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

Paul G. Cassell

United States District Court for the District of Utah district Retired 2007 · served 2002–2007 Appointed by George W. Bush (Republican) 17 signed orders read

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

How Judge Cassell decides

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

What persuades

Once counsel appears, representation continues until the court approves a substitution.

“no substitution is effective until approved by court order, so any attorney who has entered an appearance in a case must continue to vigorously represent his client until any substitution is allowed.”

Procedural preferences

A Rule 48(a) dismissal involving an identified victim required the victim's views before the court would act.

“before granting any motion by the government under Rule 48(a) to dismiss charges involving a specific victim, the court must have the victim’s views on the motion.”

Signed rulings

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

Allison v. Utah County Corp.
· 2004-09-14
Motions to dismiss (Randy Hall) Granted

“Randy Hall’s motion to dismiss (Dkt.# 7) under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) is GRANTED, and service on him is quashed.”

S.U. Ex Rel. Feldman v. Youth Care of Utah, Inc.
· 2004-11-23
Habeas petition (petitioner) Denied

“The court, therefore, DENIES the petition for civil habeas corpus (# 1-1).”

Motions to strike (respondent) Granted

“The court GRANTS the motion to strike declarations (# 17-1).”

Motions to dismiss (respondent) Granted

“The court also GRANTS respondent’s motion to dismiss the petition for habeas corpus (# 19-1).”

Pebble Creek Homes, LLC v. Upstream Images, LLC
· 2007-10-05
Motions to remand (Pebble Creek parties) Denied

“Accordingly, the court hereby DENIES the Pebble Creek Parties’ motions to remand to Utah state court [# 6] and to hold void the state court order entered on July 25, 2007[# 11].”

Motion to void state court order (Pebble Creek parties) Denied
United States v. McDaniel
· 2005-10-19
Motion to substitute counsel (proposed retained counsel) Denied

“Mr. Yengich’s motion to substitute himself as Mr. McDaniel’s counsel (#21) is DENIED because it fails to comply with Rule 83-1.4 of the Local Rules of Civil Procedure.”

Lehman Bros. Bank v. Beverly Hills Estates Funding, Inc.
· 2006-08-21
Motions to dismiss (Internal Revenue Service) Granted

“For all these reasons, the court GRANTS the IRS’ Motion to Dismiss [# 105].”

Kerry v. Southwire Co. & Affiliates Employee Benefit Plan
· 2004-07-02
Motions to dismiss (defendants) Denied

“The court disagrees and hereby DENIES the motion to dismiss.”

Disability Law Center v. Millcreek Health Center
· 2004-10-12
Motions to dismiss (Millcreek) Denied

“The court DENIES Millcreek’s motion to dismiss finding jurisdiction proper.”

Preliminary injunction (Disability Law Center) Moot / procedural

“The court DENIES the DLC’s motion for a preliminary injunction as MOOT.”

United States Ex Rel. Told v. Interwest Construction Co.
· 2007-06-08
Summary judgment (defendants) Granted

“the court must GRANT summary judgment to the defendants [# 57].”

Qwest Corp. v. Utah Telecommunications Open Infrastructure Agency
· 2006-07-18
Motions to dismiss (Qwest) Granted

“The court GRANTS Qwest’s motion to dismiss (#67) and DISMISSES UTOPIA’S first through fourth and seventh counterclaims for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.”

Summary judgment (Qwest) Denied

“And disputed issues of material fact require the court to DENY Qwest’s motion for summary judgment (# 98).”

Overstock. Com, Inc. v. Furnace Brook, LLC
· 2005-10-31
Motions to dismiss (Furnace Brook) Granted

“Because the Federal Circuit has held that cease-and-desist letters alone do not create personal jurisdiction, the court GRANTS Furnace Brook’s motion to dismiss [Docket No. 3].”

Motion for jurisdictional discovery (Overstock) Denied

“And the court DENIES Overstock’s motion for leave to conduct jurisdictional discovery because all it seeks is more information about the letters Furnace Brook sent to another Utah company — information that, as discussed above, cannot cure the jurisdictional defect.”

Merce v. Greenwood
· 2004-12-17
Motions to dismiss (defendants Pope and Greenwood) Granted

“plaintiffs’ EMTALA claims were untimely filed and defendants Pope and Greenwood’s motion to dismiss (9-1; 12-2) is GRANTED.”

Motion to amend complaint (plaintiffs) Denied

“Because the proposed amendment would be futile, plaintiffs’ motion to amend the complaint (14-1) is DENIED.”

United States v. Gill
· 2007-10-15
Motion to dismiss indictment (defendant) Granted

“Therefore, the court grants Mr. Gill’s motion to dismiss.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 89.5 days (N = 20).

Median motion-to-ruling time: 63 days (N = 1).

This is a bounded historical slice of 20 terminated cases filed in 2007, not a career-wide caseload profile.

A historical record

Judge Cassell 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.