🧪 TEST MODE ACTIVE Use test card: 4242 4242 4242 4242

Carlos Murguia

United States District Court for the District of Kansas district Retired 2020 · served 1999–2020 Appointed by Bill Clinton (Democratic) 8 signed orders read

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

How Judge Murguia decides

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

What persuades

On removal, he places the burden on the removing party and resolves genuine doubts about federal jurisdiction in favor of remand.

“To the extent the court has any doubts about federal jurisdiction, the court must find in favor of remand.”

For survey-based expert evidence, ordinary methodological defects affect weight, but defects that make the survey untrustworthy justify exclusion.

“Technical and methodological deficiencies in a survey usually relate to the weight to be given to the survey, not its admissibility. But, when the ‘deficiencies are so substantial as to render the survey’s conclusions untrustworthy, a court should exclude the survey from evidence.’”

Procedural preferences

He did not extend the complaint-focused plausibility standard to affirmative defenses and warned that premature motions to strike can generate delay with little practical effect.

“the court determines that the pleading standards of Twombly and Iqbal should be limited to complaints — not extended to affirmative defenses.”

When a pleading defect may be curable, he favors dismissal with leave to amend instead of immediate terminal dismissal.

“if it is at all possible that the party against whom the dismissal is directed can correct the defect in the pleading or state a claim for relief, the court should dismiss with leave to amend.”

Cautions

A reputation for unrelated misconduct does not make a libel plaintiff immune from reputational harm caused by a materially more serious accusation.

“A ‘womanizer’ is distinct from someone who sexually assaults or attempts to rape women.”

Signed rulings

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

Baker v. Coxcom, Inc.
6:14-cv-01324 · 2015-02-20
Motions to remand (plaintiff) Granted

“IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that plaintiffs’ Motion to Remand (Doc. 6) is granted.”

Falley v. Friends University
6:10-cv-01423 · 2011-04-14
Motion to strike affirmative defenses (plaintiff) Denied

“IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that plaintiffs Motion to Strike Affirmative Defenses (Doc. 7) is denied.”

Durbin v. Yellow Transportation
· 2009-02-11
Motion for subject matter jurisdiction determination (joint) Granted

“IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Joint Motion for Determination of an Issue of Law Concerning Subject Matter Jurisdiction (Doc. 17) is granted.”

Hodgdon Powder Co. v. Alliant Techsystems, Inc.
2:06-cv-02100 · 2007-07-20
Motion to exclude expert evidence (defendant) Granted

“IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion to Exclude Evidence of Plaintiff’s Counsel’s ‘Name Game’ Survey and to Strike Plaintiffs Expert Witness Report (Doc. 42) is granted.”

Brown v. Unified School District No. 500
· 2004-06-08
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted in part

“IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 17) is granted in part and denied in part.”

Keller v. Bank of America, N.A.
· 2017-01-13
Motions to remand (plaintiff) Denied

“IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that plaintiff Eric David Keller’s Motion to Remand (Doc. 11) is denied.”

Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted in part

“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendant Bank of America, N.A.’s Motion to Dismiss pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) (Doc. 9) is granted in part and denied in part.”

Chastain v. Hodgdon
2:16-cv-02087 · 2016-08-15
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied

“IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 6) is denied.”

Primerica Life Insurance Co. v. Frantz
· 2019-03-06
Motion for interpleader relief (plaintiff) Granted

“IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that plaintiff's Motion to Deposit Policy Benefit Into the Court's Registry And For Interpleader Relief (Doc. 13) be granted.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 642 days (N = 8).

Median motion-to-ruling time: 177 days (N = 12).

The eight sampled closed civil cases span employment, trademark, defamation, wage, tort, technology, and benefits disputes. Their duration figures describe this bounded sample, not the full career docket.

A historical record

Judge Murguia 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.