Otis D. Wright II

Judicial service On October 28, 2005, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger announced that he would be appointing Wright to serve as a judge on the Los Angeles County Superior Court. Wright replaced Judge Lorna Parnell. He was confirmed by the United States Senate on March 15, 2007, and received his commission on April 16, 2007.

Notable cases

Ruled against plaintiff's standing to sue because he had not alleged a sufficiently individualized injury. Wright was reversed by the unanimous United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which was itself then found to be in error by the U.S. Supreme Court. On remand, the Ninth Circuit again found the plaintiff had standing to sue. Ruling against a "notorious" U.S. law firm and principals, which was viewed by onlookers and the court as engaging in copyright trolling and alleged legal extortion practices, often via shell companies. The case resulted in sanctions and law firm dissolution. Wright's opinion included a number of Star Trek catchphrases. Ruling against legitimacy of a Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives ("ATF") fictional stash-house robbery sting operation; such operations had drawn significant media and judicial concerns previously for a perceived inherent lack of fairness. Imposed sanctions in the amount of after plaintiff's attorney Christopher Hook sent widely publicized emails containing profanities and threats to counsel for Allstate. SpaceX v. U.S. Air Force 2020 SpaceX was not entitled to relief after the Air Force awarded contracts to United Launch Alliance (ULA), Blue Origin, and Northrop Grumman to help those companies with costs of developing new rockets and infrastructure. TikTok v. Trump 2020 Lawsuit challenging an executive order banning TikTok; the case impacted the nearly 80 million TikTok users in the United States and drew significant attention from the press. The case was voluntarily dismissed in the Central District of California in September 2020 and filed instead in the District of Columbia. Doe v. Grindr 2023 A lawsuit against dating application Grindr, it involves a minor user who experiences harm on the platform through interactions. The case was then dismissed in the Central District of California in 2023, where the court determined that the claims are not actionable under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.