United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas

Southern District of Texas
Fifth Circuit
Judgeships
Posts: 19
Judges: 15
Vacancies: 4
Judges
Chief: Randy Crane
Active judges: Alfred Bennett, Jeff Brown, Randy Crane, Keith Ellison, Charles R. Eskridge III, Marina Garcia Marmolejo, George Hanks, Ricardo Hinojosa, John Kazen, David Morales, Rolando Olvera, Nelva Gonzales Ramos, Fernando Rodriguez Jr., Diana Saldana, Drew Barnett Tipton Senior judges: Micaela Alvarez, Andrew Hanen, Melinda Harmon, David Hittner, Kenneth Hoyt, Lynn Hughes, Janis Jack, Sim Lake, Gray Miller, John Rainey, Lee Rosenthal, Hilda Tagle, Ewing Werlein

The United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas is one of 94 United States district courts. The court's headquarters are in Houston and has six additional offices in the district. When decisions of the court are appealed, they are appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit based in downtown New Orleans at the John Minor Wisdom Federal Courthouse.

Vacancies

See also: Current federal judicial vacancies

There are four current vacancies on the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, out of the court's 19 judicial positions.

Pending nominations

There are no pending nominees for this court.

Active judges

Article III judges

Judge	Appointed By	Assumed Office	Bachelors	Law
Ricardo Hinojosa	Ronald Reagan (R)	May 5, 1983 -	University of Texas, Austin, 1972	Harvard Law, 1975
Keith Ellison	Bill Clinton (D)	July 7, 1999 -	Harvard, 1972	Yale Law, 1976
Randy Crane	George W. Bush (R)	March 19, 2002 -	University of Texas, 1985	University of Texas Law, 1987
Diana Saldana	Barack Obama (D)	February 9, 2011 -	University of Texas, 1994	University of Texas, 1997
Nelva Gonzales Ramos	Barack Obama (D)	August 4, 2011 -	Southwest Texas State University, 1987	University of Texas Law, 1991
Marina Garcia Marmolejo	Barack Obama (D)	October 4, 2011 -	University of the Incarnate Word, 1992	St. Mary's University, 1996
Alfred Bennett	Barack Obama (D)	April 15, 2015 -	University of Huston, 1988	University of Texas School of Law, 1991
George Hanks	Barack Obama (D)	April 22, 2015 -	Louisiana State University, 1986	Harvard University, 1989
Rolando Olvera	Barack Obama (D)	August 4, 2015 -	Harvard University, 1985	University of Texas School of Law, Austin, 1989
Fernando Rodriguez Jr.	Donald Trump (R)	June 12, 2018 -	Yale University, 1991	University of Texas School of Law, 1997
David Morales	Donald Trump (R)	April 25, 2019 -	St. Edward's University, 1990	St. Mary's University School of Law, 1994
Jeff Brown	Donald Trump (R)	September 4, 2019 -	University of Texas, 1992	University of Houston Law Center, 1995
Charles R. Eskridge III	Donald Trump (R)	October 17, 2019 -	Trinity University, 1985	Pepperdine University School of Law, 1990
Drew Barnett Tipton	Donald Trump (R)	June 15, 2020 -	Texas A&M University, 1990	South Texas College of Law Houston, 1994
John Kazen	Joe Biden (D)	January 12, 2024 -	University of Texas at Austin, 1987	University of Houston Law School, 1990

Active Article III judges by appointing political party

The list below displays the number of active judges by the party of the appointing president. It does not reflect how a judge may rule on specific cases or their own political preferences.

• Democrat appointed: 8
• Republican appointed: 7

Senior judges

Judge	Appointed By	Assumed Office	Bachelors	Law
David Hittner	Ronald Reagan (R)	November 11, 2004 -	New York University, 1961	New York University Law, 1964
Ewing Werlein	George H.W. Bush (R)	January 1, 2006 -	Southern Methodist University, 1958	University of Texas Law, 1961
John Rainey	George H.W. Bush (R)	June 11, 2010 -	Southern Methodist University, 1967	Southern Methodist University, Dedman School of Law, 1972
Janis Jack	Bill Clinton (D)	June 1, 2011 -	University of Baltimore, 1974	South Texas College Law, 1981
Hilda Tagle	Bill Clinton (D)	December 31, 2012 -	East Texas State University, 1969	University of Texas School of Law, 1977
Kenneth Hoyt	Ronald Reagan (R)	March 2, 2013 -	Texas Southern University, 1969	Texas Southern University, Thurgood Marshall School of Law, 1972
Melinda Harmon	George H.W. Bush (R)	March 31, 2018 -	Harvard-Radcliffe College, 1969	University of Texas Law, 1972
Gray Miller	George W. Bush (R)	December 9, 2018 -	University of Houston, 1974	University of Houston Law, 1978
Sim Lake	Ronald Reagan (R)	July 5, 2019 -	Texas A&M University, 1966	University of Texas Law, 1969
Lynn Hughes	Ronald Reagan (R)	February 12, 2023 -	University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, 1963	University of Texas Law, 1966
Micaela Alvarez	George W. Bush (R)	June 8, 2023 -	University of Texas, 1980	University of Texas Law, 1989
Lee Rosenthal	George H.W. Bush (R)	December 1, 2024 -	University of Chicago, 1974	University of Chicago Law, 1977
Andrew Hanen	George W. Bush (R)	January 2, 2025 -	Denison University, 1975	Baylor University School of Law, 1978

Senior judges by appointing political party

The list below displays the number of senior judges by the party of the appointing president. It does not reflect how a judge may rule on specific cases or their own political preferences.

• Democrat appointed: 2
• Republican appointed: 11

Magistrate judges

Federal magistrate judges are federal judges who serve in United States district courts, but they are not appointed by the president and they do not serve life terms. Magistrate judges are assigned duties by the district judges in the district in which they serve. They may preside over most phases of federal proceedings, except for criminal felony trials. The specific duties of a magistrate judge vary from district to district, but the responsibilities always include handling matters that would otherwise be on the dockets of the district judges. Full-time magistrate judges serve for renewable terms of eight years. Some federal district courts have part-time magistrate judges, who serve for renewable terms of four years.

Judge	Appointed By	Assumed Office	Bachelors	Law
J. Scott Hacker		October 17, 2008 -	University of Texas at Austin, 1990	University of Texas School of Law, Austin, 2000
Ronald G. Morgan		May 3, 2009 -	U.S. Air Force Academy, 1977	Pennsylvania State University, Dickinson Law, 1985
Diana Quiroga		December 20, 2011 -	University of California, Berkeley, 1998	Harvard Law School, 2001
Jason B. Libby		May 9, 2013 -	Trinity University, 1992	Southern Methodist University, Dedman School of Law, 1985
Ignacio Torteya III		January 24, 2014 -	Baylor University, 1992	Baylor Law, 1995
Dena Hanovice Palermo		March 9, 2016 -	Binghamton University, 1980	Boston University School of Law, 1983
Christina Bryan	Lee Rosenthal	January 8, 2018 -	University of Texas at Austin, 1988	Harvard Law School, 1991
Andrew M. Edison		February 20, 2018 -	Dartmouth College, 1991	University of Virginia School of Law, 1994
Juan F. Alanis		April 30, 2018 -	Texas A&M, 1992	University of Texas School of Law, Austin, 1996
Peter Bray		August 3, 2018 -	Rochester Institute of Technology, 1992	University of Houston Law Center, 2000
Sam S. Sheldon		September 17, 2018 -	University of Southern California, 1992	University of Houston Law Center, 1997
Julie Hampton		January 6, 2020 -	University of Kentucky, 1998	Baylor School of Law, 2001
Christopher dos Santos	United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas	July 24, 2020 -	Georgia Institute of Technology, 2005	John Marshall Law School, Atlanta, 2009
Nadia Medrano	United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas	January 7, 2021 -	St. Mary's University, Texas, 2003	University of Texas School of Law, 2006
Mitchel Neurock	United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas	September 23, 2021 -	Rice University, 1989	Washington & Lee University School of Law, 1992

Former chief judges

In order to qualify for the office of chief judge in an Article III circuit or district court, or on the United States Court of International Trade, a judge must be in active service and hold seniority over the court's commissioned judges who are 64 years of age or under, have served one year or more, and have not previously served as chief judge.

In the event that no judge on the court meets those qualifications, the youngest judge in regular active service aged 65 years or more and who has served as a judge for one year or more shall become chief judge. If no judge meets those qualifications, the judge holding seniority in active service who has not served as chief before shall become the chief judge.

The chief judge serves for a term of seven years until another judge becomes eligible to serve in the position. No judge is permitted to serve as chief judge after reaching the age of 70 years unless no other judge is qualified to serve.

Unlike the chief justice of the United States, a chief judge returns to active service after the expiration of their term and does not create a vacancy on the court by the fact of their promotion.

On the United States Court of Federal Claims, the chief judge is selected by the president of the United States. The judge must be less than 70 years of age. A chief may serve until they reach age 70 or until another judge is designated by the president as the new chief judge. If the president selects a new chief judge, the former chief judge may continue active service on the court for the remainder of their appointed term.

Lee Rosenthal - (2016 - 2022) Ricardo Hinojosa - (2009 - 2016) Hayden Head - (2003 - 2009) George Kazen - (1996 - 2003) Norman Black - (1992 - 1996) James DeAnda - (1988 - 1992)

John Singleton - (1979 - 1988) Reynaldo Garza - (1974 - 1979) Ben Connally - (1962 - 1974) Allen Hannay - (1954 - 1962)

Former judges

For more information on judges of the Southern District of Texas, see former federal judges of the Southern District of Texas.

Jurisdiction

The Counties of the Southern District of Texas (click for larger map)

The Southern District of Texas has original jurisdiction over cases filed within its jurisdiction. These cases can include civil and criminal matters that fall under federal law.

There are seven court divisions, each covering the following counties:

• The Brownsville Division, covering Cameron and Willacy counties.

• The Corpus Christi Division, covering Aransas, Bee, Brooks, Duval, Jim Wells, Kenedy, Kleberg, Live Oak, Nueces, and San Patricio counties.

• The Galveston Division covers Brazoria, Chambers, Galveston, and Matagorda counties.

• The Houston Division covers Austin, Brazos, Colorado, Fayette, Fort Bend, Grimes, Harris, Madison, Montgomery, San Jacinto, Walker, Waller, and Wharton counties.

• The Laredo Division covers Jim Hogg, La Salle, McMullen, Webb, and Zapata counties.

• The McAllen Division, covering Hidalgo and Starr counties.

• The Victoria Division, covering Calhoun, DeWitt, Goliad, Jackson, Lavaca, Refugio, and Victoria counties.

Caseloads

This section contains court management statistics dating back to 2010. It was last updated in September 2024. Click [show] below for more information on caseload terms and definitions.

Caseload statistics explanation
Term	Explanation
Cases filed and terminated	The number of civil and criminal lawsuits formally initiated or decided by the court in a calendar year. The chart below reflects the table columns Cases filed and Cases terminated.
Average time from filing to disposition	The average amount of time, in months, from a case's date of filing to date of disposition (acquittal, sentencing, dismissal, etc.). The chart below reflects the table columns Median time (Criminal) and Median time (Civil).
Starting case load	The number of cases pending from the previous calendar year.
Cases filed	The number of civil and criminal lawsuits formally initiated in a calendar year.
Cases terminated	The total number of civil and criminal lawsuits decided by the court in a calendar year.
Remaining cases	The number of civil and criminal cases pending at the end of a given year.
Median time (Criminal)	The average amount of time, in months, from a case's date of filing to the date of disposition. In criminal cases, the date of disposition occurs on the day of sentencing or acquittal/dismissal.
Median time (Civil)	The average amount of time, in months, from a case's date of filing to the date of disposition.
Three-year civil cases	The number and percent of civil cases that were filed more than three years before the end of the given calendar year.
Vacant posts	The number of months during the year an authorized judgeship was vacant.
Trial/Post	The number of trials completed divided by the number of authorized judgeships on the court. Trials include evidentiary trials, hearings on temporary restraining orders, and preliminary injunctions.
Source: United States Courts, "Explanation of the Judicial Caseload Profiles for United States District Courts," accessed September 25, 2018

United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas caseload stats, 2010-2023
Year	Cases Filed	Cases Terminated	Cases Pending	Number of Judgeships	Vacant Judgeship Months	Average Total Filings per Judgeship	Trials Completed per Judgeship	Median time from filing to disposition, criminal	Median time from filing to disposition, civil	Three-year civil cases (#)	Three-year civil cases (%)
2010	18,788	17,283	12,871	19	43	989	30	5	6	187	3
2011	14,940	15,922	10,437	19	36	786	31	5	7	364	7
2012	15,024	15,050	11,784	19	16	791	27	5	8	376	8
2013	15,130	15,115	11,891	19	34	796	26	5	7	400	8
2014	14,222	13,972	12,196	19	41	749	23	5	7	420	8
2015	14,770	14,380	12,598	19	32	777	25	5	7	374	7
2016	14,713	14,569	12,850	19	24	774	27	5	8	387	7
2017	13,656	14,049	12,470	19	24	719	23	5	8	417	8
2018	15,628	14,354	13,588	19	26	823	24	5	8	362	6
2019	19,046	17,858	14,951	19	34	1,002	25	4	8	333	6
2020	15,637	15,384	15,288	19	5	823	15	5	8	329	6
2021	15,652	16,639	14,501	19	0	824	22	5	9	330	6
2022	15,151	14,817	14,876	19	12	797	25	5	9	345	6
2023	14,140	14,458	14,599	19	26	744	20	5	8	348	6
Average	15,464	15,275	13,207	19	25	814	25	5	8	355	7

History

On December 29, 1845, the State of Texas was organized as one judicial district. One judgeship was authorized for this U.S. district court, and being that it was not assigned to a judicial circuit, the district court was granted the same jurisdiction as the United States circuit courts, excluding appeals and writs of error, which are the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.

Texas was divided into two judicial districts, known as the Eastern District of Texas and the Western District of Texas, on February 21, 1857. One judgeship was authorized for the court in each district. Circuit court jurisdiction of the district court in Texas was repealed on July 15, 1862, and a U.S. circuit court was established for the district and assigned over to the United States Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit. Texas was then assigned to the United States Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit on July 23, 1866.

The Northern District of Texas was established on February 24, 1879, with one judgeship authorized to the district court. On February 9, 1898, a temporary judgeship was authorized to the Northern District. However, the statute provided that any vacancy in the existing judgeship would not be filled.

A few years later, on March 11, 1902, the Southern District of Texas was established and one judgeship was authorized to this district court.

The Southern District of Texas had eighteen judicial posts added over time for a total of nineteen current posts.

Federal Judicial Conference recommendation (2019)

In March 2019, the Federal Judicial Conference (FJC) recommended that two judgeships be added to the district. Based on FJC data, the district handled 585 weighted filings per judgeship from September 2017 to September 2018. Weighted filings are a specific metric used by the federal judiciary that accounts for the different amounts of time judges require to resolve types of civil and criminal cases. The national average in that period for weighted filings per judgeship was 513.

The FJC is the policy-making body for the United States federal courts system. It was first organized as the Conference of Senior Circuit Judges in 1922. The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States serves as chair of the conference. The members of the conference are the chief judge of each judicial circuit, the Chief Judge of the Court of International Trade, and a district judge from each regional judicial circuit.

Judicial posts

The following table highlights the development of judicial posts for the Southern District of Texas:

Year	Statute	Total Seats
December 29, 1845	9 Stat. 1	1
March 11, 1902	32 Stat. 64	1
May 31, 1938	52 Stat. 584	2
August 3, 1949	63 Stat. 493	4 (1 post temporary)
February 10, 1954	68 Stat. 8	4
May 19, 1961	75 Stat. 80	5
March 18, 1966	80 Stat. 75	7
June 2, 1970	84 Stat. 294	8
October 20, 1978	92 Stat. 1629	13
December 1, 1990	104 Stat. 5089	18
December 21, 2000	114 Stat. 2762	19

Noteworthy cases

For a searchable list of opinions, click here.

• Emergency motion denied for recalled General Motors cars (2014)      Judge(s):Nelva Gonzales Ramos (Silvas, et al v. General Motors, LLC, 2:14-cv-00089)	Click for summary→
On April 17, 2014, Judge Nelva Gonzales Ramos denied an emergency motion for injunctive relief filed by Charles and Grace Silvas -- referred to as the "Park It Now" motion -- that sought the court to order General Motors (GM) to tell customers to stop driving its recalled vehicles until repairs could be made. Many lawsuits were filed about GM's faulty ignition switch technology, including the one by the Silvases in Texas. About 26 million people owned GM cars with defective ignition switches that could affect power steering and braking capabilities, as well as the deployment of airbags. The problem was linked to at least thirty accidents and ten deaths. The Silvases originally filed suit to reclaim the lost value of their recalled car, a 2006 Chevrolet Cobalt, but their lawyers filed a motion in March 2014 in an attempt to force the automaker, through a court order, to advise all customers to stop driving their cars in the interest of safety. Judge Ramos denied the motion, noting that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration had jurisdiction over the remedy being sought, writing: "The court is of the opinion that N.H.T.S.A. is far better equipped than this court to address the broad and complex issues of automotive safety and the regulation of automotive companies in connection with a nationwide recall."

• Third-party complaint about alleged funding of terrorism dismissed (2014)      Judge(s):Gray Miller (Odelia Abecassis, et al v. Wyatt, Jr., et al, 4:09-cv-03884)	Click for summary→
On February 12, 2014, Judge Gray Miller granted thirty-three separate motions to dismiss filed by third-party defendants, ruling that they were not entitled to relief pursuant to the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA), the law under which they filed suit. In the underlying case, oilmen Oscar Wyatt, Jr. and David Chalmers were sued as defendants for making unlawful payments for oil under the United Nations Oil for Food Program and faced claims of funding terrorism. Wyatt and Chalmers filed suit as third-party plaintiffs against sixty-two companies and individuals on October 30, 2012, alleging that they too made illegal kickback payments to purchase oil from Saddam Hussein's government in Iran. Specifically, Wyatt and Chalmers, acting as third-party plaintiffs, asserted that those payments were used to carry out three separate terrorist attacks in Israel in 2001 and 2002. The third-party complaint alleged a single claim under the ATA, asserting that if they were to be held liable for kickback payments, then the other companies named in the third-party complaint should be held liable as well. As Judge Miller noted in his opinion, the ATA does not permit defendants to demand that third parties assist in payment for damages. Miller wrote that "[t]here is no dispute that the ATA does not contain an express right of action for contribution," further noting that Wyatt and Chalmers did not "state a legally cognizable claim" in their complaint. He dismissed the third-party complaint with prejudice, denying the oilmen the opportunity to amend their complaint, as doing so would be "futile."

• Partial summary judgment in Bumbo products liability case (2013)      Judge(s):Gregg Costa (Blythe, et al v. Bumbo International Trust f/k/a Jonibach Management Trust, et al, 6:12-cv-00036)	Click for summary→
On November 26, 2013, Judge Gregg Costa granted partial summary judgment to Bumbo International in a products liability case where parents of an infant alleged that their baby fractured her skull after falling from an elevated surface while seated in a Bumbo Baby Seat. The Baby Seat had a warning that clearly stated it should "never [be used] on any elevated surface." The parents admitted they did not read any of the warnings present, but if they had, they would have obeyed them. The Blythes still believed Bumbo International failed to provide adequate warnings about the Baby Seat's potential dangers, and sued under a marketing defect claim. In his decision, Judge Costa rejected that theory of the case, ruling that "there [was] no basis for a reasonable jury to decide that this unambiguous and conspicuous warning was insufficient." A jury later returned a verdict in the companies' favor on the remaining causes of action.

• Suit against BP by investors following Gulf of Mexico spill (2012)      Judge(s):Keith Ellison (In re BP p.l.c. Securities Litigation, Civil Action No. 4:10-md-2185)	Click for summary→
On February 13, 2012, Judge Keith P. Ellison of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas ruled that BP PLC should face claims of fraud by investors who claim the company lied about its capabilities to respond to accidents before and after the 2010 major spill in the Gulf of Mexico. In his ruling, Judge Ellison rejected investor claims that BP lied about its commitment to safety, but found the company possibly exaggerated its ability to respond to a large-scale spill. His ruling allowed for the suit to move forward for holders of BP American depository receipts, but denied ordinary stockholders due to a lack of jurisdiction in his court. This suit was brought by five Ohio pension plans and one New York State pension plan. According to the investors who brought suit, BP hid the actual size of the accident to limit the damage to its stock price. They further claimed that "BP publicly declared to a commitment to safety while cutting budgets and personnel, and rejecting internal complaints."

• McNamee motion to dismiss Clemens' defamation claims (2009)      Judge(s):Keith Ellison (Clemens v. McNamee, Civil Action No. 4:08-cv-00471)	Click for summary→
Judge Ellison granted in part and denied in part Brian McNamee's motion to dismiss third-party publication defamation claims that were filed by Roger Clemens, providing Clemens leave to amend the complaint as to the denied claims alleging publication to Pettitte. On June 30, 2009, Judge Ellison rejected a claim filed by seven-time Cy Young Award winner Roger Clemens against Brian McNamee, thus allowing McNamee, a former trainer, to file his own lawsuit against Clemens. Judge Ellison's June 30 ruling also reaffirmed an earlier ruling against Clemens. Ellison said that if Clemens "believes that the federal investigators or the Mitchell Commission overstepped the bounds of the law, he is free to bring suit against those enemies, subject to possible immunity." The case involved claims by former trainer McNamee that he injected Clemens with steroids and human growth hormone from 1998 to 2001. Clemens denied using performance-enhancing drugs.

Federal courthouse

Seven separate courthouses serve the Southern District of Texas.

About United States District Courts

The United States district courts are the general trial courts of the United States federal courts. There are 94 such courts. Both civil and criminal cases are filed in the district court, which is a court of both law and equity.

There is a United States bankruptcy court and a number of bankruptcy judges associated with each United States district court. Each federal judicial district has at least one courthouse, and most districts have more than one.

There is at least one judicial district for each state, and one each for Puerto Rico and the District of Columbia. District courts in three insular areas—the United States Virgin Islands, Guam, and the Northern Mariana Islands—exercise the same jurisdiction as U.S. district courts. Despite their name, these courts are technically not District Courts of the United States. Judges on these territorial courts do not enjoy the protections of Article III of the Constitution, and serve terms of 10 years rather than for life.

There are 677 U.S. District Court judgeships.

The number of federal district judge positions is set by the U.S. Congress in Title 28 of the U.S. Code, Section 133, which authorizes a set number of judge positions, or judgeships, making changes and adjustments in these numbers from time to time.

In order to relieve the pressure of trying the hundreds of thousands of cases brought before the federal district courts each year, many trials are tried by juries, along with a presiding judge.

Appointments by president

The chart below shows the number of district court judges confirmed by the U.S. Senate through March 1 of the first year of each president's term in office. At this point in the term, no president had made Article III judicial appointments.