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

Daphne A. Oberg

United States District Court for the District of Utah magistrate 16 signed orders read

How Judge Oberg decides

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

What persuades

On a developed record she will recommend granting plaintiff's relief, including post-judgment charging orders, where the defendant defaults or fails to properly contest the supporting documentation.

“Judge Oberg subsequently issued a Report and Recommendations on June 13, 2024, recommending Plaintiff's Application [for a charging order] be granted. ... Judge Oberg's Report is ADOPTED and Defendant's Application is GRANTED.”

Procedural preferences

Enforces threshold requirements firmly on pro se and IFP litigants: screens complaints under 1915(e)(2)(B) (dismissing frivolous / Rule-8-noncompliant pleadings, with prejudice where warranted), conditions IFP on fee payment, and recommends failure-to-prosecute dismissals.

“His Amended Complaint ... is dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2)(B).”

Signed rulings

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

Sorenson v. United States
2:20-cv-00335-DAK-DAO · 2021-02-02
Screening dismissal (plaintiff) Granted

“the court fully agrees with the analysis in Magistrate Judge Oberg's Report and Recommendation. ... His Amended Complaint, therefore, is dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2)(B). ... the court ... dismisses Plaintiff's Amended Complaint [ECF No. 6] with prejudice”

Summary judgment (plaintiff) Denied

“Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment is denied because he fails to comply with the requirements of Rule 56 ... and he fails to show that he is entitled to judgment as a matter of law on any of his claims. ... denies his motion for summary judgment [ECF No. 207].”

Leshinsky v. Utah Office Recovery Services
2:23-cv-00534-TC-DAO · 2023-10-20
Ifp (plaintiff) Denied

“The court ADOPTS the R&R (ECF No. 6) and DENIES Mr. Leshinsky's motion to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 1). The court gives Mr. Leshinsky thirty days to pay the filing fee, or the court will dismiss this case without prejudice.”

Ramirez-Medina v. Brown
2:23-cv-00097-TC-DAO · 2023-10-02
Involuntary dismissal (defendant) Granted

“the court ADOPTS Judge Oberg's R&R, GRANTS Mr. Ramirez-Medina's motion to dismiss, and directs the Clerk of Court to dismiss this action without prejudice.”

Hutchinson v. Kamauu
2:20-cv-00796-RJS-DAO · 2024-08-29
Charging order (plaintiff) Granted

“Defendants' Objection to Judge Oberg's Report and Recommendation is OVERRULED. Judge Oberg's Report is ADOPTED and Defendant's Application is GRANTED.”

Tony R. v. Dudek
2:24-cv-00242 · 2025-03-18
Motion for attorney fees (plaintiff) Granted

“For the reasons explained below, the court grants the petition.”

Tyler N. v. Dudek
1:24-cv-00014 · 2025-03-21
Social security appeal (plaintiff) Denied

“The Commissioner’s decision is affirmed.”

Bart S. v. Bisignano
2:24-cv-00445 · 2025-09-15
Social security appeal (plaintiff) Denied

“The Commissioner’s decision is affirmed.”

Tharp v. Utah Division of Child and Family Services
2:25-cv-00304 · 2025-05-27
Motion for temporary restraining order (plaintiff) Denied

“the undersigned recommends the district judge deny their motion for a temporary restraining order.”

Tharp v. Utah Division of Child and Family Services
2:25-cv-00304 · 2025-06-18
Motion for appointment of counsel (plaintiff) Denied

“Because Mr. Tharp and Ms. Luby have not shown appointment of counsel is warranted, the motion is denied.”

Crossett v. Midgley
1:24-cv-00125 · 2025-07-11
Judgment on the pleadings (defendant) Granted in part

“the undersigned RECOMMENDS the district judge (1) grant in part the defendants’ motion for judgment on the pleadings,”

Preliminary injunction (plaintiff) Denied

“(2) deny Mr. Crossett’s motion for preliminary injunction,”

Soqui v. England Logistics, Inc.
2:24-cv-00261 · 2025-03-24
Motion to quash (plaintiff) Denied

“Because Mr. Soqui no longer works for Lucid and the documents sought are relevant, the motion is denied.”

OL Private Counsel, LLC v. Olson
2:21-cv-00455 · 2024-11-20
Motion for costs (nonparty) Granted in part

“The Kuendig nonparties are awarded the expenses they incurred in producing documents, but they have not established entitlement to deposition costs beyond statutorily prescribed fees.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

Salt Lake City magistrate (since 2020-05-01) carrying a heavy civil caseload. Two streams: (1) directly-assigned / 636(c) CONSENT civil matters she decides herself, prominently Social Security disability appeals; and (2) 636(b) referral matters (pro se / IFP screening, prisoner civil-rights, post-judgment collection, contract/fraud) on which she issues Reports and Recommendations reviewed by the district judges. Composition only; not a grant rate.

Put Judge Oberg's record to work

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

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