Mark Lane
How Judge Lane rules, drawn from 25 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Lane
Mark Lane has served as a United States magistrate judge for the Western District of Texas since 2012. Before joining the bench in Austin, he was an assistant United States attorney and a prosecutor in Travis County.
Judge Lane's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Lane, 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 amended or supplemental pleadings and shall join additional parties on or before ______________.
“The parties shall file all amended or supplemental pleadings and shall join additional parties on or before ______________.”
Conferences
A report on alternative dispute resolution in compliance with Local Rule CV-88 shall be filed on or before ______________.
“A report on alternative dispute resolution in compliance with Local Rule CV-88 shall be filed on or before ______________.”
Conferences
The parties are ordered to retain the written offers of settlement and responses as the court will use these in assessing attorney’s fees and court costs at the conclusion of trial.
“The parties are ordered to retain the written offers of settlement and responses as the court will use these in assessing attorney’s fees and court costs at the conclusion of trial.”
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 Lane decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In Orion Labs v. Sprinklr, Lane recommended rejecting patent-infringement dismissal arguments that demanded proof of claim limitations before discovery, while leaving those disputes for summary judgment after claim construction.
“Orion is not required to prove its infringement contentions at this stage, nor is it even required to plead its claims on an element-by-element basis.”
In Dwyer v. UnitedHealthcare, Lane recommended a partial attorney-fee award after an ERISA benefits victory and declined to reduce fees just because the plaintiff had lost some motions during the case.
“The court will not reduce Dwyer’s attorneys’ fees for this motion practice.”
Cautions
In Hill v. Moran, Lane recommended summary judgment on false-arrest and related federal false-imprisonment claims filed more than two years after the plaintiff’s bond hearing; he resolved those claims on limitations grounds without reaching qualified immunity.
“Because limitations is dispositive on this issue, the court does not reach Defendants’ qualified immunity arguments.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Defendants' Motion to Dismiss, (Dkt. 12), is GRANTED. Plaintiff's complaint, (Dkt. 5), is DISMISSED with prejudice”
“Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment, (Dkt. 15), is DISMISSED.”
“Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment and Permanent Injunction, (Dkt. 17), is GRANTED.”
“Defendant's Cross Motion for Summary Judgment, (Dkt. 15), is DENIED.”
“DENIES Plaintiff's Motion for Entry of Default Judgment Against Defendant CC Aggregates LLC”
“GRANTS Defendant CC Aggregates LLC'S Motion to Set Aside Entry of Default”
“Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment, (Dkt. 115), is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. Specifically, Plaintiffs Tanze and Godze's claims are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE and the New York, Florida, and Michigan express warranty claims are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. The motion is otherwise DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.”
“Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification, (Dkts. 125, 147), is DENIED.”
“the Court AFFIRMS the order granting Defendant's Motion to Exclude and Strike the Report of Dr. Greg Allenby, (Dkt. 151), and DENIES Plaintiffs' appeal”
“the 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.”
“Respondents' Joint Motion to Quash, (Dkt. 23) is GRANTED”
“Applicant's Cross-Motion to Compel, (Dkt. 24), is DENIED.”
“Plaintiff's Motion for Class Certification, (Dkt. 84, 103), is DENIED.”
“The decision of the Commissioner is AFFIRMED and Plaintiff's appeal is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.”
“Defendant's Motion to Dismiss, (Dkt. 21), is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART AS FOLLOWS: Ambriz's state-law claims and any federal claim seeking retrospective relief or damages are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Ambriz's prospective declaratory and injunctive claims are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“Defendants' Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. (Dkt. # 19.) ... Redpoint's conversion claim shall be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE in its entirety and Redpoint's breach of fiduciary duty and constructive trust claim shall be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE as to Leslie Schlesinger and Joshua Schlesinger.”
“The Court DENIES Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to Amend. (Dkt. # 59 at 13.)”
“Defendants' motions to dismiss, (Dkts. 6, 7), are GRANTED. Plaintiff's state-law claims are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE and Plaintiff's federal claims are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.”
“the magistrate judge granted Plaintiff leave to file a second amended complaint to assert federal claims for association discrimination, race discrimination, and retaliation because these claims would not be preempted by the Ted Stevens Act. ... Accordingly, the magistrate judge granted Plaintiff's motion for leave to amend in part.”
“Grainger's motion to dismiss, (Dkt. 40), is GRANTED. Plaintiffs' first amended complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Judge Lane sits in the Austin Division and receives civil referrals from Judge Robert Pitman and Senior Judges David Alan Ezra and James R. Nowlin. His directly assigned work also includes criminal-duty matters and screening recommendations in in-forma-pauperis cases.
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 | 1 |
| Mar 2022 | 0 | 1 |
| Sep 2021 | 0 | 1 |
| Mar 2021 | 0 | 1 |
| 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 U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, not for Judge Lane: 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 Lane with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Lane, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Lane's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace