Sheila M. Finnegan
How Judge Finnegan decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
On consent Social Security review she both remands and affirms on the merits as final judgments (here 1 remand, 2 affirmances). A remand turns on a concrete analytical gap — e.g. an unresolved conflict between the vocational expert's testimony and the Dictionary of Occupational Titles — so a claimant should pin the substantial-evidence/'logical bridge' challenge to a specific, identifiable error rather than a general disagreement.
“the ALJ's decision is reversed, and this case is remanded”
Procedural preferences
On referred civil discovery she actively polices the adequacy and transparency of a producing party's search: where responsive documents were missed and the search process could not be clearly explained, she granted relief, while denying the over-reaching parts (e.g. a demand for a second Rule 30(b)(6) deposition). Come to her with a concrete, well-documented showing of a search deficiency and a narrowly-scoped request, not a blunderbuss demand.
“The motion is denied at this time in all other respects.”
She grants compel motions for either side when relevance and proportionality are shown and the opponent has not carried the undue-burden showing — including ordering production of documents used to refresh a witness's recollection under Fed. R. Evid. 612 and allowing more than ten depositions where proportional. Frame discovery disputes around proportionality and a specific evidentiary hook.
“Plaintiff's Renewed Motion to Compel [76] is granted.”
Cautions
She does not award discovery sanctions reflexively: a non-party's Rule 45(d)(1) sanctions motion was denied where the subpoenaing party had not acted sanctionably, the burden was limited, and the fees claimed were not actually incurred by the movant. A sanctions request must be backed by sanctionable conduct and the movant's own real, incurred costs.
“For the reasons set forth above, Non-Party Andrew McLeod's Motion for Sanctions [13] is denied.”
Motion outcomes
Counted from classified signed orders only. Percentages are shown only where the sample is large enough to be meaningful; smaller samples are reported as raw counts.
| Motions to compel N = 4 |
Granted: 2Granted in part: 2 | counts only |
| Social security review N = 3 |
Granted: 1Denied: 2 | counts only |
| Motions to dismiss N = 2 |
Granted: 2 | counts only |
| Motion for sanctions N = 1 |
Denied: 1 | counts only |
| Motion for leave to exceed deposition limit N = 1 |
Granted: 1 | counts only |
A "1 of 1" is one ruling, not a tendency. Treat small samples as illustrative, not predictive.
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“the Trost Motion to Dismiss [Doc. 16] is granted with prejudice.”
“the Brown and Draus Motion to Dismiss [Doc. 17] is also granted, and the dismissal as to the malicious prosecution claims is with prejudice.”
“Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Expert Opinion Basis Materials (Doc. 107) is granted in part and denied in part.”
“The motion is denied at this time in all other respects.”
“Plaintiff's Renewed Motion to Compel [76] is granted.”
“both motions are granted.”
“both motions are granted.”
“For the reasons set forth above, Non-Party Andrew McLeod's Motion for Sanctions [13] is denied.”
“the ALJ's decision is reversed, and this case is remanded”
“Plaintiff's request to reverse or remand the ALJ's decision is denied, and the Commissioner's motion for summary judgment [19] is granted.”
“the Court grants judgment in favor of the Commissioner.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Finnegan is an active magistrate judge (Presiding Magistrate Judge of the district since January 1, 2021). Her recency-sorted enumerable docket docket as assigned_judge is duty-magistrate work (same-day search-warrant / package-seizure / cell-site mc matters). Her civil reasoning work — Social Security consent dispositions and referred discovery (motions to compel, sanctions, deposition-limit relief) — is reflected in the GovInfo reasoning layer and the SEC-case discovery timeline below.