Judge Patrick S. Thompson

Judge Patrick S. Thompson is a relatively newly appointed jurist on the San Francisco Superior Court, having been appointed by Governor Gavin Newsom in March 2022 to fill the vacancy created by the retirement of Judge Newton J. Lam. His judicial philosophy and courtroom patterns are still developing in the public record, but his extensive pre-bench career provides meaningful insight into the intellectual framework he likely brings to the bench. Thompson spent approximately 30 years as a practicing attorney at three of the most prestigious large law firms in the country — Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman, Goodwin Procter, and Perkins Coie — all of which are known for sophisticated commercial litigation, technology, and corporate transactional work. His Harvard Law School pedigree and BigLaw career trajectory strongly suggest a judge who is analytically rigorous, comfortable with complex legal and factual records, and accustomed to high-stakes, document-intensive disputes. Because Thompson spent his entire career in elite commercial practice environments, attorneys should expect a judge who values precision in legal argument, thorough briefing, and well-organized evidentiary presentations. His background at firms with significant technology and intellectual property practices — particularly Perkins Coie and Goodwin Procter — suggests familiarity with business disputes, contract interpretation, and potentially IP-adjacent matters. His registration without party preference is consistent with his appointment by a Democratic governor but signals an effort to present as a neutral arbiter, which may translate to a bench demeanor that is methodical and focused on the law rather than outcome-oriented. No ruling analyses or attorney observations are currently available in the data record, which means all assessments here are necessarily inferential and based on career background rather than observed judicial behavior. Attorneys should treat this profile as a baseline framework to be updated as courtroom experience accumulates.

Given Thompson's three-decade career in BigLaw commercial litigation and transactional work, attorneys appearing before him should prioritize the quality and precision of their written submissions above all else. Judges who come from elite firm backgrounds are typically accustomed to reading sophisticated, well-structured briefs and may have lower tolerance for sloppy legal writing, unsupported factual assertions, or arguments that conflate legal standards. Invest heavily in your briefs — ensure that every factual claim is pinned to a record citation and every legal proposition is supported by controlling California authority before reaching persuasive authority. In oral argument, expect a judge who may be an active questioner with a transactional or analytical mindset. Thompson's background suggests he will want to understand the practical stakes and business logic of a dispute, not just the doctrinal framework. Frame your arguments in terms of what outcome makes legal and commercial sense, and be prepared to engage with hypotheticals or edge-case questions. Avoid over-relying on equitable appeals without grounding them in the applicable legal standard — a BigLaw litigator turned judge will likely want to see the doctrinal hook before entertaining policy arguments. Because Thompson is a relatively new judge (appointed 2022), attorneys should also be attentive to the possibility that he is still calibrating his courtroom management style. Be flexible, patient with procedural adjustments, and avoid any behavior that could be perceived as attempting to exploit inexperience on the bench. Demonstrating professionalism and good faith will likely be rewarded.

• critical

  Prepare Exceptionally Polished Written Submissions

  Given Thompson's BigLaw background, your briefs must meet the standard of large-firm commercial litigation work. Every factual assertion needs a record citation, every legal argument needs controlling authority, and the overall structure should be clear and logical. Sloppy writing will likely undermine credibility.

• critical

  Research His Prior Firm Practice Areas

  Review the types of matters Perkins Coie, Goodwin Procter, and Pillsbury Winthrop handled during Thompson's tenure to identify subject matter areas where he likely has deep familiarity. Tailor your argument complexity accordingly — do not over-explain concepts he likely knows well, but do not assume expertise in areas outside his practice history.

• critical

  Review San Francisco Superior Court Local Rules Carefully

  Thompson transitioned from federal-oriented BigLaw practice to state superior court. Ensure strict compliance with all applicable local rules, standing orders, and department-specific procedures. A new judge may be particularly attentive to procedural compliance as he establishes his courtroom culture.

• important

  Prepare for Active Oral Argument Questioning

  Experienced commercial litigators who become judges often engage actively from the bench. Prepare to defend every position in your brief, anticipate the strongest counterarguments, and have concise, direct answers ready. Do not plan to simply read from prepared remarks.

• important

  Monitor His Emerging Ruling Record Continuously

  As Thompson accumulates rulings, monitor Trellis, CourtListener, and the San Francisco Superior Court docket for any published or accessible decisions. Early rulings will be disproportionately informative about his judicial philosophy and should be incorporated into strategy as they become available.

• important

  Identify Any Recusal Considerations from Prior Firm Work

  Thompson was a partner at Perkins Coie until his 2022 appointment. Assess whether any parties, counsel, or matters in your case have connections to Perkins Coie, Goodwin Procter, or Pillsbury Winthrop that could trigger recusal obligations or at minimum require disclosure.

• ›Treat the courtroom with the formality expected in a sophisticated commercial litigation environment — Thompson spent his career in high-stakes, professionally demanding settings and will likely expect corresponding decorum from counsel.
• ›Be thoroughly prepared on both the facts and the law before any hearing; a judge with Thompson's analytical background will likely probe beyond surface-level argument and expect counsel to have command of the record.
• ›Avoid condescension or over-explanation of legal concepts that fall within Thompson's known practice areas — commercial contracts, corporate disputes, and technology-related matters — as this may signal poor preparation or disrespect.
• ›Arrive early and comply strictly with all scheduling orders and time limits; new judges often use procedural compliance as an early signal of counsel's professionalism and reliability.
• ›Maintain collegial but professional interactions with opposing counsel in the courtroom — Thompson's BigLaw background means he has worked in environments with high professional standards for adversarial conduct.