Eugene E. Siler Jr.
How Judge Siler decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
Reaches for a plain-English, everyday analogy rather than abstract doctrine to make a technical securities-law distinction concrete -- here, explaining why a statement of present fact is not shielded by the PSLRA's forward-looking-statement safe harbor merely because it concerns a future event.
“Take for instance a man's statement to his friend, "My girlfriend has agreed to marry me." That is not a forward-looking statement. Rather, it is a backward-looking statement concerning a future event.”
Procedural preferences
Rigorous, textualist two-step application of the Supreme Court's ACCA categorical/modified-categorical framework (Taylor, Descamps, Mathis, Sykes): first pin down the precise elements a defendant necessarily admitted, then compare only those elements to the federal definition, regardless of how sympathetic or unsympathetic the underlying conduct was. Applied consistently across a 2004-2019 span of ACCA sentencing appeals (Newton, Mitchell, Ball, Dawson, Eason).
“Congress did not attach a mens rea requirement to manufacturing. And it is clear that Congress could have done so, since it did for convictions involving possession of a controlled substance.”
Holds petitioners and plaintiffs strictly to procedural burdens and deadlines even where the underlying failure was arguably outside their control (a lost Express Mail delivery; postal delays generally) -- procedural default is not excused by hardship alone absent a showing of the specific 'extraordinary circumstances' or evidentiary rebuttal the rule requires.
“[N]either the Postal Service's provision of incorrect information nor its failure to deliver the notice on time constitutes an extraordinary circumstance that would justify intervention by this court into the Board's exercise of discretion.”
Cautions
Notwithstanding his Republican appointment, affirms denials of qualified immunity to police officers at the pleading and summary-judgment stages when the complaint or the record, viewed favorably to the plaintiff, plausibly shows a clearly-established Fourth Amendment violation -- not a reflexive pro-officer vote. Two independent 2015-2018 panels reach this result on different fact patterns (a no-knock nighttime raid at the wrong address; a fatal shooting during a suspect's flight).
“Because we find that the complaint states a plausible claim that the officers violated the plaintiffs' clearly established Fourth Amendment rights by executing a search warrant on their home in an unreasonable manner, we AFFIRM the district court's decision.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“We affirm the district court's determination that Michigan's crime of third-degree home invasion is categorically equivalent to generic burglary. ... AFFIRMED.”
“we REVERSE Harris's conviction on Count 5, obstruction of justice, and REMAND ... We VACATE the judgment of the district court denying Harris's request to ... hold a Remmer hearing and REMAND for a Remmer hearing. We AFFIRM Harris's convictions on Counts 1, 2, 3, and 4 ...”
“Because we lack jurisdiction, we DISMISS Reid's appeal. ... Appeal DISMISSED.”
“We hold today that our July 13, 2016 order instructing the district court to vacate its preliminary injunction in Miller did not render this damages-only action moot. Therefore, we REVERSE the district court's judgment and REMAND for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.”
“We agree with the district court that Dr. Dargie's repayment to UT in 2002 was a personal expense and, therefore, not deductible under I.R.C. 162. ... AFFIRMED.”
“In each case, the district court disagreed, finding the penalties to be nondischargeable. We affirm the decisions below because the penalties are nondischargeable under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2).”
“The district court granted summary judgment for both First Advantage and Elder Living, holding that the FCRA's two-year statute of limitations barred Rocheleau's lawsuit. We AFFIRM.”
“Because the MSPA does not provide Osborne a cause of action, the district court's decision is AFFIRMED.”
“Because we find that the complaint states a plausible claim that the officers violated the plaintiffs' clearly established Fourth Amendment rights by executing a search warrant on their home in an unreasonable manner, we AFFIRM the district court's decision.”
“Since these convictions are serious drug offenses under the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA), we REVERSE Eason's sentence and REMAND for resentencing.”
“Because Plaintiffs adequately alleged scienter, we REVERSE and REMAND.”
Put Judge Siler's record to work
Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Siler actually rules, not a generic AI guess.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Siler's own signed orders and cites them.