Tana Lin
How Judge Lin rules, drawn from 23 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Lin
Tana Lin is a judge of the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington. Appointed by President Joseph R. Biden, Judge Lin received a commission on November 23, 2021.
Judge Lin's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Lin, 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
Filing
In civil cases, provide courtesy copies when a pleading and its attachments exceed 50 pages.
“Courtesy copies are required only for pleadings that in the aggregate (i.e., the brief plus any declarations or exhibits) are longer than fifty (50) pages”
Motions
In criminal cases, contact the courtroom deputy before moving to continue trial to check availability of the new date.
“Prior to filing a motion to continue a trial date, Counsel are directed to contact the Court’s Courtroom Deputy Kadya Peter”
Discovery
An opposed discovery motion must quote or attach the discovery request and objection at issue.
“Any opposed discovery motion shall contain a verbatim recitation of the discovery request and objection (if any) at issue, or shall attach a copy of same.”
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 Lin decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
A forum-non-conveniens motion must identify an adequate alternative forum and address both private and public interests; an initial unsupported motion was denied, while a renewed motion succeeded after supplying that analysis.
“As both the private and public interest factors weigh in favor of dismissal, the Court concludes that this matter should be dismissed for forum non conveniens.”
In Morganstern, Lin left a state-law debt claim for the factfinder because the validity of the debt remained disputed.
“whether the debt was valid is a dispute of material fact”
Procedural preferences
In Docklight Brands v. Tilray, she referred the pending dismissal motion to Magistrate Judge Tsuchida for a report and recommendation.
“The Court also hereby refers to Magistrate Judge Tsuchida for preparation of a report and recommendation the pending motion to dismiss (Dkt No. 18). Signed by Judge Tana Lin.”
In McPeak v. Butcher, she issued an order to show cause after the federal-claim defendants left the case, then remanded the remaining state-law claims and vacated pending motions and deadlines.
“ORDER OF REMAND. The matter is REMANDED to Lewis County Superior Court ... All pending motions and deadlines in this matter are VACATED.”
She gave a pro se contract plaintiff one opportunity to identify the allegedly breached terms and correct service, then dismissed with prejudice when the amended pleading still identified no enforceable obligation.
“It may be misleading for Defendant to state in a policy that fake engagement will be removed while admitting in its briefing that its policies are merely aspirational. But that does not make Defendant’s actions here a breach of contract.”
When an arbitration agreement called for the parties to select an arbitrator together, the court compelled arbitration but directed a good-faith attempt to agree before asking it to appoint anyone.
“The Court therefore DENIES both Parties’ requests to appoint an arbitrator.”
In Harmon, Lin dismissed with prejudice after finding judicial immunity fatal to the claim and amendment futile.
“judicial immunity is fatal to Plaintiff’s claim.”
Cautions
Default judgment is premature before completed service and proof of service; issuance of a summons by the clerk does not itself serve the defendant.
“As Defendant has not yet been properly served, the Court DENIES Plaintiff’s motion without prejudice.”
In the Stanley tumbler litigation, Lin dismissed a second consolidated complaint with leave to amend but warned that another failure to plead materiality would end that opportunity.
“However, if Plaintiffs again fail to cure the deficiencies of their claims, particularly as related to materiality, leave to amend will not be granted again.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“ORDER ADOPTING 29 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION. McPeak's Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. 19) is GRANTED-IN-PART and DENIED-IN-PART. Butcher's counterclaims are dismissed without prejudice for failure to state a claim, but the Court declines to issue Rule 11 sanctions.”
“ORDER ADOPTING 40 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION. Docklight Brands Inc.'s Motion to Dismiss Counterclaims, Affirmative Defenses, and to Strike Portions of the Answer of Defendants and Counterclaimants Tilray, Inc. and High Park Holdings Ltd. (Dkt. No. 18) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.”
“Defendant’s motion (Dkt. No. 18) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.”
“Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim and Insufficient Service of Process (Dkt. No. 10) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART with leave to amend and serve process.”
“Accordingly, Defendant's motion to dismiss (Dkt. No. 25) is GRANTED, and Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint (Dkt. No. 23) is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“As Defendant has not yet been properly served, the Court DENIES Plaintiff’s motion without prejudice.”
“For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff’s Motion for Appointment of Counsel is DENIED.”
“Defendant Valve Corporation’s motion to dismiss (Dkt. No. 47) is GRANTED”
“Defendant Zhao’s motion to dismiss (Dkt. No. 30) is DENIED AS MOOT.”
“Defendant Valve Corporation’s Motion to Dismiss Second Amended Complaint Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) (Dkt. No. 54) is GRANTED. Defendant Valve is DISMISSED from this action.”
“Defendant Zhao’s Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. No. 53) and Additional Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. No. 55) are DENIED.”
“Accordingly, Defendant Xue Zhao’s Motion to Dismiss Under the Doctrine of Forum Non Conveniens (Dkt. No. 65) is GRANTED.”
“Accordingly, Plaintiffs’ Motion for Reconsideration (Dkt. No. 70) 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 | 11 |
| Bench trials submitted more than six months | 0 |
| Bankruptcy appeals pending more than six months | 0 |
| Social Security appeals pending more than six months | 2 |
| Civil cases pending more than three years | 6 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 11 | 6 |
| Sep 2025 | 1 | 4 |
| Mar 2025 | 0 | 2 |
| Sep 2024 | 0 | 3 |
| Mar 2024 | 1 | 2 |
| Sep 2023 | 5 | 6 |
| Mar 2023 | 4 | 3 |
| Sep 2022 | 8 | 5 |
| Mar 2022 | 0 | 4 |
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 (Seattle), not for Judge Lin: 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 Lin with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Lin, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Lin's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace