Robin Lee Rosenberg
How Judge Rosenberg rules, drawn from 27 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Rosenberg
Robin Lee Rosenberg is a judge of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida. Appointed by President Barack Obama, Judge Rosenberg received a commission on July 24, 2014.
Judge Rosenberg's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Rosenberg, as published on the court's website (checked October 8, 2026). Judges revise these often, so confirm the current version on the court's site before you file.
Key rules
Motions
Limit a motion in limine to three requests for relief, including Daubert challenges.
“Each party is limited to filing one motion in limine that contains no more than three requests for relief. This limitation includes Daubert challenges to expert witnesses.”
Conferences
Requests to continue the dispositive motion deadline or trial date must give detailed supporting information.
“The parties are cautioned that the Court will not grant continuances of the dispositive motion deadline or trial date lightly. Any motion requesting either of these forms of relief should contain detailed information in support of the motion”
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 8, 2026).
How Judge Rosenberg decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In the Zantac multidistrict litigation, she entered summary judgment for the defendants in designated cancer cases after excluding the plaintiffs' general-causation experts and giving the parties notice under Rule 56(f).
“Pursuant to Rule 56(f) and the order to show cause process endorsed in cases such as Home Depot, the Court enters summary judgment in favor of every Defendant in the MDL, Brand or non-Brand, in every active Designated Cancer case filed prior to May 5, 2023.”
Procedural preferences
In Bill Gosling Outsourcing v. Nation Motor Club, she found no arbitration waiver because the defendant moved to compel arbitration as its first substantive response. She required arbitration in London, Ontario, rather than Boca Raton.
“Defendant's Motion to Compel Arbitration [14] is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. The Motion is granted in that the parties must proceed with arbitration. The Motion is denied insofar as Defendant asks for the arbitration to take place in Boca Raton, Florida. Arbitration shall take place in London, Ontario.”
In Schwan Buick, the court granted two dismissal motions because the amended complaint combined multiple defendants in single counts and described their conduct collectively. It allowed the plaintiff seven days to amend.
“the Plaintiff’s decision to combine multiple Defendants into single counts,”
In one copyright dispute, Rosenberg vacated a summary-judgment ruling on a count that existed only in an amended complaint filed without leave.
“Because there is no Count IV, it was error for the Court to enter summary judgment on the Count.”
Cautions
In Donnelly v. Wal-Mart, she granted the store summary judgment because the record did not show it knew or should have known about a spill that had existed for about 67 seconds.
“Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment [DE 67] is GRANTED and summary judgment is entered in favor of Defendant.”
In one emergency injunction request, Rosenberg denied relief when the plaintiff had not adequately pleaded federal diversity jurisdiction, in addition to gaps in the merits, irreparable-harm, and security showings. Plead the citizenship of each LLC member before seeking urgent relief on diversity jurisdiction.
“The Plaintiff has not facially alleged federal jurisdiction in this matter”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Defendant's Motion to Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint [DE 36] is GRANTED. The Second Amended Complaint [DE 35] is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“Pursuant to Rule 56(f) and the order to show cause process endorsed in cases such as Home Depot, the Court enters summary judgment in favor of every Defendant in the MDL, Brand or non-Brand, in every active Designated Cancer case filed prior to May 5, 2023.”
“the Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment [DE 56] is GRANTED and the Plaintiff's cross-Motion for Summary Judgment [DE 55] is DENIED.”
“the Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED and the Plaintiff's Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED.”
“Magistrate Judge Reinhart's Report and Recommendation [DE 50] is hereby ADOPTED in its entirety, ... The Defendant's Motion to Dismiss [DE 33] is GRANTED, ... The complaint [DE 1] is DISMISSED without prejudice, and ... Plaintiff is GRANTED leave to amend the complaint.”
“Defendants' Motion is therefore granted to the extent it argues that Park Place should be joined in this action, but it is denied without prejudice in all other respects.”
“it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Defendant's Motion to Dismiss is DENIED.”
“Defendant School Board of Highlands County Florida's Amended Motion for Reconsideration of Defendant's Motion for Final Summary Judgment [DE 84] is DENIED.”
“Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 6's Renewed Motion for Partial Summary Judgment [DE 85] is DENIED.”
“Defendant EIS's Motion to Compel Arbitration [DE 42] is GRANTED. The parties are directed to proceed with arbitration.”
“Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment [DE 67] is GRANTED and summary judgment is entered in favor of Defendant.”
“Defendant's Motion to Compel Arbitration [14] is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. The Motion is granted in that the parties must proceed with arbitration. The Motion is denied insofar as Defendant asks for the arbitration to take place in Boca Raton, Florida. Arbitration shall take place in London, Ontario.”
“it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Defendant’s Motion [DE 58] is GRANTED. Counts I and II are DISMISSED. Because this is the first dismissal based on a Court order, the Court’s dismissals are WITH LEAVE TO AMEND.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 82 days (N = 9).
Median motion-to-ruling time: 48 days (N = 5).
- The reviewed 2021-2023 matters include a diverse civil caseload and the Zantac multidistrict litigation.
- Several admiralty, consumer-reporting, patent, copyright-subpoena, and prisoner-screening cases ended within one to five months.
- The Zantac tag-along cases that opened and closed in spring 2022 were administrative multidistrict-litigation transfers rather than merits adjudications.
- This provides descriptive context rather than a caseload-wide rate.
Pending matters in the official report
Judge Rosenberg was last listed in the Civil Justice Reform Act report as of September 30, 2025.
| 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 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, not for Judge Rosenberg: 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 | 8,196 | 3.4 months |
| Closed with no court action | 848 | 3 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 7,287 | 3.5 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 16 | 10.1 months |
| Closed during trial | 45 | 17.1 months |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 8,196 | 3.4 months |
| Sep 2024 | 7,755 | 3.6 months |
| Sep 2023 | 20,408 | 0 months |
| Sep 2022 | 8,287 | 3.7 months |
| Sep 2021 | 8,536 | 3.2 months |
| Sep 2020 | 8,657 | 3.4 months |
| Sep 2019 | 9,471 | 3.7 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 Rosenberg with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Rosenberg, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Rosenberg's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace