Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong at a glance
- Current role
- Judge
- Court
- U.S. District Court for the Central District of California
- Jurisdiction
- California · Federal
- Judicial service
- February 7, 2022–present
Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong
Judge · U.S. District Court for the Central District of California
Available research
Loading public docket analytics…
Loading public docket analytics…
Biography
Professional career
- Professional Career: Vice president, general counsel, and corporate secretary, Millenium Challenge Corporation, Washington, D.C., 2015-2016
- Professional Career: Acting deputy assistant attorney general, consumer protection, 2011-2012
- Professional Career: Acting deputy assistant attorney general, torts, 2012
- Professional Career: Principal deputy associate attorney general, 2014
- Professional Career: Counsel to assistant attorney general, Civil Division, 2009-2011
- Professional Career: Deputy assistant attorney general, consumer protection, 2012-2014
- Professional Career: Trial attorney, National Courts Section, 2007-2009
- Professional Career: Private practice, San Francisco, California, 2002-2007
- Professional Career: Law clerk, Hon. Stephen Reinhardt, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 2001-2002
- Professional Career: Counselor to the attorney general, 2014-2015
Judicial service
- Judge, Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, 2016-present
- Professional Career: Judge, Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, 2016-2022; site judge, Metropolitan Courthouse, 2018-2020; assistant supervising judge, Criminal Division, infractions, 2018-2020; assistant supervising judge, Criminal Division, limited jurisdiction, 2020-2022
- Professional Career: U.S. Department of Justice, 2007-2015
Education
- Harvard University · B.A. Social Science, concentration: History & Science, 1997
- Yale Law School · J.D., 2001
- The Webb Schools
Personal record
Born 1976 · Los Angeles
Courtroom rules and guidance
Civil Remote Testimony
In federal district-court civil proceedings, testimony is ordinarily taken in open court; remote contemporaneous testimony requires good cause in compelling circumstances and appropriate safeguards.
For good cause in compelling circumstances and with appropriate safeguards, the court may permit testimony in open court by contemporaneous transmission from a different location.Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 43(a), Testimony in Open Court ↗
Criminal Recording And Broadcasting
Federal district courts may not permit courtroom photography or broadcasting during criminal judicial proceedings unless a statute or another federal rule provides an exception.
Except as otherwise provided by a statute or these rules, the court must not permit the taking of photographs in the courtroom during judicial proceedings or the broadcasting of judicial proceedings from the courtroom.Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 53, Courtroom Photographing and Broadcasting Prohibited ↗
Sources
Federal Judicial Center biography
Identity source · HTML · checked August 16, 2026
https://apps.cacd.uscourts.gov/Jps/CourtListener judicial biographical directory
Identity source · HTML · checked August 2, 2026
https://www.courtlistener.com/person/14083/maame-ewusi-mensah-frimpong/Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 43(a), Testimony in Open Court
Judge research source · HTML · checked July 26, 2026
https://www.uscourts.gov/forms-rules/current-rules-practice-procedure/federal-rules-civil-procedureFederal Rule of Criminal Procedure 53, Courtroom Photographing and Broadcasting Prohibited
Judge research source · HTML · checked July 26, 2026
https://www.uscourts.gov/court-records/access-court-proceedings/remote-public-access-proceedings/history-cameras-broadcasting-and-remote-public-access-courts