Robert J. Bryan
How Judge Bryan rules, drawn from 20 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Bryan
Robert Jensen Bryan is a judge of the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington. Appointed by President Ronald Reagan, Judge Bryan received a commission on May 7, 1986. Judge Bryan assumed senior status on November 1, 2000.
Judge Bryan's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Bryan, as published on the court's website (checked October 9, 2026). Judges revise these often, so confirm the current version on the court's site before you file.
Key rules
Trial
Do not approach the bench, a witness, opposing counsel, or court staff without leave.
“Counsel should not approach opposing counsel, the bench, a witness, the court reporter’s table, or the clerk’s desk without leave of court.”
Trial
Only one attorney per party may examine or cross examine a witness.
“Only one attorney for each party may examine or cross examine a witness.”
Trial
Deliver the court’s exhibit copies to the courtroom deputy on the Thursday before trial unless other arrangements are made.
“The Court’s copies should be delivered to Tyler Campbell in the clerk’s office, the Thursday prior to 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 9, 2026).
- Amended Procedures for the Filing, Service, and Management of Highly Sensitive Documents ↗
- Materials Related to Cooperation ↗
- Exhibit Retention Procedures ↗
- Availability and Redaction Policies for Electronically Filed Transcripts ↗
- Social Security Cases ↗
- Immigration Habeas Petitions Under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 ↗
- Amended Provisions for Electronic Case Filing ↗
How Judge Bryan decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In Danielson, Bryan granted the union’s summary-judgment motion because it had relied in good faith on the law governing agency fees before Janus.
“The good faith defense should apply here as a matter of law.”
He enforced a settlement stated in court after comparing the proposed writing with the hearing transcript and finding all material terms complete.
“The Settlement Agreement proposed by the plaintiff is a full and final agreement.”
Procedural preferences
In Gossen v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, Bryan granted the defendants' Rule 12 motions and dismissed the plaintiffs' claims with prejudice.
“Defendant JP Morgan Chase Bank's Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. 11) is GRANTED ... Defendant Northwest Trustee Services, Inc.'s Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. 15) is GRANTED ... The claims of Plaintiffs Yuliya Gossen and Aleksey Gossen (Dkt. 6-1) are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE”
In a dispute requiring destructive testing, the judge distinguished the cost of producing physical evidence from its asserted value as a damages item when deciding who should pay for a sample.
“value of the doors are not a cost of production.”
He set aside a default where the delay reflected ordinary oversight, the defendant identified colorable defenses, and the plaintiffs showed no prejudice beyond delay.
“This case should be decided on the merits.”
In a challenge to state agency fees after a change in controlling law, Bryan dismissed state officials without prejudice after finding their new policy made the challenged practice unlikely to recur.
“because the State Defendants have met their burden to show that the challenged agency fees cannot reasonably be expected to recur, Plaintiffs' claims are moot.”
Cautions
In Gifford Pinchot Task Force v. Clayton, Bryan granted the defendants' cross-motion for summary judgment and dismissed the action with prejudice.
“Defendants' Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 26) is GRANTED. Plaintiffs action is DISMISSED with PREJUDICE.”
In a discovery sanctions order, he imposed negative inferences for lost electronic records and personnel material and ordered expense shifting after finding the Postal Service had not completed adequate searches.
“Negative inferences will be drawn against the USPS regarding the content of lost”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“THEREFORE, it is HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, Council 28, AFL-CIO's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings or Summary Judgment (Dkt. 41) is GRANTED. The Union Defendant is DISMISSED from the case.”
“Plaintiffs Motion Summary for Judgment (Dkt. 20 & 21) is DENIED.”
“Defendants' Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 26) is GRANTED. Plaintiffs action is DISMISSED with PREJUDICE.”
“(1) The Defendant's Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. 10) is GRANTED; (2) The case is DISMISSED;”
“(3) Plaintiffs Cross-Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Dkt. 16) DENIED as moot;”
“Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant Northwest Home Designing Inc.'s Motion to Dismiss Counterclaims II and III of Counter-Claimant Gerry Slick and Gerry Slick Design Group, Inc. (Dkt. 56) is DENIED.”
“Defendant JP Morgan Chase Bank's Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. 11) is GRANTED ... Defendant Northwest Trustee Services, Inc.'s Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. 15) is GRANTED ... The claims of Plaintiffs Yuliya Gossen and Aleksey Gossen (Dkt. 6-1) are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE”
“Defendants’ Motion to Compel (Dkt. 21) is GRANTED;”
“Judgment (Dkt. 21) is DENIED IN PART and GRANTED IN PART”
“The Neil Jones Food Company’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (16) is DENIED.”
“Judgment (Dkt. 18) is GRANTED. All claims against Wausau are”
“Summary Judgment (Dkt. 19) is GRANTED. All claims against Traveler’s are”
“GRANTED as to:”
“(Dkt. 16) IS GRANTED.”
“this Court’s September 27, 2023 Order (Dkt. 27) IS DENIED, IN PART, as to the motion for a”
“The Defendant’s Motion to Vacate the Default (Dkt. 24) IS GRANTED;”
“The Plaintiffs’ Motion for Entry of Default Judgment (Dkt. 22) IS DENIED.”
“The Plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel (Dkt. 41) 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 | 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 | 1 |
| Mar 2024 | 0 | 1 |
| Sep 2023 | 0 | 2 |
| Mar 2023 | 0 | 2 |
| Sep 2022 | 0 | 1 |
| Mar 2022 | 1 | 1 |
| Sep 2021 | 0 | 3 |
| Mar 2021 | 0 | 3 |
| Sep 2020 | 0 | 2 |
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 Washington (Tacoma), not for Judge Bryan: 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 | 2,877 | 6 months |
| Closed with no court action | 684 | 3.4 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 2,159 | 6.7 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 10 | 27.7 months |
| Closed during trial | 24 | 25.2 months |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 2,877 | 6 months |
| Sep 2024 | 2,639 | 6.5 months |
| Sep 2023 | 2,594 | 6.4 months |
| Sep 2022 | 2,303 | 7.3 months |
| Sep 2021 | 2,703 | 8.7 months |
| Sep 2020 | 2,340 | 7.2 months |
| Sep 2019 | 2,536 | 7.6 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 Bryan with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Bryan, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Bryan's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace