David Alan Ezra
How Judge Ezra rules, drawn from 22 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Ezra
David Alan Ezra is a judge of the United States District Court for the District of Hawaii. Appointed by President Ronald Reagan, Judge Ezra received a commission on May 20, 1988. Judge Ezra assumed senior status on June 27, 2012.
Judge Ezra's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Ezra, as published on the court's website (checked October 8, 2026). Judges revise these often, so confirm the current version on the court's site before you file.
Key rules
Motions
The parties shall file all motions to amend or supplement pleadings or to join additional parties by _______________________.
“The parties shall file all motions to amend or supplement pleadings or to join additional parties by _______________________.”
Conferences
The parties must mediate this case on or before date and file a report in accordance with Rule 88 after the mediation is completed.
“The parties must mediate this case on or before date and file a report in accordance with Rule 88 after the mediation is completed.”
Conferences
The parties asserting claims for relief shall submit a written offer of settlement to opposing parties by ______________ and each opposing party shall respond, in writing, by _______________________.
“The parties asserting claims for relief shall submit a written offer of settlement to opposing parties by ______________ and each opposing party shall respond, in writing, by _______________________.”
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 8, 2026).
- Standing Order Regarding Joint or Unopposed Request to Change Deadlines ↗
- Order Regarding Procedures for the Filing, Service and Management of Highly Sensitive Documents ↗
- General Order Regarding Electronic Filing of Transcripts ↗
- Standing Order Regarding Attorney Admissions and CLE Requirements ↗
- Privacy Policy and Public Access to Electronic Files ↗
- Standing Order Regarding the Electronic Submission of Sealed Civil Documents ↗
How Judge Ezra decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In the SB 4 case, Ezra preliminarily enjoined enforcement after considering the parties’ briefing and the relevant law.
“Having considered the parties' briefing and the relevant law, the Court will preliminarily enjoin Defendants from enforcing SB 4.”
Procedural preferences
In Hellman's employment suit, Ezra granted Austin Community College's motion to dismiss in part while allowing Hellman's retaliation claim to proceed.
“Defendant ACC's Partial Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. (Dkt. # 12.) ... The Motion is DENIED as to Hellman's retaliation claim.”
In a False Claims Act case, the court addressed each defendant’s motion separately and dismissed claims that lacked particular fraud allegations or standing, without prejudice.
“As to Defendants USAA and Caremark, Plaintiff-Relator’s FAC does not state any claims upon which relief can be granted. And Plaintiff-Relator lacks standing entirely for his claims against Optum.”
Cautions
In Paul's habeas case, Ezra denied an emergency request to stay a state-court criminal-contempt order after considering the factors governing a stay.
“It is therefore ORDERED that Petitioner Natin Paul's Emergency Application for a Stay of the State Trial Court's Criminal Contempt Order (ECF No. 3) is DENIED.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“the Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Mark Lane's Report and Recommendation (Dkt. # 83) as the opinion of the Court and GRANTS the SEC's Motion for Final Judgment and Remedies Against Defendant Jaitley. (Dkt. # 79.)”
“It is therefore ORDERED that Petitioner Natin Paul's Emergency Application for a Stay of the State Trial Court's Criminal Contempt Order (ECF No. 3) is DENIED.”
“Defendant ACC's Partial Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. (Dkt. # 12.) ... The Motion is DENIED as to Hellman's retaliation claim.”
“Having considered the parties' arguments, including those in writing, the evidence presented, and the relevant law, the Court GRANTS the United States' Motion for Preliminary Injunction for the reasons that follow. (Dkt. # 5.)”
“Having considered the parties' briefing and the relevant law, the Court will preliminarily enjoin Defendants from enforcing SB 4.”
“the Court -- for reasons that follow -- GRANTS Plaintiffs' motion as to their First Amendment claims and GRANTS the motion in part as to their Section 230 claims. Defendant Colmenero is preliminarily ENJOINED from enforcing H.B. 1181.”
“the Court GRANTS Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. # 36)”
“DENIES Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. # 37)”
“the Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (Dkt. # 61) and GRANTS Defendants' motions to dismiss (Dkt. ## 30, 31, 33)”
“GRANTS the Government's Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. # 52)”
“DENIES Quam's Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. # 53)”
“DENIES Pro Se Defendant Eric Hoppe's Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. # 42)”
“DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Counts 1, 2 and 3 remain.”
“Court GRANTS IN PART Plaintiff’s Motions for Attorney’s Fees and Costs, GRANTING Plaintiff $233,973 in attorney’s fees and $11,394.30 in costs.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
The reviewed Austin and San Antonio matters are diverse, while the newest filings are dominated by 2026 immigration-detention habeas petitions. Timing observations therefore come from terminated civil cases filed from 2021 through 2024; the roughly twenty-six reviewed dockets are not a complete census.
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 | 23 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 0 | 23 |
| Sep 2025 | 0 | 18 |
| Mar 2025 | 0 | 11 |
| Sep 2024 | 0 | 10 |
| Mar 2024 | 0 | 9 |
| Sep 2023 | 0 | 5 |
| Mar 2023 | 0 | 3 |
| Sep 2022 | 0 | 3 |
| Mar 2022 | 0 | 6 |
| Sep 2021 | 0 | 5 |
| Mar 2021 | 0 | 5 |
| Sep 2020 | 0 | 4 |
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 Texas, not for Judge Ezra: 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 | 3,691 | 7.7 months |
| Closed with no court action | 1,171 | 5.5 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 2,115 | 7.5 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 366 | 14 months |
| Closed during trial | 39 | 30.6 months |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 3,691 | 7.7 months |
| Sep 2024 | 3,440 | 7.8 months |
| Sep 2023 | 3,823 | 7.2 months |
| Sep 2022 | 3,633 | 8.3 months |
| Sep 2021 | 3,178 | 8 months |
| Sep 2020 | 2,990 | 6.4 months |
| Sep 2019 | 2,854 | 7.1 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 Ezra with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Ezra, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Ezra's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace