Nathan W. Hill

United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida magistrate 5 signed orders read

How Judge Hill decides

Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

Procedural preferences

Before any discovery motion, litigants must confer in good faith; a resulting dispute must come as a Short-Form Discovery Motion capped at 500 words (exclusive of caption, signature block, and certifications), with any response due within five days -- a non-response is deemed unopposed. This is his standard template order in referred civil cases, so counsel should expect it and plan discovery-dispute filings accordingly.

“a litigant may seek court intervention, but must do so by filing a Short-Form Discovery Motion in compliance with this Order. Neither the Motion nor any response thereto shall exceed 500 words ... a failure to file a timely response will result in the Motion being deemed unopposed.”

Motions to seal must certify compliance with Local Rule 3.01(g) (the conferral requirement) or he will deny them without prejudice on the papers, even where the underlying request is otherwise unopposed -- expect a quick refile-and-grant if counsel corrects the omission.

“ENDORSED ORDER denying without prejudice for failure to comply with Local Rule 3.01(g) 28 Motion to seal”

Cautions

He takes contested discovery motions as a batch after a hearing rather than ruling on them piecemeal as filed, and typically splits the result (granted in part / denied in part) rather than fully crediting one side -- a wholesale grant or denial of a compel or sanctions motion is the exception, not the rule, in his docket so far.

“granting in part and denying in part 67 Motion to Compel ... granting in part and denying in part 71 Motion for Sanctions ... granting in part and denying in part 75 Motion to Compel”

In forma pauperis motions from pro se litigants have been denied without prejudice twice in a row before being granted on a corrected third filing -- expect close scrutiny of the supporting affidavit rather than a rubber stamp.

“ORDER denying without prejudice 2 Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis. Plaintiff must either pay the filing fee or file an amended motion by July 22, 2025.”

Signed rulings

A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.

Bell v. Orange County, Florida
6:25-cv-00865 · 2025-12-19
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“ORDER granting 10 Motion to Dismiss; adopting 22 Report and Recommendations. The 1 Complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Plaintiff is GRANTED leave to file an amended complaint on or before January 28, 2026.”

Kellom v. Centurion of Florida L.L.C.
6:26-cv-00178 · 2026-01-29

Judge Hill's standard order at the start of referred civil cases rules on no pending motion but establishes his discovery-dispute procedure. Counsel must confer in good faith before seeking court intervention, and any remaining dispute must be raised in a short-form motion capped at 500 words, with a five-day response deadline; a non-response is deemed unopposed.

Scamnetic, Inc. v. BlackCloak, Inc.
6:25-cv-00967 · 2025-07-21
Motion to seal (defendant) Denied

“ENDORSED ORDER denying without prejudice for failure to comply with Local Rule 3.01(g) 28 Motion to seal (This document is sealed and only available to the Court). Signed by Magistrate Judge Nathan W. Hill on 7/21/2025.”

Scamnetic, Inc. v. BlackCloak, Inc.
6:25-cv-00967 · 2025-11-24
Motion for protective order (defendant) Denied

“ORDER denying without prejudice 61 Motion for Protective Order, granting in part and denying in part 67 Motion to Compel, granting in part and denying in part 71 Motion for Sanctions, granting in part and denying in part 75 Motion to Compel, and granting 88 Motion to Compel. Signed by Magistrate Judge Nathan W. Hill on 11/24/2025.”

Motions to compel (plaintiff) Granted in part
Motion for sanctions (defendant) Granted in part
Motions to compel (plaintiff) Granted in part
Motions to compel (plaintiff) Granted
Venable v. TPUSA, Inc.
6:25-cv-01183 · 2025-12-23
Motion for miscellaneous relief (plaintiff) Denied

“ENDORSED ORDER denying 32 Motion to "Deem Requests for Admission Admitted." Defendants served timely responses under Fed. R. Civ. P. 36(a)(3) and Plaintiff's factual disagreement with the responses is not grounds to reject them. ... Future failures to timely respond may result in motions being granted as unopposed.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

The reviewed matters provide descriptive caseload context for an early tenure beginning in June 2025. No authoritative case-disposition baseline is available because the existing administrative data predates his appointment.

Put Judge Hill's record to work

Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Hill actually rules, not a generic AI guess.

Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Hill's own signed orders and cites them.