Robert H. Whaley
How Judge Whaley decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In tribal-sovereignty disputes, the judge looks for whether tribal court jurisdiction over the claims presents a genuine, colorable question -- not certainty either way -- and will stay rather than dismiss a federal case to let the tribal court address that jurisdictional question first, in the interest of comity.
“Therefore, there exists a colorable question of the existence of tribal court jurisdiction in this case over Philip Morris. In the interest of comity and the promotion of tribal sovereignty, the Court shall abstain from further action in this matter to give the tribal court the opportunity to address the jurisdictional question ... in the first instance.”
On an Endangered Species Act injunction motion, the judge required the agency's own biological-opinion terms and conditions to be followed to the letter; a general prior approval of an activity did not excuse the failure to conduct the site-specific consultation the agency's own opinion demanded.
“the Agreement memorializes USFS's continued discretion to authorize and place conditions on trail grooming within the IPNF. Accordingly, it is an agency action under Section 7(a)(2) which requires consultation.”
Procedural preferences
Facing a case with no action of record for over two years and a plaintiff who had entirely stopped participating in discovery despite repeated accommodations, the judge found dismissal -- ordinarily a harsh remedy -- was the only option left once no less drastic sanction remained available.
“the Court has already made numerous fruitless efforts to accommodate Plaintiffs' search for counsel. There are no longer any less drastic measures that would be effective here.”
When the government's appeal of one order threatened to force a second, duplicative appeal down the road, the judge resolved the jurisdictional and reconsideration questions immediately rather than deferring them, to avoid years of additional delay.
“A second appeal would further delay the resolution of this case for a minimum of two years. Therefore, in the interest of judicial economy and to consolidate appeals, the Court declines to reconsider its order granting the motion to suppress.”
In unopposed Social Security appeals, the judge adopts the magistrate's Report and Recommendation in full once satisfied its findings are correct, without independently re-litigating the administrative record.
“No objections were filed. After reviewing the Report and Recommendation, the Court finds the Magistrate Judge's findings are correct. Therefore, the Court adopts the Report and Recommendation in its entirety.”
Cautions
A motion for reconsideration is treated as an extraordinary remedy: the judge will not grant one absent newly discovered evidence, clear error, or an intervening change in law, and will not let it be used to raise arguments that could have been made earlier.
“a motion for reconsideration should not be granted, absent highly unusual circumstances, unless the district court is presented with newly discovered evidence, committed clear error, or if there is an intervening change in the controlling law.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Ct. Rec. 2) is DENIED.”
“Plaintiffs' Motion for a TRO and/or Preliminary Injunction (Ct. Rec. 35) is GRANTED.”
“Plaintiffs' Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages (Ct. Rec. 45) is GRANTED.”
“The parties' Stipulation of Dismissal With Prejudice (Ct. Rec. 18) is GRANTED. The above-captioned case is DISMISSED with prejudice and without costs to the parties.”
“Plaintiffs' Motion/Declaration re: Continuance of Motion and Trial (Ct. Rec. 41) is DENIED.”
“Defendants' F.R.C.P. 41(b) and/or 37(b) Motion for Involuntary Dismissal / Sanctions (Ct. Rec. 35) is GRANTED. The Complaint in the above-captioned matter is dismissed with prejudice.”
“Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Indictment for Violation of Statute of Limitations (Ct. Rec. 34) is DENIED.”
“Defendant's Motion to Compel Discovery (Ct. Rec. 38) is DENIED with leave to renew.”
“Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 11, is GRANTED. The Commissioner's decision is REVERSED and this matter is REMANDED for the calculation and award of benefits.”
“Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 12, is DENIED.”
“Petitioner's Petition Under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254 for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Ct. Rec. 12) is DISMISSED with prejudice.”
“Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 17, is GRANTED. The Commissioner's decision is REVERSED and this matter is REMANDED for further administrative proceedings pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. Sec. 405(g).”
“Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 18, is DENIED.”
“Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 15, is GRANTED. The Commissioner's decision is REVERSED and this matter is REMANDED for 1) an immediate calculation of benefits for the childhood disability claim; and 2) further proceedings as of age 18.”
“Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 16, is DENIED.”
“Defendant's Motion for Time Reduction by an Inmate in Federal Custody Under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2255 (Ct. Rec. 86) is DENIED.”
“The Stipulated Motion to Dismiss Civil Forfeiture Complaint, ECF No. 27, is GRANTED. The above entitled action is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“The parties' Stipulated Motion for Remand, ECF No. 24, is GRANTED. ... the above-captioned case be REVERSED and REMANDED to the Commissioner of Social Security for further administrative proceeding pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. Sec. 405(g).”
“Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 17, is STRICKEN AS MOOT.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median motion-to-ruling time: 378 days (N = 9).
The judge's current docket is concentrated almost entirely in Social Security disability appeals referred to and initially handled by magistrate judges, with the judge entering the final order adopting (or, on stipulation, directly ordering) a remand or affirmance and closing the file. Nearly all sampled Social Security appeals ended in a remand to the agency rather than an outright affirmance, and several were followed by a separate motion for attorney's fees and costs, which the judge also decided. Historical filings from earlier in his tenure (2005-2016) show a broader civil and criminal caseload, including trademark, environmental, tribal-sovereignty, habeas, and forfeiture matters.
Put Judge Whaley's record to work
Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Whaley actually rules, not a generic AI guess.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Whaley's own signed orders and cites them.