Michael Joseph Truncale
How Judge Truncale rules, drawn from 32 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Truncale
Michael Joseph Truncale is a judge of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. Appointed by President Donald J. Trump, Judge Truncale received a commission on May 16, 2019.
Judge Truncale's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Truncale, 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 Order Regarding Readiness for Scheduling Conference in Patent Cases ↗
- Standing Order Regarding Paper Copies of Lengthy Documents ↗
- Standing Order Regarding Courtroom Opportunities for Newer Attorneys ↗
- Protective Order Form ↗
- Final Joint Pre-trial Order ↗
- Beaumont: Proposed Order Setting Patent Cases for Rule 16 Management Conference ↗
- Beaumont: Proposed Scheduling Order and Scope of Discovery for Patent Cases ↗
- Lufkin: Proposed Order Setting Patent Cases for Rule 16 Management Conference ↗
- Lufkin: Proposed Scheduling Order and Scope of Discovery for Patent Cases ↗
Key rules
Filing
Do not send paper copies of lengthy electronic filings unless the court requests them.
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that courtesy paper copies shall only be provided to chambers when specifically requested by the undersigned.”
Conferences
In patent cases, plaintiffs should notify the court when all defendants have responded and identify pending motions and related district cases.
“In all patent cases pending before the undersigned, when all defendants have responded to the initial pleadings (whether by Answer or Motion), the plaintiff shall inform the Court that the case is ready for an initial Case Management Conference by submitting a Notice that shall also identify (1) any pending motions, and (2) any related cases in this District.”
Trial
The court encourages opportunities for newer attorneys who helped prepare a motion to argue it.
“the Court strongly encourages litigants to be mindful of opportunities for Newer Attorneys to conduct oral argument before the Court,”
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 Truncale decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Procedural preferences
On a magistrate judge's report and recommendation his standard of review tracks whether a party objected: a party who files timely, specific written objections is entitled to de novo review of the challenged findings, while frivolous, conclusory, or general objections need not be considered and unobjected-to portions are reviewed for clear error. A litigant who disagrees with a recommendation must identify the specific finding of law or fact in dispute to obtain de novo review.
“A party who files timely written objections to a magistrate judge's report and recommendation is entitled to a de novo determination of those findings or recommendations to which the party specifically objects. ... Frivolous, conclusive or general objections need not be considered by the district court.”
In Gibbs v. Jackson, he dismissed a pro se prisoner's civil-rights action without prejudice under Rule 4(m) after more than ten months and several extensions without service or a showing of good cause.
“Plaintiff has had more than ten months in which to serve the defendants in this action. ... the dismissal is mandatory absent a showing of good cause.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Before the Court are three Motions to Dismiss filed by Defendants Pfizer, Inc. ... ICON, PLC ... and Ventavia Research Group, LLC ... For the reasons discussed below, the Court grants Defendants' Motions.”
“the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (Doc. No. 16) is ADOPTED; Gillespie's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 15) and Defendants' Joint Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 8) are GRANTED; and Gilbert's case is DISMISSED.”
“Magistrate Judge Christine Stetson issued the Report and Recommendation that Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Claims, in part, Pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) be partially granted. ... the report denied the dismissal of the 14th Amendment Equal Protection Claims. ... the Court ADOPTS the magistrate judge's recommendations.”
“the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge [Dkt. 132] is ADOPTED. Plaintiff's Motion for Partial Summary Judgement [Dkt. 99] is DENIED.”
“plaintiff's motion for reconsideration is without merit and is denied.”
“plaintiff's claims must be dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Rule 4. It is therefore ORDERED that the above-styled action is DISMISSED without prejudice pursuant to FED R. CIV. P. 4.”
“the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge [Dkt. #12] is ADOPTED. Plaintiff's Motions to Dismiss are GRANTED. A final judgment will be entered in this case in accordance with the Magistrate Judge's recommendation.”
“The magistrate judge recommends dismissing this action without prejudice based on plaintiff's motion for voluntary dismissal. ... the findings of fact and conclusions of law of the magistrate judge are correct and the report and recommendation of the magistrate judge is ADOPTED.”
“petitioner's objections are OVERRULED. The findings of fact and conclusions of law of the Magistrate Judge are correct, and the report of the Magistrate Judge is ADOPTED. A Final Judgment will be entered in accordance with the recommendations of the Magistrate Judge.”
“Motion for Summary Judgment [Dkt. 40] is GRANTED. Plaintiff Amberley Lambert's claims are DISMISSED in their entirety.”
“Plaintiff Abbruzzese's claims for injunctive relief that would directly or indirectly interfere with the ongoing student-conduct hearings are DISMISSED.”
“Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction [Dkt. 1] is DENIED.”
“Plaintiff's Motion for Default Judgment [Dkt. 11] and Plaintiff's Supplemental Motion for Default Judgment [Dkt. 12] are DENIED.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Truncale's Beaumont and Lufkin docket includes immigration-detention habeas petitions, federal and state-prisoner habeas matters, prisoner civil-rights suits, insurance and personal-injury cases, consumer and employment claims, commercial disputes, False Claims Act litigation, and administrative-law challenges. Many prisoner 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 | 7 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 0 | 7 |
| Sep 2025 | 0 | 4 |
| Mar 2025 | 0 | 4 |
| Sep 2024 | 1 | 2 |
| Mar 2024 | 0 | 1 |
| Sep 2023 | 0 | 1 |
| Mar 2023 | 0 | 1 |
| Sep 2022 | 0 | 1 |
| Mar 2022 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2021 | 2 | 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 Truncale: 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 Truncale with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Truncale, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Truncale's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace