisoner suit referred to a magistrate judge, the court adopted an unobjected recommendation after clear-error review and dismissed the action with prejudice on sua sponte screening under 28 U.S.C. 1915A(b)(1) for failure to state a claim.
“The court grants the motion to dismiss (Doc. 78) and dismisses all claims against Matthew Everett with prejudice.”
“defendant's motion to dismiss (Doc. 18) is granted as to any theory of vicarious liability on the constitutional claims and otherwise denied”
After the parties jointly moved for entry of a consent judgment declaring the Johnson Amendment unconstitutional, the court examined its own jurisdiction and held it barred by the Tax Anti-Injunction Act and Declaratory Judgment Act: "this case is dismissed without prejudice for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction."
“The court grants defendants' motion to dismiss (Doc. 13) and dismisses the action without prejudice for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.”
“plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction (Doc. 14) be denied as moot because plaintiff has been transferred from the Beto Unit. ... plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction (Doc. 14) is denied.”
“The court remands this matter to the Municipal Court, City of the Colony, Denton County, Texas.”
“Defendant's motion to dismiss (Doc. 7) is granted in part and denied in part.”
“plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment (Doc. 10) is granted, and defendants’ cross-motion for summary judgment (Doc. 34) and motion to transfer for lack of jurisdiction (Doc. 25) are denied.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Barker's Tyler Division docket includes Social Security appeals, prisoner civil-rights and habeas matters, consumer and debt-collection suits, insurance, contract, foreclosure, product-liability, employment, civil forfeiture, immigration mandamus, immigration-detention habeas, and patent cases. Many civil matters are referred to magistrate 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 United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, not for Judge Barker: 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 Barker with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Barker, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Barker's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace