Sherry R. Fallon
How Judge Fallon rules, drawn from 19 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Fallon
Sherry R. Fallon has served as a full-time United States magistrate judge for the District of Delaware since April 25, 2012. She presides over civil cases with the parties’ consent and decides referred pretrial matters.
Judge Fallon's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Fallon, 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.
- Discovery Matters – Procedures – Revised 7/24/2023 ↗
- Rule 16 Scheduling Order – Patent – Revised 02/15/23 ↗
- Order Governing Mediation Conferences - Statements ↗
- Standing Order for ADR Mediation - Revised 1/22/16 ↗
- Discovery Matters - Motion to Resolve Discovery Dispute - Revised 10/10/19 ↗
- Form Letter Regarding Mediation Referral Request ↗
- Order Governing Patent Mediation Conferences - Statements ↗
- Proposed Final Pretrial Order - Revised 10/13 ↗
- Standing Order in Non-Pro Se Matters for Objections filed under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72 ↗
- Standing Order in Pro Se Matters for Objections filed under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72 ↗
- Rule 16 Scheduling Order – Asbestos – Revised 11/07/22 ↗
- Rule 16 Scheduling Order – Non-Patent – Revised 02/15/23 ↗
Key rules
Filing
Hand deliver courtesy copies of discovery dispute letter submissions within one hour after e-filing.
“Courtesy copies of discovery dispute letter submissions are to be hand delivered to the Clerk’s Office within one hour of e-filing.”
Discovery
For unresolved discovery or protective-order disputes, file a motion for conference using the court’s model.
“Should counsel find they are unable to resolve a discovery matter or a matter regarding a protective order, 1 the parties shall file a ‘[Joint] Motion for Conference To Resolve [Protective Order or Discovery] Dispute.’”
Discovery
Limit discovery dispute letter submissions to four pages in at least 12-point type.
“Discovery dispute letter submissions shall not exceed four (4) pages, and all printed matter, including footnotes, must appear in at least 12-point font.”
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).
- In Re: Amendment to Procedures For Requesting, Filing, and Management of Highly Sensitive Documents ↗
- Standing Order Rescinding Mediation of Appeals from Bankruptcy Court ↗
- Standing Order No. 2022-2 Regarding Referrals to Magistrate Judges for Alternative Dispute Resolution ↗
- Originally posted 8-16-2022: Standing Order Regarding Revision to Electronic Case Filing Policies and Procedures ↗
- Standing Order for Objections Filed Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 72 ↗
How Judge Fallon decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
She concluded that alleging a patent was essential to an industry standard, without connecting the defendant’s specific products to the asserted claims, did not adequately plead pre-suit knowledge of induced infringement.
“an industry standard does not provide the level of specificity required to establish that practicing that standard would always result in infringement.”
Contributory patent infringement requires identifying a component with no substantial non-infringing use. Pointing at an accused platform 'as a whole' without isolating a separate-and-distinct feature that has no substantial non-infringing use is fatal at the pleading stage.
“The amended complaint and affiliated infringement charts refer to the Gusto platform as a whole without identifying how any component part of the Gusto platform has 'no substantial non-infringing uses.'”
Procedural preferences
She applied Rule 12(g)(2) to bar defenses that were available but omitted from an earlier Rule 12 motion, holding that an amended complaint did not revive those arguments.
“Plaintiff's subsequent filing of the FAC and the SAC does not grant Defendants a fresh opportunity to revive arguments that were previously available to them, but that Defendants failed to press.”
She treated a pending pleadings-stage motion as moot once leave to file a superseding complaint was granted, resolving the motion procedurally without reaching its merits.
“the court recommends denying Defendants' partial motion for judgment on the pleadings as moot . . . in light of the court's granting the plaintiffs' subsequently filed motion for leave to file a second amended complaint.”
Cautions
Fallon's reports and recommendations on referred matters remain advisory and are subject to district-court review. Her orders are final when all parties consent to magistrate-judge jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 636(c), including in consent Social Security appeals.
“This Report and Recommendation is filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(B), Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(1), and D. Del. LR 72.1.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“For the foregoing reasons, the court recommends granting the Gusto's motion to dismiss without prejudice.”
