Steven Charles Seeger
How Judge Seeger rules, drawn from 26 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Seeger
Steven Charles Seeger is a judge of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. Appointed by President Donald J. Trump, Judge Seeger received a commission on September 13, 2019.
Judge Seeger's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Seeger, 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 ↗
- Joint Initial Status Report Under Rule 26(f) ↗
- Scheduling Order Under Rule 16(b) ↗
Key rules
Trial
Deliver a joint and party-specific exhibit bench book to the court and counsel at least two business days before trial.
“Counsel must deliver to the Court a bench book of joint exhibits and each party’s separate exhibits, and must make it available to all counsel no later than two business days before the start of trial.”
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 Seeger decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In Ford-Reyes v. Progressive Funeral Home, Seeger dismissed a negligence suit for improper venue. Applying the text of the venue statute, he found that the defendants and the events at issue were in Georgia; the plaintiff’s Illinois residence did not establish venue in the Northern District of Illinois.
“Based on the plain text of the statute, this case does not belong in the Northern District of Illinois.”
In Rogers v. Wells Fargo, Seeger denied dismissal of a credit-report claim because the bank’s explanation for accessing the report depended on facts outside the complaint. He left that factual account for a later stage rather than accepting it on the pleadings.
“a motion to dismiss is not the time for the defendant to tell its side of the story, let alone receive judgment in its favor based on that story.”
Procedural preferences
In Robinson v. Kelley, Seeger converted a motion to dismiss into one for summary judgment under Rule 12(d) after the defendants submitted voter-registration records outside the pleadings. He gave Robinson notice and time to respond before granting judgment for the defendants.
“On May 4, 2020, this Court gave notice to Robinson that it was converting the motion to dismiss to a motion for summary judgment.”
In an insurance appraisal dispute, he denied a motion to compel appraisal before the insurer answered because a request for judgment on the pleadings must await closed pleadings. He expressly left open a later motion.
“So, for now, the motion to compel an appraisal is denied. Wildberry may file a motion for judgment on the pleadings someday, but it must wait until ‘[a]fter the pleadings are closed.’”
In a First Amendment summary-judgment dispute, he declined to consider an excessive-discretion theory first raised in briefing after years of litigation, emphasizing that the City had prepared to defend the pleaded claim.
“The Court declines to consider the new legal theory.”
Cautions
Fraud-based claims (False Claims Act / Illinois FCA) must satisfy Rule 9(b) particularity. Pleading a regulatory violation is not enough: the complaint must allege an actual false claim submitted to the government, with at least a representative example (who, what, when, where, how). The implied-false-certification theory does not relax this, and 'information and belief' pleading is unavailable to a relator who claims personal knowledge.
“A failure to comply with a regulatory requirement, without more, is not enough to state a claim for a violation of the False Claims Act.”
In Haymarket DuPage v. Village of Itasca, Seeger dismissed claims against the school district and fire district for lack of standing. They spoke against the proposed treatment center but did not vote on the zoning decision, so the alleged injury was not traceable to them.
“the School District and the Fire District had a voice, but they didn’t have a vote. So there is no traceability.”
In McMurtry v. Wexford, Seeger dismissed the claim against one eye-care provider as untimely. The plaintiff learned of the glaucoma injury in May 2017 but first added that provider in January 2020, outside the two-year limitations period.
“the Court grants Defendant Dunn’s motion to dismiss. Defendant Dunn is dismissed.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“The motions to dismiss for improper venue are granted, and this case is dismissed without prejudice.”
“Defendant's motion to dismiss is denied. Defendant shall answer Plaintiff's complaint by March 27, 2020.”
“the Court grants Defendant Dunn's motion to dismiss. Defendant Dunn is dismissed.”
“Wexford's motion for judgment on the pleadings is denied.”
“There is no genuine issue of material fact. Defendants did not prevent Robinson from becoming a registered voter because he was already a registered voter. This Court grants summary judgment to Defendants.”
“For the foregoing reasons, Defendants' motion to dismiss is granted.”
“the motions to dismiss the School District and the Fire District are hereby granted. The Itasca Fire Protection District No. 1, the Itasca Public School District 10, and School Superintendent Craig Benes are hereby dismissed for lack of standing.”
“For the reasons stated above, Defendants' motion for summary judgment is granted.”
“For the foregoing reasons, the motion to intervene is denied.”
“For the foregoing reasons, the motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, to stay filed by Travelers is denied.”
“So, for now, the motion to compel an appraisal is denied. Wildberry may file a motion for judgment on the pleadings someday, but it must wait until ‘[a]fter the pleadings are closed.’ See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(c).”
“The motion to dismiss and to strike is hereby denied.”
“Defendant’s motion to dismiss Count I is hereby granted.”
“Defendant I.W.’s Motion to Dismiss (Dckt. No. [16]) is granted in part and denied in part.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 69 days (N = 19).
Judge Seeger's reviewed Chicago docket includes civil and criminal cases, including immigration-detention habeas petitions and intellectual-property enforcement matters. The civil sample spans civil rights, disability access, consumer credit, insurance and contract, employment, whistleblower fraud, product liability, copyright, and civil forfeiture.
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 | 30 |
| Bench trials submitted more than six months | 0 |
| Bankruptcy appeals pending more than six months | 2 |
| Social Security appeals pending more than six months | 0 |
| Civil cases pending more than three years | 40 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 30 | 40 |
| Sep 2025 | 27 | 44 |
| Mar 2025 | 10 | 41 |
| Sep 2024 | 6 | 36 |
| Mar 2024 | 16 | 34 |
| Sep 2023 | 27 | 42 |
| Mar 2023 | 45 | 38 |
| Sep 2022 | 9 | 47 |
| Mar 2022 | 10 | 39 |
| Sep 2021 | 18 | 42 |
| Mar 2021 | 36 | 39 |
| Sep 2020 | 13 | 22 |
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 Seeger: 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 Seeger with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Seeger, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Seeger's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace