Gilbert C. Sison
How Judge Sison decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
On prisoner motions for preliminary injunctive relief he enforces a strict nexus requirement: the relief sought must relate to the claims and defendants in the underlying complaint, and a PI is not a vehicle to add new claims, new defendants, or grievances about a different facility. He also applies the mootness rule that transferring a prisoner out of the facility whose conditions he challenges moots facility-specific injunctive relief.
“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.”
On removal/remand he applies the forum-defendant rule and the 'nerve center' test for corporate citizenship (Hertz v. Friend), and recommends remand where an in-state defendant defeats removability -- though his factual citizenship finding can be corrected by the district judge on de novo review (the remand result still stood on the removing defendant's consent).
“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
On PLRA exhaustion summary judgment he applies Local Rule 7.1(c) firmly -- a plaintiff's failure to respond to the motion is treated as an admission of its merits -- and recommends granting where the grievances did not exhaust remedies as to the specific named defendant (claims then dismissed without prejudice).
“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.”
He manages discovery deadlines strictly: he recommended denying a defendant's sanctions motion because the deposition notice was not served the required 14 days in advance, and recommends dismissal for want of prosecution after issuing a Notice of Impending Dismissal when a plaintiff lets a deadline lapse.
“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).”
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.
| Summary judgment N = 2 |
Granted: 1Granted in part: 1 | counts only |
| Motion for sanctions N = 2 |
Denied: 2 | counts only |
| Preliminary injunction N = 2 |
Denied: 1Moot / procedural: 1 | counts only |
| Social security appeal N = 1 |
Granted: 1 | counts only |
| Motion for remand N = 1 |
Granted: 1 | counts only |
| Dismissal for want of prosecution 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.
“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.”
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).
Counts are illustrative from a capped enumeration, not an authoritative caseload census. The 2019 duration cohort and the 2025-2026 pending sample show a stable consent-case mix (prisoner 1983 + SSA + diversity civil).