“the court recommends denying defendant's motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim and granting defendant's motion to stay.”
“For the foregoing reasons, I recommend that the court DENY Defendants' partial motion for judgment on the pleadings without prejudice.”
“Therefore, the court recommends granting with prejudice the United States' motion to dismiss plaintiff's negligence and/or gross-negligence claims for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.”
“Therefore, the United States' motion to substitute party is granted.”
“Therefore, the court recommends granting plaintiff's motion to remand only his supplemental state law claims against GoDaddy, PayPal, and Shijil to the Delaware Superior Court.”
“I recommend that the court GRANT-IN-PART and DENY-IN-PART Vudu's motion to dismiss (D.I. 53) without prejudice as follows: a. GRANT Vudu's motion with respect to the FAC's induced infringement claims in Count VI; b. GRANT Vudu's motion with respect to the FAC's pre-suit induced infringement claims in Counts I-V and VII-XI; and c. DENY Vudu's motion with respect to the post-suit inducement claims in Counts I-V and VII-XI.”
“For the foregoing reasons, (1) Walker's Motion for Summary Judgment (D.I. 13) is denied; and (2) the Commissioner's Cross Motion for Summary Judgment (D.I. 19) is granted.”
“IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiffs' motion to compel (D.I.183) is GRANTED-IN-PART and DENIED-IN-PART. Specifically, defendant is ordered to produce a redacted version of the PowerPoint presentation referenced at Item Number 29 in the privilege log. (D.I. 183, Ex. E at 7) Plaintiffs' motion is denied in all other respects.”
“For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiffs moti'on to establish applicable substantive law is denied, and Defendants' motion to establish applicable substantive law is granted.”
“ISM's motion for summary judgment is GRANTED-IN-PART. Specifically: 1. ISM's motion for summary judgment is GRANTED with respect to Rumanek's ADA/DPDEP retaliation claim; 2. ISM's motion for summary judgment is GRANTED with respect to Rumanek's FMLA retaliation claim; and 3. ISM's motion for summary judgment is DENIED with respect to Rumanek's Title VII/DDEA retaliation claim based on Rumanek's August 23, 2010 email threatening to file an EEOC complaint.”
“(1) Crawford's motion to strike (D.I. 167) is DENIED; and”
“(2) G & L's motion to strike and for sanctions (D.I.185) is GRANTED-IN-PART and DENIED-IN-PART.”
“(1) the Clerk of Court shall enter judgment in favor of Plaintiff and against TIAA-CREF on his claim for breach of contract for the amount due to him under the contract, plus prejudgment and postjudgment interest; and (2) the Clerk of Court shall enter judgment in favor of Pedrick and Roten on Plaintiffs claim for unjust enrichment;”
“For the foregoing reasons, I recommend that the court deny Defendants' motion to dismiss the original complaint as moot (D.I. 30), and grant Defendants' motion to dismiss MONEC's claims in the first amended complaint for induced, contributory, and willful infringement of the reexamined '678 patent, without prejudice (D.I. 41).”
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 | 7 |
| Bench trials submitted more than six months | 0 |
| Bankruptcy appeals pending more than six months | 0 |
| Social Security appeals pending more than six months | 2 |
| Civil cases pending more than three years | 11 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 7 | 11 |
| Sep 2025 | 7 | 9 |
| Mar 2025 | 11 | 2 |
| Sep 2024 | 8 | 2 |
| Mar 2024 | 7 | 0 |
| Sep 2023 | 1 | 0 |
| 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 District of Delaware, not for Judge Fallon: 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 | 1,391 | 9.7 months |
| Closed with no court action | 244 | 3.4 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 1,042 | 10.5 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 68 | 21 months |
| Closed during trial | 37 | 42.3 months |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 1,391 | 9.7 months |
| Sep 2024 | 1,331 | 8.5 months |
| Sep 2023 | 1,357 | 8.2 months |
| Sep 2022 | 1,925 | 7.3 months |
| Sep 2021 | 1,823 | 7.1 months |
| Sep 2020 | 1,914 | 6.4 months |
| Sep 2019 | 2,001 | 5.4 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 Fallon with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Fallon, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Fallon's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace