James L. Robart
How Judge Robart decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In discrimination pleading, a 'similarly situated comparator' must be alleged with concrete specificity; a broad undifferentiated category will not support an inference of intent.
“the broad, undifferentiated category 'other paying customers' lacks sufficient specificity and is not a comparator that is similarly situated to the Tribe or the Casino in all material respects.”
Procedural preferences
Decides motions on the briefing without oral argument by default, per W.D. Wash. LCR 7(b)(4); requesting argument does not guarantee it.
“No party has requested oral argument, and the court deems it unnecessary to the disposition of this motion. See Local Rules W.D. Wash. LCR 7(b)(4).”
Cautions
In a Washington product-liability case, a plaintiff's own admitted disregard of a warning he understood can be an unforeseeable superseding cause that defeats legal causation as a matter of law -- even where cause-in-fact is genuinely disputed.
“Because Mr. Beard's act in defying Mighty Lift's warning decal was not reasonably foreseeable, his act represents a superseding cause that breaks the chain of proximate causation to Mighty Lift.”
Motion outcomes
Counted from classified signed orders only. Percentages are shown only where the sample is large enough to be meaningful; smaller samples are reported as raw counts.
| Motions to dismiss N = 4 |
Granted: 1Granted in part: 3 | counts only |
| Summary judgment N = 3 |
Granted: 2Denied: 1 | counts only |
| Motions to compel N = 1 |
Moot / procedural: 1 | counts only |
| Motion to exclude expert testimony N = 1 |
Moot / procedural: 1 | counts only |
A "1 of 1" is one ruling, not a tendency. Treat small samples as illustrative, not predictive.
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“the court GRANTS Mighty Lift's motion for summary judgment (Dkt. # 31).”
“Mighty Lift's motion to compel discovery (Dkt. # 24) is now moot, and accordingly, the court DENIES it.”
“In ruling on Mighty Lift's motion for summary judgment, the court did not rely upon the challenged portion of Mighty Lift's expert witness's testimony. Accordingly, Mr. Beard's motion is also moot, and the court DENIES it.”
“the court GRANTS in part and DENIES in part Defendants' motion (Dkt. # 22). The court DISMISSES the Tribe's Section 1981 claim but GRANTS the Tribe leave to amend its complaint concerning that claim within 20 days of the date of this order. The Court DENIES without prejudice Defendants' request that the court decline supplemental jurisdiction over and dismiss the Tribe's state law claims.”
“the court GRANTS in part and DENIES in part Eddie Bauer's motion to dismiss (Dkt. # 40). Veridian may file an amended complaint that is consistent with court's rulings herein.”
“the court GRANTS MITAC America's motion, GRANTS in part and DENIES in part AeroTEC Defendants' motion, and GRANTS Bombardier leave to file an amended complaint within 15 days of the date of this order.”
“the court GRANTS MITAC America's motion, GRANTS in part and DENIES in part AeroTEC Defendants' motion, and GRANTS Bombardier leave to file an amended complaint within 15 days of the date of this order.”
“the court GRANTS Massachusetts Bay's motion and DENIES Defendants' motion”
“the court GRANTS Massachusetts Bay's motion and DENIES Defendants' motion”