Heather K. McShain
How Judge McShain rules, drawn from 11 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge McShain
Heather K. McShain was sworn in as a United States Magistrate Judge for the Northern District of Illinois in May 2020. She previously served as a federal prosecutor in both the Northern District of Illinois and the Southern District of New York. She earned her law degree from Notre Dame Law School and presides over the district's Veterans Treatment Court.
Judge McShain's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge McShain, 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.
- Case Procedures ↗
- Judge McShain’s Standing Order for Initial Status Report ↗
- hkm standing order for initial status report 003 withsignature ↗
Key rules
Motions
In Social Security cases, file the plaintiff’s summary judgment motion within 60 days after the answer and record are filed.
“Within sixty (60) days after the filing of the answer to the complaint and the administrative record, the plaintiff shall file a motion for summary judgment and memorandum in support.”
Discovery
Deliver summary judgment materials to chambers within 24 hours after filing.
“A courtesy copy of the memorandum of law, depositions and other materials relied upon in support of the motion (as required by Local Rule 56.1(a)(1)-(3)) or in opposition to the motion (as required by Local Rule 56.1(b)(1)-(3)) must be delivered to chambers within 24 hours of when it is filed on the CM/ECF system.”
Trial
Seek court permission before contacting jurors after trial.
“After the conclusion of a trial, no party, agent, or attorney shall communicate with any members of the petit jury before which the case was tried without first receiving permission of the Court.”
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 McShain decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In Maria R. v. Kijakazi, she remanded a disability decision because limiting the claimant to simple, routine work did not account for the administrative law judge's finding of moderate limits in concentration, persistence, and pace under the cited Seventh Circuit precedent.
“The question, therefore, is whether 'simple, routine tasks' accounts for a moderate limitation in CPP. The answer from the Seventh Circuit, time and time again, has been no.”
In Maria R. v. Kijakazi, she declined to uphold the benefits denial on the Commissioner's later reading of a medical report because the administrative law judge had not relied on that rationale.
“this Court's review of social security decisions is limited to the ALJ's rationales, and a decision cannot be upheld by giving it new ground to stand on.”
In Mary Ann S., the court required the administrative law judge to address later treatment notes that contradicted the decision’s description of the record. The omission prevented the court from tracing how the evidence supported the benefits denial.
“The fact that the ALJ never discussed these records and labeled other medical records–from months before the final Chiro One treatment notes–as plaintiff’s ‘most recent treatment records,’ [12-1] 21, leaves the Court with the impression that this evidence was impermissibly ignored.”
In Orlandra H., the court accepted the administrative law judge’s explanation for discounting parts of the opinion evidence because the decision tied the mental work restrictions to treatment records and daily activities.
“These findings provided substantial evidentiary support for the ALJ’s conclusion that the opinion evidence was ‘not wholly consistent’ with the record.”
Procedural preferences
In Maria R. v. Kijakazi, McShain denied the Commissioner’s Rule 59(e) motion to change a Social Security remand because a new regulatory argument could have been raised in the original merits briefing.
“A motion under Rule 59(e) does not permit a party to advance arguments or theories that could and should have been made before the district court rendered a judgment, nor is it a vehicle for recycling arguments that the Court has previously rejected.”
At a limited-consent exhaustion hearing in Taylor, she held that a detainee’s grievance gave adequate notice of a continuous alleged use-of-force episode even though the detainee could not identify one officer while incapacitated. The ruling addressed exhaustion, not the underlying merits.
“For the reasons set forth above, the Court holds that the defense of failure to exhaust administrative remedies does not bar plaintiff’s claims against defendants Mintah, Hidalgo, and Ochoa.”
Cautions
In Kaepplinger v. Michelotti, she allowed the plaintiffs to substitute a standard-of-care expert after their sole expert became unwilling to cooperate, finding that the delay did not justify forcing them to proceed with a hostile witness.
“Even if such a delay was error, however, it does not merit such a severe punishment---forcing Plaintiffs to prosecute their case using a hostile expert witness as their sole witness on standard of care.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“the Court grants plaintiff's motion for summary judgment [18], denies the Acting Commissioner's motion for summary judgment [27], reverses the SSA's decision, and remands this case for further proceedings.”
“denies the Acting Commissioner's motion for summary judgment [27], reverses the SSA's decision, and remands this case for further proceedings.”
“The Acting Commissioner's motion to alter or amend judgment [35] is denied.”
“Plaintiffs' motion to substitute experts [221] is granted subject to the above.”
“Plaintiff’s motion to reverse and remand [11] is granted and defendant’s motion for summary judgment [18] is denied.”
“Plaintiff’s motion to reverse and remand [12] is denied, the Commissioner’s motion for summary judgment [14] is granted, and the denial of benefits is affirmed.”
“Plaintiff’s motion to reverse and remand [16] is granted and defendant's motion for summary judgment [17] is denied.”
“Plaintiff’s motion to reverse and remand, [13], is granted and defendant's motion for summary judgment, [16], is denied.”
“Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment [16] is denied, the Commissioner’s motion for summary judgment [20] is granted, and the denial of benefits is affirmed.”
After a limited-consent hearing on an exhaustion defense, the judge held that a detainee's grievance gave notice of his excessive-force claim, including conduct by an officer the detainee could not identify while incapacitated. The order resolves an affirmative defense rather than a filed motion.
“Plaintiff’s motion for summary remand [20] is denied, defendant’s motion for summary judgment [21] is granted, and the denial of benefits is affirmed.”
“Plaintiff’s motion to reverse and remand [17] is granted and defendant's motion for summary judgment [20] is denied.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
- Judge McShain's docket includes duty-magistrate warrant and sealed matters, criminal cases, and civil cases in which she handles referred pretrial work while a district judge retains the dispositive motions.
- Her own dispositive decisions arise principally in consent civil cases, including Social Security and medical-malpractice matters, while her referred work includes discovery disputes.
- She also presides over the district's Veterans Treatment Court.
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 | 2 |
| Civil cases pending more than three years | 1 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 0 | 1 |
| Sep 2025 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2025 | 0 | 1 |
| Sep 2024 | 0 | 1 |
| Mar 2024 | 0 | 16 |
| Sep 2023 | 0 | 8 |
| Mar 2023 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2022 | 0 | 1 |
| Mar 2022 | 2 | 4 |
| Sep 2021 | 0 | 3 |
| Mar 2021 | 0 | 2 |
| Sep 2020 | 0 | 2 |
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 McShain: 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 McShain with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge McShain, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge McShain's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace