Kathleen Cardone

U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas district Appointed by George W. Bush (Republican) 29 signed orders read

How Judge Cardone decides

Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

What persuades

She is protective of indigent and pro se plaintiffs at the pleading stage, denying dismissal and directing that service be effected rather than ending a case on a technical defect.

“For the reasons set forth herein, all three motions are DENIED... it is ORDERED that the Clerk shall re-issue the papers required for service of process and furnish them to the U.S. Marshal.”

Procedural preferences

She applies AEDPA's one-year limitations period strictly, denying an untimely state-prisoner habeas petition after calculating the limitations period and rejecting unsupported equitable-tolling claims.

“IT IS ORDERED that Garcia's pro se "Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody" (ECF No. 1) is DENIED, and his civil cause is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”

She refers civil matters to a magistrate judge and rules by adopting the report and recommendation, granting or denying the underlying motion as the R&R recommends.

“the Court ADOPTS the Wyoming R&R. Wyoming's Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 12, is DENIED.”

She decides Daubert challenges granularly, condition by condition, admitting the reliable portions of expert testimony and excluding only what is unsupported.

“The government's Motion is therefore GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.”

Cautions

She holds litigants to her standing-order procedural requirements, and a party that ignores them risks an adverse ruling on the underlying motion.

“For the reasons set forth below, the Court GRANTS the Motion for Summary Judgment. The Court DENIES the Motion to Strike and the Motion to Dismiss as moot.”

Signed rulings

A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.

Cardenas v. Napolitano
3:08-cv-00459-KC · 2010-04-15
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted in part

“Defendants' Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED with respect to Cardenas's claims under the Mandamus Act (28 U.S.C. § 1361). It is DENIED with respect to Cardenas's claims under the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. § 701, et seq).”

Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED. The Clerk shall close the case.”

Oporto v. City of El Paso
3:10-cv-00110-KC · 2010-09-02
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted in part

“the City's Motion (Doc. No. 19) is GRANTED in part, as to any state law claims, and DENIED in part, as to the § 1983 claims.”

Motions to dismiss (defendant) Moot / procedural

“the Wiles & Allen Motion (Doc. No. 22) is DENIED as moot.”

Davis v. Supreme Labor Source, LLC
3:23-cv-00046-KC · 2023-12-14
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied

“the Court ADOPTS the Wyoming R&R. Wyoming's Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 12, is DENIED.”

Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted in part

“the Supreme R&R is ADOPTED. Supreme's Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 17, is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Supreme's Motion is GRANTED as to Count One of Plaintiff's FAC, which is DISMISSED. Supreme's Motion is otherwise DENIED.”

United States v. Olivas
3:09-cr-01402-KC · 2009-07-17
Motion to suppress (defendant) Denied

“Accordingly, Defendant's Motion to Suppress Physical Evidence and Statements (Doc. No. 45) is DENIED.”

Starr v. County of El Paso, Texas
3:09-cv-00353-KC · 2010-02-04
Default judgment (plaintiff) Denied

“The Court also considered "Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Under Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 12(b)(2), (4) and (5)," which was embedded in its Response to Plaintiff's Motions ("Defendant's Response and Motion to Dismiss") (Doc. No. 15). For the reasons set forth herein, all three motions are DENIED.”

Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied

“For the reasons set forth herein, all three motions are DENIED... it is ORDERED that the Clerk shall re-issue the papers required for service of process and furnish them to the U.S. Marshal.”

Wilson v. Lumpkin
3:22-cv-00262-KC · 2022-11-02
Habeas petition (plaintiff) Denied

“IT IS ORDERED that Wilson's pro se "Petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody" (ECF No. 1) is DENIED, and his civil cause is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”

Behl v. Lumpkin
3:22-cv-00376-KC · 2023-03-31
Motion for extension of time (plaintiff) Denied

“IT IS ORDERED that Behl's motion for an extension of time (ECF No. 14) is DENIED.”

Habeas petition (plaintiff) Moot / procedural

“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Behl's pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus (ECF No. 1) is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for failure to exhaust all his remedies available in the state system.”

Joiner v. Lumpkin
3:23-cv-00334-KC · 2024-04-10
Habeas petition (plaintiff) Denied

“IT IS ORDERED that Joiner's "Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus: 28 U.S.C. § 2254" (ECF No. 1) is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE as untimely.”

Smith v. Lumpkin
3:21-cv-00205-KC · 2021-10-22
Habeas petition (plaintiff) Denied

“IT IS ORDERED that Smith's pro se "Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody" (ECF No. 1) is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.”

Garcia v. Davis
3:17-cv-00253-KC · 2018-02-13
Habeas petition (plaintiff) Denied

“IT IS ORDERED that Garcia's pro se "Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody" (ECF No. 1) is DENIED, and his civil cause is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”

Castillo v. Lumpkin
3:23-cv-00356-KC · 2024-02-09
Habeas petition (plaintiff) Denied

“IT IS ORDERED that Castillo's pro se "Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus: 28 U.S.C. § 2254" (ECF No. 4) is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”

County of El Paso, Texas v. Luther Jones, et al.
3:09-cv-00119-KC · 2013-05-31
Motion for partial dismissal want of prosecution (defendant) Denied

“Defendant Escobar's Motion is DENIED... For the reasons stated above, Defendant Escobar's Motion for Partial Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, ECF No. 229, is DENIED.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

The El Paso docket reviewed is dominated by drug and immigration prosecutions and also includes civil-rights, employment, and civil immigration matters. The roughly ten cases provide an illustrative sample rather than a complete census.

Put Judge Cardone's record to work

Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Cardone actually rules, not a generic AI guess.

Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Cardone's own signed orders and cites them.