Patricia Tolliver Giles
How Judge Giles decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In a habeas/immigration-detention posture she protects the court's jurisdiction when a petition is filed in-district before the government moves the detainee away, and resolves jurisdiction before reaching the merits or release.
“the Court finds that it has proper habeas jurisdiction to consider the Petition. Accordingly, Respondents' Motion to Dismiss, or in the Alternative, Motion to Transfer Venue (Dkts. 24, 25) are denied.”
On a 12(b)(6) procedural-due-process challenge to evidence retention, she follows circuit precedent that the Fourth Amendment defines the process due for property lawfully seized and held during an active criminal investigation.
“because the motorcycles were lawfully seized under the Fourth Amendment and retained as evidence in an active criminal investigation, no further process was due.”
Procedural preferences
She decides threshold jurisdiction first: she heard oral argument focused on jurisdiction and held that issue must be resolved before reaching the other motions (including release).
“On May 1, 2025, the Court heard oral argument primarily focused on the issue of jurisdiction, which must be resolved before reaching the other motions.”
Without an evidentiary hearing, she takes the non-movant's factual assertions as true for the jurisdictional inquiry (allegations in the light most favorable to the non-movant).
“Absent an evidentiary hearing, the Court accepts the non-movants factual assertions.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“the Court finds that it has proper habeas jurisdiction to consider the Petition. Accordingly, Respondents' Motion to Dismiss, or in the Alternative, Motion to Transfer Venue (Dkts. 24, 25) are denied.”
“ORDERED that Respondents' Motion to Dismiss, or in the Alternative, Motion to Transfer Venue (Dkts. 24, 25) are DENIED”
“Petitioner's 20 Motion for Release on Bond is GRANTED ... Petitioner Dr. Khan Suri is to be immediately released on his personal recognizance during the pendency of his habeas proceedings”
“Petitioner's 5 Motion to Compel Respondents to Return Petitioner to this District is DENIED as moot”
APPELLATE panel opinion AUTHORED by Giles sitting by designation on the Fourth Circuit (joined by Judges Benjamin and Floyd) -- not a district-court motion ruling, so EXCLUDED from district motion stats; recorded for the pattern layer. A vehicle-finance lienholder brought a 42 U.S.C. 1983 procedural-due-process claim after a sheriff's department seized and retained two motorcycles as murder-investigation evidence without notifying the lienholder. The panel AFFIRMED the district court's 12(b)(6) dismissal: where property is lawfully seized and retained as evidence in an active criminal investigation, the Fourth Amendment (not the Fourteenth Amendment's notice-and-hearing requirement) defines the process due, so no further process was owed. Shows her textualist/precedent-bound reading of due process in the criminal-evidence context.
“ORDERED that Defendants' Motion for Reconsideration (Dkt. 41) is DENIED; and it is further ORDERED that the list of books (as submitted to the Court) is deemed filed on the public docket and included as Attachment A to this Memorandum Order.”
“Accordingly, Plaintiffs' Motion for a Preliminary Injunction is granted. Dkt. 9. Defendants DoDEA, Dr. Beth Schiavano-Narvaez, and Secretary of Defense Peter Brian Hegseth are enjoined from further removal of educational books and curricular content in implementation of Executive Order Nos. 14168, 14185, and 14190 and any related memoranda, directives, and guidance at Plaintiffs' DoDEA schools: Crossroads Elementary School, Barsanti Elementary School, Aviano Middle-High School, Stollars Elementary School, and Egdren Middle High School. ... Therefore, the Court denies Plaintiffs' request for relief across all DoDEA schools.”
“For the foregoing reasons, it is hereby ORDERED that Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. 48) is DENIED.”
“For the reasons that follow, the Court finds that NetChoice has standing and satisfied each of the factors set out in Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Council Inc. 555 U.S. 7, 20 (2008). Accordingly, the Court grants the Motion for Preliminary Injunction.”
“Accordingly, the Court will grant Defendants' Motion to Dismiss as it relates to Comcast's Seventh Amendment and Article III claims. Comcast has also not properly pled a compensable injury as a result of the removal restriction on DOL ALJs and has therefore failed to state a claim for an Article II violation. Accordingly, the Court will grant Defendants' Motion to Dismiss as it relates to Comcast's Article II claim.”
“For the foregoing reasons, Respondent's Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. 8) will be granted, and Petitioner's Motion to Amend (Dkts. 16, 24) will be denied. The Petition must be dismissed with prejudice, and an appropriate Order shall issue.”
“At this point, amendment would be futile because the original pleading was not timely filed—i.e. there is no timely claim to which the new claim could relate back. ... Thus, the Court will deny Mr. Nelson's motion to amend.”
“Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 18) is GRANTED and Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 23) is DENIED. Defendant is directed to approve Plaintiff Mursal Zalmai's application for naturalization.”
“ORDERED that Defendants' Motions to Dismiss (Dkts. 5, 6) are GRANTED; ... and it is further ORDERED that this civil action be and is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“ORDERED that Defendant's Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. 8) is GRANTED; and it is further ORDERED that Plaintiff's ADEA, ADA, and Title VII claims are DISMISSED without prejudice. Plaintiff may file an amended complaint within twenty-one (21) days.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median motion-to-ruling time: 35 days (N = 5).
From the enumerated dockets (illustrative, not a counted population): Giles's Alexandria docket runs heavily to immigration-agency review and mandamus (USCIS/State Dept naturalization and visa delays -- Mayorkas/Jaddou/Blinken defendants), FDCPA and consumer suits, ADA Title III access cases (serial 'Windsor' filings), employment, prisoner civil-rights, and federal criminal matters; her 2026 active assignments are dominated by a surge of alien-detainee 2241 habeas petitions plus new criminal indictments. Her best-known matters (the Oct. 2024 voter-roll-purge order, stayed by the Supreme Court; the 2025 Suri release) are high-profile.
Put Judge Giles's record to work
Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Giles actually rules, not a generic AI guess.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Giles's own signed orders and cites them.