Patricia C. Fawsett
How Judge Fawsett rules, drawn from 23 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Fawsett
Patricia C. Fawsett is a judge of the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida. Appointed by President Ronald Reagan, Judge Fawsett received a commission on June 9, 1986. Judge Fawsett assumed senior status on August 25, 2008.
Judge Fawsett's practices and standing orders
The court's website lists no individual practices or standing orders of Judge Fawsett's own (checked October 8, 2026), so the court's local rules and general orders are the place to look (court page ↗).
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 10, 2026).
How Judge Fawsett decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In McNa v. Communications Inter-Local Agency, Fawsett treated the complaint’s assertion that anxiety and depression substantially limited a major life activity as a legal conclusion. She found that other pleaded facts nevertheless supported an inference that the supervisors regarded McNa as impaired in her ability to work.
“McNa’s allegation that her anxiety and depression ‘substantially limited one or more major life activities’ is purely a legal conclusion. However, the facts alleged in her complaint are sufficient to infer that McNa’s supervisors, Bubb and Cox, perceived McNa as possessing a mental impairment that limited the major life activity of working.”
In McNa v. Communications Inter-Local Agency, Fawsett rejected a request to dismiss retaliation counts as duplicative of discrimination counts based on the same termination. The federal pleading rules permitted alternative theories based on the same facts.
“A common set of facts often form the basis for multiple causes of action.”
In Voter Verified v. Premier Election Solutions, Fawsett granted summary judgment on several patent validity issues, including Section 101 and parts of the Section 112 and anticipation challenges, while denying the patent owner’s motion in other respects.
“The Motion is GRANTED to the extent WI seeks a finding that the claims of the '449 patent are not invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101;”
In Siever v. BWGaskets, Fawsett granted the defendants summary judgment on the plaintiffs' claims that the Los Angeles and Orange County exclusivity provisions had been breached. She denied the defendants' motion in other respects and denied the plaintiffs' motion for partial summary judgment.
“The Motion is GRANTED to the extent Defendant seeks summary judgment on breach of the exclusivity provision of the Los Angeles and Orange County Agreements in Counts III and IV. The Motion is DENIED in all other respects.”
Cautions
In McNa v. Communications Inter-Local Agency, Fawsett dismissed the Section 1983 count without prejudice because a possible procedural due process theory appeared only in the complaint's factual background and was not pleaded distinctly in that count.
“to the extent McNa is asserting a procedural due process claim, she fails to meet the pleading requirements of Federal Rules of Procedure 8(a) and 10(b) which ‘require the pleader to present his claims discretely and succinctly, so that his adversary can discern what he is claiming and frame a responsive pleading.’”
In Miller v. Toyota Motor Corp., Fawsett denied a rental company's motion to dismiss a suit arising from an accident abroad and its accompanying request to join a co-defendant's pleadings.
“The Motion of Defendant Thrifty Rent-A-Car Service, Inc. to Dismiss and Motion to Join in the Pleadings of the Co-Defendant Toyota Motor Company (Doc. No. 14, filed Dec. 19, 2007) is DENIED.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Based on the foregoing it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED that the Motion to Dismiss Count I of Plaintiffs Complaint and Incorporated Memorandum of Law filed by Defendants Captain Katanna's, Inc. And Pineda Inn Bar and Grill, Inc. (Doc. No. 9, filed Apr. 17, 2013) is DENIED.”
“Based on the foregoing, the Motion for Summary Judgment (with Incorporated Memorandum of Law), filed by Defendants T.D. Williamson, Inc., TDW Services, Inc., and Bryan McDonald on December 29, 2006, (Doc. No. 101), and the Former Employees' Motion for Summary Judgment (with Incorporated Memorandum of Law), filed by Defendants Greg Foushi, Jose Delgado, Saul Ferrer, James Jackson, Robert John, Michael Mainelli, Rebecca Minervino, James Overstreet, Robert Schmidt, Nicole Turner, and John Foushi on December 29, 2006, (Doc. No. 102), are GRANTED in part and DENIED in part”
“the Former Employees' Motion for Summary Judgment (with Incorporated Memorandum of Law), filed by Defendants Greg Foushi, Jose Delgado, Saul Ferrer, James Jackson, Robert John, Michael Mainelli, Rebecca Minervino, James Overstreet, Robert Schmidt, Nicole Turner, and John Foushi on December 29, 2006, (Doc. No. 102), are GRANTED in part and DENIED in part”
“the Motion for Default Judgement and Memorandum of Law and Fact in Support Thereof by En-pat, Inc. (Doc. No. 16, filed Jan. 7, 2011) is GRANTED to the extent it seeks a finding that Defendant Budnic use of the JCM Modification Kit infringed and continues to infringe the '260 patent.”
“Defendant Green Thumb Landscaping, Inc.'s Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.”
“The Court DENIES Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 50).”
“Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 37) is GRANTED with respect to Count IV and DENIED with respect to Counts I, II, III, V, VI.”
“1) Plaintiffs Access Now, Inc. and Edward Resnick's Motion to Certify Class (Doc. No. 31) is DENIED.”
“2) Defendants Walt Disney World Company, Walt Disney Parks and Resorts, LLC, Walt Disney World Hospitality & Recreation Corporation and Lake Buena Vista Communities, Inc.'s Motion to Strike Class Allegations (Doc. No. 41) is GRANTED.”
“Based on the foregoing, the Court DENIES the Motion of MLU Services, Inc. to Dismiss the Complaint or, in the Alternative, Motion to Strike and Memorandum of Law in Support (Doc. No. 13, filed Dec. 21, 2007).”
“The Motion of Defendants to Dismiss Plaintiffs Second Amended Complaint (Doc. No. 21, filed Jan. 10, 2008) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Count IV is DISMISSED without prejudice. All other counts remain pending before the Court. Plaintiff has ten (10) days to submit a Third Amended Complaint which complies with this Order.”
“Based on the foregoing, the Court GRANTS the Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 29) of Defendant Universal City Development Partners, Ltd. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment in favor of Defendant and against Plaintiff.”
“Based on the foregoing, the Court DENIES Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 59, filed February 7, 2008).”
“Based on the foregoing, the Defendant's Motion and Memorandum of Law to Dismiss the Complaint or Alternatively, to Stay the Federal Court Proceedings, filed by Defendant Champion Window Manufacturing and Supply Company, Inc. (‘CWMSC’) on April 9, 2007, (Doc. No. 12), is DENIED.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 247 days (N = 20).
Median motion-to-ruling time: 46 days (N = 5).
The two bounded Orlando cohorts include wage-and-hour, employment-discrimination, civil-rights, Social Security, product-liability, foreclosure, insurance, copyright, and other statutory matters. The available entries are incomplete in several sampled cases, so this mix and the recorded outcomes describe only the twenty sampled matters.
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 | 0 |
| Sep 2024 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2024 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2023 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2023 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2022 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2022 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2021 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2021 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2020 | 0 | 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 United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida, not for Judge Fawsett: 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 | 6,896 | 5.5 months |
| Closed with no court action | 49 | 3.5 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 6,492 | 5.2 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 319 | 14.7 months |
| Closed during trial | 36 | 24.2 months |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 6,896 | 5.5 months |
| Sep 2024 | 7,115 | 5.6 months |
| Sep 2023 | 6,777 | 5.5 months |
| Sep 2022 | 6,781 | 6.7 months |
| Sep 2021 | 6,749 | 6.2 months |
| Sep 2020 | 6,392 | 6.2 months |
| Sep 2019 | 6,830 | 5.7 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 Fawsett with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Fawsett, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Fawsett's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace