Salvador Mendoza Jr.

How Judge Mendoza rules, drawn from 18 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

Judge Mendoza no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.

Court
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington
Position
district
Status
Elevated to a higher court
Served
2014–2022
Appointed by
Barack Obama (Democratic)
Commissioned
2014-06-19
Education
University of Washington (B.A., philosophy, 1994); University of California, Los Angeles, School of Law (J.D., 1997)
Signed orders read
18

How Judge Mendoza decides

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

What persuades

The court applied ordinary contract meaning and held that a statutory notice announcing future litigation was not itself a demand for relief.

“The notice does not request a settlement or direct Tree Top to take any affirmative action. It merely provides notice of ELF’s allegations and its intent to sue.”

A temporary restraining order followed where continued detention rested on an administrative immigration warrant and the plaintiff was likely to succeed on a Fourth Amendment claim.

“the Court concludes that Sanchez Ochoa is likely to succeed on the merits of his Fourth Amendment claim and meets the standard for obtaining the requested relief.”

An environmental analysis was remanded because it did not adequately account for climate-change effects on hatchery operations and water use.

“the BiOp is arbitrary and capricious on one narrow basis — NMFS failed to adequately consider the effects of climate change in its analysis of the Hatchery’s operations and water use.”

Procedural preferences

The court treated discovery as broad but tied compelled production to relevance and the search for admissible evidence.

“wide access to relevant facts serves the integrity and fairness of the judicial process by promoting the search for truth.”

Cross-motions were decided separately when one party prevailed on the policy-interpretation question and the competing request failed.

“Tree Top’s, Motion for Summary Judgment Regarding When the Claim was First. Made, ECF No, 43, is GRANTED.”

Cautions

A criminal charge could not proceed when the regulation supporting it had not been validly adopted.

“Defendant's Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 17 , is GRANTED .”

A moving party's factual record did not eliminate trial issues across all employment claims, resulting in only partial summary judgment.

“Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 67 , is GRANTED in part, and DENIED in part.”

Signed rulings

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

Kelleher v. Fred Meyer Stores Inc.
· 2014-10-06
Motions to compel (plaintiff) Granted in part

“Plaintiffs Motion to Compel, ECF No. 37, is GRANTED IN PART (as to the production detailed above) and DENIED IN PART (award of fees and costs).”

Langley v. Geico General Insurance
· 2015-02-24
Summary judgment (defendant) Denied

“Defendant’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment Regarding IFCA Claim, ECF No. 49, is DENIED.”

Multifab, Inc. v. ArlanaGreen.com
· 2015-08-11
Default judgment (plaintiff) Denied

“Plaintiffs Motion for Entry of Default Judgment, ECF No. 29, is DENIED.”

Wild Fish Conservancy v. Irving
· 2016-11-22
Summary judgment (plaintiff) Granted in part

“Plaintiff Wild Fish Conservancy’s Motion for Summary Judgment ECF No. 92, is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.”

Summary judgment (defendants) Granted in part

“Defendants’ Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment, ECF Nos. 97, 98, and 100, are GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.”

Center for Environmental Law & Policy v. United States Fish & Wildlife Service
· 2017-01-09
Summary judgment (plaintiffs) Granted

“Plaintiffs’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment, ECF No. 13, is GRANTED.”

Judgment on the pleadings (defendants) Denied

“Defendants’ Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings, ECF No. 22, is DENIED.”

Summary judgment (defendants) Denied

“Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 23, is DENIED.”

City of Spokane v. Monsanto Co.
· 2017-02-14
Motions to dismiss (plaintiff) Granted

“Plaintiffs Motion to Dismiss Monsanto’s Counterclaims, ECF No. 83, is GRANTED.”

Ochoa v. Campbell
· 2017-07-31
Motion for temporary restraining order (plaintiff) Granted

“Plaintiff Sanchez Ochoa’s Motion in Support of Temporary Restraining Order, ECF No. 6, is GRANTED;”

Goetz v. Life Insurance Co. of North America
· 2017-09-21
Summary judgment (plaintiff) Denied

“Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 31, is DENIED.”

Summary judgment (defendant) Denied

“LINA’s Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 37, is DENIED.”

Tree Top Inc. v. Starr Indemnity & Liability Co.
· 2017-11-21
Summary judgment (plaintiff) Granted

“Tree Top’s, Motion for Summary Judgment Regarding When the Claim was First. Made, ECF No, 43, is GRANTED.”

Summary judgment (defendant) Denied

“Starr’s Cross Motion for Summary Judgment Re: Claim, ECF No, 41, is DENIED.”

United States v. Rangel
· 2018-03-21
Motion for pretrial detention (government) Denied

“USAO's Motion for Pretrial Detention, ECF No. 41 , is DENIED.”

Bultena v. Washington State Department of Agriculture
· 2018-03-30
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted in part

“Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 67 , is GRANTED in part, and DENIED in part.”

Summary judgment (plaintiff) Denied

“Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 71 as amended by ECF No. 117 , is DENIED .”

Motions to strike (defendant) Denied

“Defendant's Motion to Strike 72 Statement of Facts, ECF No. 86 , is DENIED .”

Silva v. Campbell
· 2018-06-05
Motion to expedite and for protective order (plaintiff) Granted

“Plaintiff's Motion to Expedite and for Protective Order, ECF No. 34 , is GRANTED .”

Motion for reconsideration (defendants) Denied

“Defendants' Motion for Reconsideration, ECF No. 37 , is DENIED .”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

The authored decisions and accepted docket sample span civil rights, insurance, environmental, employment, criminal, commercial, Social Security, and prisoner matters. The small fixed sample does not support a quantified caseload claim.

A historical record

Judge Mendoza no longer hears cases. This profile stays available as a record of how they ruled. If you're preparing for a matter, start from the court's current bench.