Timothy J. Kelly
How Judge Kelly decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
He holds agencies to procedural rules and treats missed administrative deadlines as fatal where the rules so provide: he upheld a Provider Reimbursement Review Board dismissal for late position papers, finding the representative's illness/death was not 'good cause' under the Board's own rules.
“The parties now cross-move for summary judgment. For the reasons below, the Court will grant Defendant’s motion and deny Plaintiff’s.”
He distinguishes statutory rights from contractual ones in arbitration: a collective-bargaining grievance clause must 'clearly and unmistakably' require arbitration of statutory (Title VII) claims before he will compel it -- a general grievance process is not enough.
“because that agreement does not clearly and unmistakably require employees to submit Title VII claims to the grievance process, the Court will deny Excalibur’s motion to compel arbitration.”
On a Rule 12(c) motion he will rely on video (body-worn-camera) footage incorporated by reference in the complaint, deciding consent and qualified immunity at the pleadings stage without converting to summary judgment.
“because the footage is “incorporated by reference in[] the complaint itself,” the Court may do so “without converting the motion for judgment on the pleadings to one for summary judgment.””
Procedural preferences
He enforces litigants' housekeeping duties strictly, including for pro se parties: failure to keep a current address of record and to respond to a dispositive motion can lead to sua sponte dismissal for want of prosecution under the court's inherent power.
““District courts have inherent power to dismiss a case sua sponte for a plaintiff’s failure to prosecute or otherwise comply with a court order.” ... Accordingly, the Court will, in a separate order, dismiss this case without prejudice for want of prosecution.”
He declines to rule on a summary-judgment motion filed prematurely (e.g. simultaneously with an opposition to a motion to dismiss), denying it without prejudice rather than reaching the merits before the issues are properly joined.
“it will also deny without prejudice Browder’s motion for summary judgment, which he filed simultaneously with his opposition to the Secretary’s motion.”
Cautions
A government mootness argument is not a sure thing before him: where a plaintiff seeks relief beyond what the agency has already granted, he will find the case live and deny the motion to dismiss even after intervening agency action (a backdated promotion).
“The Court agrees with Browder on both fronts, so it will deny the Secretary’s motion to dismiss.”
In employment-discrimination cases he applies the McDonnell Douglas / pretext framework rigorously and will grant the employer summary judgment where the plaintiff offers no evidence the documented nonretaliatory reason was pretextual.
“On the record here, no reasonable jury could find that Beaulieu was the victim of retaliation. She has pointed to no evidence that Defendant’s reason for firing her was pretextual, or that her termination was otherwise retaliatory.”
Motion outcomes
Counted from classified signed orders only. Percentages are shown only where the sample is large enough to be meaningful; smaller samples are reported as raw counts.
| Summary judgment N = 9 |
Granted: 5Denied: 3Moot / procedural: 1 | counts only |
| Motions to dismiss N = 2 |
Granted: 1Denied: 1 | counts only |
| Judgment on the pleadings N = 1 |
Granted: 1 | counts only |
| Motion to compel arbitration N = 1 |
Denied: 1 | counts only |
| Motion for attorney fees N = 1 |
Denied: 1 | counts only |
A "1 of 1" is one ruling, not a tendency. Treat small samples as illustrative, not predictive.
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“The parties now cross-move for summary judgment. For the reasons below, the Court will grant Defendant’s motion and deny Plaintiff’s.”
“the Court will grant Defendant’s motion and deny Plaintiff’s.”
“And because that agreement does not clearly and unmistakably require employees to submit Title VII claims to the grievance process, the Court will deny Excalibur’s motion to compel arbitration.”
“Reviewing that Report and Recommendation de novo, the Court rejects it and concludes that Defendants’ position on whether the foreign affairs function exception to the notice-and-comment requirement applied, though incorrect, was substantially justified. Thus, Plaintiffs are not entitled to recover attorney’s fees.”
“Because the Court agrees that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and Helix Electric is entitled to judgment as a matter of law, it will grant Helix Electric’s motion.”
“Ultimately, the Court agrees with Defendants that her remaining claims must be dismissed. ... So the Court will grant Defendants’ motion and dismiss the case.”
“For the reasons below, the Court will grant the motion and enter judgment for Defendants.”
“The R&R recommends that the Court grant Defendant’s motion for summary judgment and deny Plaintiffs’ motion. ... the Court will adopt the R&R and, as it proposes, enter judgment for Defendant.”
“the Court will adopt the R&R and, as it proposes, enter judgment for Defendant.”
“Because the undisputed facts show that Barnes’s lawsuit is untimely, the Court will grant the motion.”
“The Court agrees with Browder on both fronts, so it will deny the Secretary’s motion to dismiss.”
“But it will also deny without prejudice Browder’s motion for summary judgment, which he filed simultaneously with his opposition to the Secretary’s motion.”
“The parties have cross-moved for summary judgment on this remaining count. ... the Court will grant Defendant’s motion and deny Beaulieu’s.”
“the Court will grant Defendant’s motion and deny Beaulieu’s.”
Pro se civil-forfeiture-practices suit. A defendant's MTD/alternative MSJ was pending, but the Court did NOT reach it: the plaintiff's mail was repeatedly returned undeliverable and she failed to keep her address updated or respond, so the Court dismissed sua sponte for want of prosecution under its inherent power. Recorded as a sua sponte non-motion disposition -- counts as an order read, excluded from motion stats. Grounding quote: 'the Court will, in a separate order, dismiss this case without prejudice for want of prosecution.' Signed /s/ Timothy J. Kelly; docket (TJK). Read via get_case(include_text).
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Sampled recent assignments (20 dockets, mostly filed 2026) are agency- and commercial-litigation heavy: FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (895 -- Catholic University Immigration Law Initiative v. DHS, Project on Government Oversight v. OMB, Bader Family Foundation v. Commerce, Leopold v. SSA), ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE ACT / 'Other Statutory' agency review (899/890 -- State of New York v. Interior, Smith v. USAID, Nour v. Zillow, Smith v. Puig), Medicare-recovery contract (151 -- Crestwood Medical Center v. Kennedy), immigration (465 -- Abdi v. Rubio, Saldanha v. Edlow), plus a notable commercial slice: antitrust (United States v. Columbus McKinnon Corp.), ERISA (IAM National Pension Fund v. Loomis), consumer credit (Muhammad v. Experian), qui tam (Van Bemmelen), and contract/tort (Diamond Transportation v. WMATA, Ferguson v. Fenix International, State Farm v. United States). This is a qualitative character sample, NOT a counted nature-of-suit distribution; the FOIA/APA-heavy mix with a commercial-litigation tail is consistent with the agency- and employment-weighted reasoning-layer sample.