Mary K. Dimke
How Judge Dimke rules, drawn from 23 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Dimke
Mary Katherine Dimke is a judge of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Washington. Appointed by President Joseph R. Biden, Judge Dimke received a commission on December 21, 2021.
Judge Dimke's practices and standing orders
The court's website lists no individual practices or standing orders of Judge Dimke's own (checked October 9, 2026), so the court's local rules and general orders are the place to look (court page ↗).
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 Dimke decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In a breach-of-contract claim over product-line coverage under a partnership agreement, ambiguous or internally inconsistent use of a defined term in the complaint (singular vs. plural) undercuts a plausible link between the alleged agreement and the specific products at issue.
“Plaintiffs use ‘OrganiClean product’ both singularly and plural; it is thus unclear if Plaintiffs are alleging that OC3 and/or Bac Stop are OrganiClean products.”
Procedural preferences
In a pleading dispute, she denied leave to amend claims whose deficiencies the plaintiffs did not appear able to cure, while addressing other proposed amendments separately.
“the Court finds amendment would be futile as it does not appear that Plaintiffs will be able to cure the deficiencies in the claims.”
In a joint sentence-correction request, the court amended a federal judgment after the parties showed that they had shared a mistaken expectation about related state charges.
“Given the parties’ mistaken understanding, the Court finds it appropriate to grant Defendant’s § 2255 motion and amend his sentence in the manner requested by the parties.”
Cautions
In a Social Security appeal, Dimke found that the claimant's complaint lacked sufficient facts to support equitable tolling of the 60-day filing deadline.
“Plaintiff's Complaint lacks sufficient factual allegations demonstrating circumstances under which the statute of limitations should be equitably tolled.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Defendant Arxada, LLC's Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 5, is GRANTED. Defendant Arxada, LLC is DISMISSED from this action.”
“Defendant Enviro Tech Chemical Services, Inc.'s Motion to Dismiss, ECF Nos. 6, 9, is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. a. Plaintiff's claims for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing and conversion claim are DISMISSED with prejudice. b. Plaintiff's claims concerning Bac Stop and OC3 are DISMISSED without prejudice.”
“Defendant's Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 10, is GRANTED. Plaintiff's Complaint, ECF No. 1, is DISMISSED with prejudice.”
“The State Defendants' Motion and Memorandum for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 22, is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part in the manner explained above.”
“Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 22, is GRANTED. Plaintiff's Complaint, ECF No. 1, is DISMISSED with prejudice.”
“Plaintiffs' Motion for Injunctive and Declaratory Relief, ECF No. 20, is DENIED.”
“Plaintiff's ‘Motion for Issuance of an Emergency Temporary Restraining Order to Stay the Sale of Real Property; And Imposition of Permanent Injunctive Relief Barring the Sale of the Real Property By Defendants,’ ECF No. 3, is DENIED.”
“The United States' Motion to Lift Stay, ECF No. 27, is GRANTED.”
“Claimant Salvador Ruiz-Cortez's Motion to Set Aside Entry of Default, ECF No. 23, is DENIED.”
“The United States' Motion for Default Judgment and Final Order of Forfeiture, ECF No. 22, is GRANTED.”
“Defendant's Motion Requesting the Court to Recharacterize His Current Rule 60 Motion as a Section 2255 Motion, ECF No. 194, is GRANTED.”
“Defendant's recharacterized Section 2255 Motion, ECF No. 187, is DENIED.”
“Defendant's Motion for Appointment of Counsel, ECF No. 188, is DENIED as moot.”
“Defendant Vapor Beast LLC's Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 69, is DENIED.”
“KSD's Motion to Dismiss Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), ECF No. 437, is DENIED AS MOOT.”
“Defendants' Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 27, is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.”
“Plaintiff's Construed Motion to Recuse, ECF No. 17, is DENIED.”
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 | 2 |
| 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 | 1 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 2 | 1 |
| Sep 2025 | 0 | 2 |
| Mar 2025 | 0 | 1 |
| Sep 2024 | 0 | 5 |
| Mar 2024 | 1 | 5 |
| Sep 2023 | 3 | 4 |
| Mar 2023 | 4 | 5 |
| Sep 2022 | 3 | 2 |
| Mar 2022 | 0 | 2 |
| 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 U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington, not for Judge Dimke: 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 | 620 | 6.2 months |
| Closed with no court action | 56 | 4.6 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 554 | 6.3 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 3 | not reported |
| Closed during trial | 7 | not reported |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 620 | 6.2 months |
| Sep 2024 | 700 | 7.2 months |
| Sep 2023 | 694 | 8.2 months |
| Sep 2022 | 890 | 8.3 months |
| Sep 2021 | 852 | 9 months |
| Sep 2020 | 963 | 7.4 months |
| Sep 2019 | 954 | 9.4 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 Dimke with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Dimke, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Dimke's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace