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

Brantley David Starr

U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas Appointed by Donald Trump (Republican) 16 signed orders read

How Judge Starr decides

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

What persuades

Textual reading of the controlling instrument: applies the words of a treaty/statute as written. In Firehawk he held the Hague Service Convention inapplicable straight from Article 1's text because the defendant's address was unknown.

“Article 1 of the Convention states that it ‘shall not apply where the address of the person to be served with the document is not known.’ ... As a result, the Convention does not apply.”

Prefers to deny a 12(b)(6) MTD and defer contested merits questions (e.g. antitrust market definition / injury) to a fuller summary-judgment record rather than resolve them on the pleadings.

“the Court finds that the points of dispute contained therein are more appropriate for resolution at the summary-judgment stage of this case. Accordingly, the Court DENIES the motion.”

Procedural preferences

Strict disclosure discipline -- a plaintiff that withholds its theory of liability from the pleadings and discovery cannot raise it for the first time to defeat summary judgment; the theory is forfeited (Rule 41(b) violation an alternative basis).

“The Court cannot give Lymphedema Texas a fourth bite at the apple and encourage plaintiffs to sandbag their opponents until after discovery is over. ... It should have pled this theory. It didn't.”

Expects candor and civility; directs litigants to the Dallas court's en banc Dondi Properties decision and treats motion practice as a last resort after conferral.

“Going forward, the Court expects candor, civility, and compliance from the parties. ... The Court will not tolerate practices that ‘do not advance the resolution of the merits of a case.’ ... Motions should be a last resort.”

Cautions

The dismissal sample is weighted toward motions resolved on jurisdiction, sanctions, service, or timing rather than the merits of a Rule 12(b)(6) claim. Starr's generative-AI certification order and the Southwest Airlines contempt order, later vacated by the Fifth Circuit, are standing or contempt orders rather than party-motion dispositions and are excluded from the counts. Two candidate cases signed by other judges were also excluded.

“(builder caveat -- not an order quote)”

Signed rulings

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

Ramachandran v. Jain
3:18-cv-00811-X · 2020-06-22
Motions to dismiss (plaintiff) Denied

“Therefore, the Court DENIES Ramachandran's motion to dismiss [Doc. No. 133].”

Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied

“Therefore, the Court also DENIES the defendants' motion to dismiss [Doc. No. 134].”

Oyekwe v. Research Now Group Inc
3:21-cv-02166-X-BK · 2021-12-14
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted in part

“GRANTS IN PART Defendants' Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim and for a Pre-Suit Injunction. [Doc. No. 5]. The Court GRANTS Defendants' motion to dismiss and DENIES WITHOUT PREJUDICE Defendants' request for a pre-suit injunction.”

Motion for sanctions (defendant) Denied

“The Court DENIES Defendants' Motion for Sanctions [Doc. No. 15]”

Endure Industries Inc v. Vizient Inc
3:20-cv-03190-X · 2023-01-08
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied

“the Court finds that the points of dispute contained therein are more appropriate for resolution at the summary-judgment stage of this case. Accordingly, the Court DENIES the motion.”

Firehawk Aerospace, Inc. v. Jones
3:25-cv-01005-X · 2025-07-16
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied

“As a result, the Convention does not apply. ... Therefore, the Court DENIES Jones's motion to dismiss. (Doc. 18).”

Motion for sanctions (defendant) Denied

“Jones has not shown this lawsuit constitutes retaliation nor has she demonstrated that suing someone who lacks stable housing is sanctionable conduct.”

Butler v. Garland
3:21-cv-00064-X-BN · 2023-01-05
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“Finding none, the Court ACCEPTS the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge and GRANTS Garland's motion for summary judgment.”

Lymphedema & Wound Care Consultants of America, Inc. v. Health Care Service Corp. (Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Texas)
3:19-cv-02164-X · 2023-04-27
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“the Court GRANTS Blue Cross's motions for summary judgment and dismisses with prejudice the claims of Lymphedema Texas and Lymphedema America.”

Jones v. Code Enforcement Business
3:22-cv-01907-X-BT · 2023-04-06

Starr dismissed a pro se Section 1983 complaint sua sponte for failure to state a claim, adopting the magistrate judge's findings and recommendation after de novo review of the objections. The dismissal was with prejudice because the plaintiff had already filed two complaints plus a questionnaire, making further amendment futile; the in forma pauperis motion was moot. Quote: 'The Court DISMISSES WITH PREJUDICE all of Jones' claims against all defendants.'

Lindsley v. TRT Holdings Inc / Omni Hotels
3:17-cv-02942-X · 2022-03-18
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted in part

“the Court GRANTS IN PART AND DENIES IN PART the defendants' motions for summary judgment.”

Ideas & Innovations LLC v. Raise Marketplace Inc
3:22-cv-02569-X · 2023-04-12
Motions to remand (plaintiff) Denied

“the Court DENIES I & I's motion to remand.”

Harper v. King
3:22-cv-00097-X · 2022-10-18
Default judgment (plaintiff) Granted

“the Court GRANTS Harper's motion for default judgment and CONFIRMS the Award.”

Qiang Li v. Verizon Wireless Texas LLC
3:17-cv-02249-X-BH · 2020-05-15
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“the Court GRANTS defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. No. 65]. By separate judgment, the Court will DISMISS WITH PREJUDICE Li's claims against the defendants.”

Battle v. Gravamen Asset Management
3:21-cv-02217-X-BH · 2022-04-05
Default judgment (plaintiff) Denied

“the Court ACCEPTS the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge and DENIES Battle's motion for default judgment.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

The sampled cases provide a limited view of Starr's caseload rather than an authoritative baseline and include matters referred to magistrate judges.

Put Judge Starr's record to work

Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Starr actually rules, not a generic AI guess.

Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Starr's own signed orders and cites them.