April M. Perry
How Judge Perry rules, drawn from 18 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Perry
April Michelle Perry is a judge of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. Appointed by President Joseph R. Biden, she received her commission on November 20, 2024.
Judge Perry's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Perry, as published on the court's website (checked October 27, 2026). Judges revise these often, so confirm the current version on the court's site before you file.
Key rules
Filing
In sealed Schedule A cases, file the judge’s defendant-information template within 14 days of assignment or reassignment.
“In all ‘Schedule A’ cases where Defendants’ identities are initially under seal, Plaintiff must provide the information requested in the Court’s Schedule A Template, which can be found here. Plaintiff must complete and file the template on the docket within 14 days of the case being assigned or reassigned to Judge Perry, or the case may be dismissed for want of prosecution.”
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 Perry decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Procedural preferences
In Collins, Perry compelled arbitration under a valid written agreement and stayed the case pending arbitration.
“Because the parties formed a valid, written agreement to arbitrate, this dispute falls 9 --- *Page 10* within the scope of that agreement, and Plaintiff has refused to arbitrate, Defendant’s motion to compel arbitration is granted and the case is stayed pending the completion of the arbitration”
Cautions
In Ducere, Perry dismissed refusal-to-deal claims with prejudice while allowing amendment of the essential-facilities claims.
“For the foregoing reasons, the Court grants Enbridge’s motion. It dismisses Ducere’s refusal to deal claims brought under federal and state law with prejudice. It dismisses Ducere’s essential facilities claims without prejudice and leave to amend.”
In Hsieh, Perry found the requested injunction depended on speculative future events after the defendant removed the plaintiff’s information.
“Plaintiff points to no record evidence indicating this is likely to take place.”
In Hilliard, Perry found that incarcerated plaintiffs had pleaded plausible constitutional and disability claims against the state corrections director, and she denied dismissal.
“The Courts find that Plaintiffs have standing and have stated plausible claims against Defendant under the Eighth Amendment, ADA, and Rehabilitation Act. Defendant’s motion to dismiss is denied.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“For the foregoing reasons, the Court grants Enbridge’s motion. It dismisses Ducere’s refusal to deal claims brought under federal and state law with prejudice. It dismisses Ducere’s essential facilities claims without prejudice and leave to amend.”
“For the reasons that follow, the Court grants the motions to dismiss.”
“For the foregoing reasons, Defendant’s motion for summary judgment is granted.”
“The Courts find that Plaintiffs have standing and have stated plausible claims against Defendant under the Eighth Amendment, ADA, and Rehabilitation Act. Defendant’s motion to dismiss is denied.”
“For the foregoing reasons, the Court grants the City’s motion to dismiss only as to Count IX, and West’s motion to dismiss is denied. If Plaintiff believes he can plausibly allege a Monell claim based upon the guidance set forth in this opinion, he may file a proposed amended complaint by April 1, 2026.”
“For the above reasons, AAIC and Markel’s motion to strike is denied. AAIC’s motion to dismiss Count III is denied, and Markel’s motion to dismiss is granted only as to Count II as it relates to Markel. Defendants may amend Count II, to the extent they can do so consistent with this opinion.”
“For the foregoing reasons, the Court denies Plaintiff’s motion to remand and grants HUD’s motion to dismiss, dismissing all claims against the Secretary of HUD and Ira T. Nevel without prejudice. Any subsequent pleading against these defendants must be brought in a separate case. The court also grants the Cook County Clerk’s motion to dismiss without prejudice and dismisses the case against Universal Financial Group Inc. without prejudice. To the extent Plaintiff believes she can re-plead plausible claims against these defendants, an amended complaint must be filed by March 19, 2026.”
“For the above stated reasons, Defendants’ motion for summary judgment is granted. Defendants’ motion to strike is denied.”
“For the foregoing reasons, the Court grants Defendants’ motions to dismiss.”
“Therefore, the Court dismisses the complaint against Detective Scott and denies Plaintiff’s motion for entry of default as moot.”
“Acosta and Taylor’s motion for abstention is denied. The Westchester Defendants’ motion to dismiss is granted and the complaint is dismissed in its entirety for failure to allege a plausible claim.”
“BPS’s motion to dismiss is denied. BPS is to answer the complaint by February 16, 2026.”
“For the reasons stated above, Defendants’ motion to dismiss is granted. Any amended complaint must be filed by March 27, 2026.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
This narrow earliest-filing sample does not support a court-wide caseload or duration claim.
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 | 22 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 0 | 22 |
| Sep 2025 | 0 | 26 |
| Mar 2025 | 0 | 28 |
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 Northern District of Illinois, not for Judge Perry: 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 | 12,205 | 5.9 months |
| Closed with no court action | 4,300 | 7 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 7,558 | 5.4 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 305 | 12.6 months |
| Closed during trial | 42 | 49.5 months |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 12,205 | 5.9 months |
| Sep 2024 | 9,700 | 6.8 months |
| Sep 2023 | 7,093 | 6 months |
| Sep 2022 | 6,841 | 7.3 months |
| Sep 2021 | 9,703 | 15.1 months |
| Sep 2020 | 8,046 | 10.6 months |
| Sep 2019 | 8,134 | 7.4 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 Perry with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Perry, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Perry's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace