Sonja F. Bivins
How Judge Bivins rules, drawn from 11 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Bivins
Sonja F. Bivins joined the United States Magistrate Judge bench for the Southern District of Alabama in 2004. A Mobile native, she earned degrees from Spring Hill College and the University of Alabama School of Law. Before her appointment, she clerked for District Judge Virgil Pittman and practiced employment law.
Judge Bivins's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Bivins, as published on the court's website (checked October 9, 2026). Judges revise these often, so confirm the current version on the court's site before you file.
Key rules
Trial
Confer with opposing counsel and file a single proposed pretrial order at least five days before the pretrial conference.
“Counsel shall confer and shall prepare a single proposed Pretrial Order in the form attached, which must be filed with the Clerk of Court at least five (5) days before the pretrial conference.”
Standing orders for every case in this court
Orders the court applies to all of its cases, whichever judge has them, as published on the court's website (checked October 9, 2026).
How Judge Bivins decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
On an ERISA complete-preemption question, the judge focused less on a defendant's formal fiduciary status under a plan and more on whether the specific alleged misconduct occurred while that defendant was functioning in a fiduciary capacity.
“The case law makes clear however that this is a functional rather than a categorical definition. In other words, a person may be a fiduciary in relation to certain claims but not to other claims.”
Procedural preferences
When a self-represented complaint is an impermissible shotgun pleading, strikes it and provides a detailed repleader checklist and deadline before recommending dismissal with prejudice.
“When presented with a deficient shotgun pleading such as Muhammad’s complaint in this case, a district court should take the initiative to dismiss or strike the pleading and give the plaintiff an opportunity to replead his case.”
In a pro se prisoner suit seeking relief a federal court cannot grant (ordering an officer's termination), the judge addressed the limits of available remedies directly rather than treating the request as part of the merits analysis.
“the federal court had no authority to discharge prison officials from their positions, as the decision whether to fire them was for their supervisors, not the court. ... Douglas' request for the firing of Deputy Faldoski seeks relief that is unavailable in this Court.”
When considering a late jury-trial request in Harris, she weighed whether the case was fact intensive, whether a jury would disrupt the schedule, and whether the opposing side would be prejudiced.
“Neither Defendants’ nor the Court’s schedule will be disrupted by a jury trial, and Defendants will suffer no prejudice if this case is set for a jury trial.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Based upon the foregoing reasons, it is recommended that Defendants’ motion for summary judgment be GRANTED as to all claims alleged in this action, and that this action be DISMISSED with prejudice.”
“Based on the foregoing, the undersigned RECOMMENDS that the motion for summary judgment be GRANTED, that summary judgment be entered in favor of Deputy Faldoski, that Douglas’ claims against Deputy Faldoski be DISMISSED with prejudice, and that this action be DISMISSED in its entirety.”
“Construing the removal statue strictly and resolving all doubts in favor of remand, in accordance with University of South Alabama, 168 F.3d at 411, the court finds that Defendants have failed to establish the propriety of removal under 28 U.S.C. Section 1441, and have failed to establish the existence of federal jurisdiction. Accordingly, the undersigned RECOMMENDS that the Motion to Remand this case to the Circuit Court of Mobile County, Alabama is due to be GRANTED.”
“the undersigned RECOMMENDS that Defendant's unopposed Motion to Remand be GRANTED, and that this Court enter judgment reversing and remanding this cause to the Commissioner for action consistent with the Defendant's motion.”
“Upon consideration of the administrative record, oral arguments, and memoranda of the parties, it is ordered that the decision of the Commissioner be REVERSED and REMANDED.”
“Upon careful consideration of the administrative record, the oral arguments, and the memoranda of the parties, the decision of the Commissioner is hereby REVERSED and REMANDED.”
“Upon careful consideration of the administrative record and the memoranda of the parties, it is hereby ORDERED that the decision of the Commissioner be REVERSED and REMANDED.”
“Upon careful consideration of the administrative record and the memoranda of the parties, it is hereby ORDERED that the decision of the Commissioner be REVERSED and REMANDED.”
“Muhammad’s motion to proceed without prepayment of fees (Doc. 2) is GRANTED.”
“Plaintiff’s motions are GRANTED to the extent they request that the Court order a jury trial pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 39(b).”
“Movants’ motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s second amended complaint (Doc. 24) be GRANTED in part and DENIED in part, as follows:”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Consent-jurisdiction caseload sampled here is entirely Social Security disability appeals, spanning cohorts from 2006 through 2022. Each sampled case produced a grounded final order (affirmed or reversed/remanded) after the parties consented to her jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. Section 636(c).
Pending matters in the official report
Reported by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts under the Civil Justice Reform Act, as of March 31, 2026.
| Motions pending more than six months | 0 |
| Bench trials submitted more than six months | 0 |
| Bankruptcy appeals pending more than six months | 0 |
| Social Security appeals pending more than six months | 0 |
| Civil cases pending more than three years | 0 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2025 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2025 | 0 | 1 |
| Sep 2024 | 0 | 1 |
| Mar 2024 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2023 | 0 | 2 |
| Mar 2023 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2022 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2022 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2021 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2021 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2020 | 1 | 0 |
A snapshot on that date: matters listed may since have been decided or reassigned. A motion referred to a magistrate judge is counted for both judges. Motions in multidistrict litigation, section 2255 cases and Social Security appeals are not counted, and a very large three-year count is generally a multidistrict docket. Source: Appendix A of the report (PDF); about the report.
How long civil cases take in this court
For the whole of U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Alabama, not for Judge Bivins: median time from filing to disposition of the civil cases the court closed in the 12 months ending September 30, 2025, as reported by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts.
| Cases | Median time | |
|---|---|---|
| All civil cases closed | 352 | 10.4 months |
| Closed with no court action | 98 | 6.7 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 238 | 10.4 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 8 | not reported |
| Closed during trial | 8 | not reported |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 352 | 10.4 months |
| Sep 2024 | 424 | 9.1 months |
| Sep 2023 | 389 | 10 months |
| Sep 2022 | 457 | 11.3 months |
| Sep 2021 | 457 | 10.1 months |
| Sep 2020 | 998 | 4.5 months |
| Sep 2019 | 407 | 9.4 months |
The table leaves out prisoner petitions, land condemnations, deportation reviews, recovery of overpayments and enforcement of judgments, and reports no median for fewer than 10 cases. A district that closed a large multidistrict litigation in the period shows very large counts and long medians for that year. Source: Table C-5, U.S. District Courts (spreadsheet).
Draft for Judge Bivins with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Bivins, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Bivins's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace