Gilbert C. Sison
How Judge Sison rules, drawn from 19 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Sison
Gilbert C. Sison serves as a United States Magistrate Judge for the Southern District of Illinois. His investiture was on January 7, 2019, followed by a formal investiture ceremony on March 22, 2019.
Judge Sison's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Sison, as published on the court's website (checked October 9, 2026). Judges revise these often, so confirm the current version on the court's site before you file.
Key rules
Discovery
For an unresolved discovery dispute, submit a one-page joint statement of the issues.
“If the discovery dispute cannot be resolved informally, the parties will be required to submit a one-page joint statement of the issues.”
Trial
Serve Rule 26(a)(3) pretrial disclosures four weeks before the final pretrial conference, with objections two weeks later.
“Rule 26(a)(3) disclosures should be made 4 weeks before the scheduled Final Pretrial Conference date. Objections are due 2 weeks after the disclosures are made.”
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 9, 2026).
How Judge Sison decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In Goings v. Jones, he recommended denying a prisoner's request for immediate transfer because the new allegations concerned different officials and were unrelated to the complaint.
“there is no apparent relationship between the facts and allegations contained in Goings's motion and those contained in the Complaint. Indeed, the Defendants in this case are different than the individuals/officials at Pontiac who Goings currently complains about in his motion for immediate transfer.”
In Dowswell v. Mead Johnson, he recommended remand after finding the Mead defendants' principal place of business was in Illinois; the district judge rejected that citizenship finding but still remanded.
“Based on the evidence presented, Judge Sison concluded that the Mead Defendants' principal place of business is in Illinois, and therefore, the 'forum defendant rule' compels remand.”
Procedural preferences
In Sharp v. Berry, he treated the plaintiff's failure to respond as an admission under Local Rule 7.1(c) and found that the grievances did not exhaust remedies as to Berry.
“Under Local Rule 7.1(c), Judge Sison considered Sharp's failure to respond an admission of the merits of the motion. Moreover, the evidence in the record demonstrated that, while Sharp's grievances were fully exhausted, they did not exhaust Sharp's remedies as to Defendant Berry.”
In Goings v. Jones, he recommended denying the defendants' sanctions motion because the deposition notice did not meet the scheduling order's 14-day requirement.
“Judge Sison recommends denying Defendants' motion for sanctions because the notice of deposition was not sent at least 14 days prior to the scheduled deposition, as required by the Amended Scheduling Order (Doc. 121).”
In one prisoner medical-care case, the court granted summary judgment where the record did not support deliberate indifference and the plaintiff’s expert could not link the physician’s conduct to injury. The decision shows the need to connect medical evidence to each element of the claim.
“Here, Plaintiff has not produced the requisite medical expert opinion evidence to establish a medical negligence claim.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“For good cause shown, the parties' Agreed Motion to Remand to the Commissioner (Doc. 14) is GRANTED. The final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security is REVERSED and REMANDED to the Commissioner for rehearing and reconsideration of the evidence, pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. 405(g). The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment in favor of Plaintiff.”
“For the foregoing reasons, it is RECOMMENDED the Court DENY the motion for immediate transfer to federal custody which the undersigned construes as a motion for injunctive relief (Doc. 217).”
“the Court ADOPTS Judge Sison's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 209) and DENIES as moot the Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed by Plaintiff Fredrick Goings (Doc. 167).”
“The Motion for Sanctions filed by Defendants (Doc. 156) is DENIED.”
“The various motions filed by Plaintiff Frederick Goings related to sanctions (Docs. 166, 184, 189) are also DENIED.”
“Having found no clear error, the Court ADOPTS Judge Sison's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 21). The Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Defendant Corey Berry (Doc. 18) is GRANTED, and Plaintiff James Sharp's claims against Defendant Berry are DISMISSED without prejudice.”
“GRANTS in part and DENIES in part the defendants' motion for summary judgment (Doc. 57). The motion is DENIED as to Count 1 against Sims and GRANTED in all other respects”
“Finding no clear error, the Court ADOPTS Judge Sison's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 23) and DISMISSES Plaintiff Timothy McReaken's claims against Southeastern Homes. Southeastern Homes shall be TERMINATED as a party to this action.”
“the Court REJECTS Judge Sison's finding that Defendant Mead Johnson & Company LLC and Mead Johnson Nutrition Company citizens of Illinois, but ADOPTS his ultimate Recommendation that the case be remanded back to the Circuit Court of the Third Judicial Circuit, Madison County, Illinois.”
“the Court DENIES Khan's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Doc. 1). The Court DISMISSES with prejudice this matter.”
“the Court GRANTS the motion for summary judgment on the issue of exhaustion of administrative remedies filed by Defendant Hughes (Doc. 44). The Court DISMISSES without prejudice the ADA claim against Defendant Hughes”
“The Commissioner's final decision denying Plaintiff's application for disability benefits and supplemental security income is REVERSED and REMANDED to the Commissioner for clarification of the State agency doctor's opinions, rehearing and reconsideration of the evidence, pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).”
“the parties' Agreed Motion to Remand to the Commissioner (Doc. 22) is GRANTED. The final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security is REVERSED and REMANDED to the Commissioner for rehearing and reconsideration of the evidence, pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).”
“the Court DENIES Defendant Nurse Tara's motion to dismiss Plaintiff's complaint with prejudice pursuant to FED. R. CIV. PROC. 12(b)(6). (Doc. 29).”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 457 days (N = 20).
Median motion-to-ruling time: 61 days (N = 4).
The reviewed 2019 terminated cases and 2025–2026 pending matters provide a limited view of a consent docket that includes prisoner civil-rights, Social Security, and diversity cases; the figures are not a complete caseload census.
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 | 4 |
| 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 | 15 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 4 | 15 |
| Sep 2025 | 3 | 13 |
| Mar 2025 | 2 | 9 |
| Sep 2024 | 0 | 11 |
| Mar 2024 | 1 | 19 |
| Sep 2023 | 5 | 20 |
| Mar 2023 | 1 | 20 |
| Sep 2022 | 4 | 17 |
| Mar 2022 | 2 | 20 |
| Sep 2021 | 3 | 23 |
| Mar 2021 | 0 | 31 |
| Sep 2020 | 0 | 27 |
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 United States District Court for the Southern District of Illinois, not for Judge Sison: 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 | 1,081 | 13.6 months |
| Closed with no court action | 651 | 13.5 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 414 | 13.8 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 7 | not reported |
| Closed during trial | 9 | not reported |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 1,081 | 13.6 months |
| Sep 2024 | 1,389 | 10.4 months |
| Sep 2023 | 863 | 9.9 months |
| Sep 2022 | 836 | 10.5 months |
| Sep 2021 | 753 | 9 months |
| Sep 2020 | 897 | 13.3 months |
| Sep 2019 | 1,281 | 8.3 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 Sison with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Sison, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Sison's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace