William v. Gallo
, District Court, S.D. California 2009–
On the assumption that the model is right — qwen3.8-27b's verdicts on a court's own orders matched a later appeal 76% of the time (104 of 136), graded on a curve: A is the top fifth of the judges graded under this model, F the bottom fifth; ++ / + / − / −− within the band. How the grade is made.
Outcomes on appeal
The Ninth Circuit's later rulings on their dockets
affirmed 4 vacated 1 reversed in part 1
Each Ninth Circuit opinion that names a docket this judge wrote an order on, by its outcome; the ruling it reviewed is not always the order in the record. The order's page links the opinion.
Areas
By year: 2021 1 ·
Analysis
No analyses yet. When they exist, this shows counts of the model's findings across this judge's reviewed cases — with the court's own dispositions beside them, and only from 10 cases.
Cases authored (every role)
- (HC) Rodriguez v. Fisher
- McNamara v. Wells Fargo & Company
- Cadles of West Virginia, LLC v. Alvarez
- Simmons v. Modly
- Arguedas v. Carson
- Grizzle v. San Diego, County of
- Barbee v. Kijakazi
- Pouliot v. Mechling
- Romero v. United States Department of Justice
- Pouliot v. Mechling
- Fleischman v. Kijakazi
- Keller v. Kijakazi
- Martinez v. Costco Wholesale Corporation
- Martinez v. Costco Wholesale Corporation
- Romero v. United States Department of Justice
- Yassein v. Henderson
- Ireland v. Solaris Enterprise, LLC
- Nguyen v. Saul
- Wietfelt v. Comdata
- Numan v. Saul
- Ingrande v. Autozoners, LLC
- Lien v. City of San Diego
- Mansour v. Saul
- Taffe v. Kijakazi
- Thorsnes Bartolotta McGuire LLP v. Jory