Say you have had a hearing and it was thrown out for lack of evidence. Now you're having a second hearing with a new judge. Does he have to read all the new evidence, or can he throw it out, too?
Without more detail, it's hard to know what you mean. Under reasonable circumstances judges do want to understand new evidence at hearings. However they have wide latitude.
A judge doesn't, technically, have to read everything you submit. For example, in Chevron Corp. v. The Weinberg Group (D.D.C. 2012) Judge Facciola stated, "Here, I would have to review 9,171 pages of documents. That seems inconceivable given my advanced years" (the background was a requested privilege review).