Stephen Patrick McGlynn
How Judge McGlynn rules, drawn from 36 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge McGlynn
Stephen Patrick McGlynn is a judge of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Illinois. Appointed by President Donald J. Trump, Judge McGlynn received a commission on September 18, 2020.
Judge McGlynn's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge McGlynn, 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
Counsel must attend discovery-motion hearings in person.
“Judge McGlynn sets discovery motions to be heard in Court with counsel present in person.”
Trial
After Judge McGlynn assigns a firm trial date, he will not consider motions to continue it.
“Judge McGlynn will give the case a firm trial date. No motions for continuance will be considered after the firm trial date is assigned.”
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 McGlynn decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In Giesler v. City of Herrin, McGlynn denied summary judgment on claims whose probable-cause and qualified-immunity questions depended on disputed material facts. He left those factual questions for the jury.
“These questions of material fact are the province of the jury, not the undersigned.”
In Dowdy v. United Seating and Mobility, McGlynn denied dismissal of a product claim against seller Numotion. The complaint alleged that Numotion knew of or helped create the alleged defect; he left Numotion’s factual challenge to that allegation for a later stage.
“While Numotion may be able to ultimately prevail in its position, this is a factual argument which must be resolved at a later stage in this action.”
Procedural preferences
In Ferrari v. Link, he dismissed a repeatedly amended civil-rights complaint with prejudice after finding that it failed to identify clear claims against each defendant and declining to assemble a coherent claim from the pleading.
“The Court is not obliged to comb a complaint in an attempt to piece together a coherent claim and will not do so here.”
Reconsideration is not a vehicle to re-argue: Rule 59(e)'s 28-day deadline is hard, and Rule 60(b) needs newly discovered evidence or extraordinary circumstances, not a renewed disagreement with the court's reasoning.
“Motions to reconsider are not an appropriate tool to [rehash] old arguments or for presenting arguments that should have been raised before the court made its decision.”
Cautions
In Ferrari v. Link, McGlynn treated the plaintiffs’ failure to develop legal arguments against dismissal as waiver and dismissed the repeatedly amended civil-rights complaint with prejudice.
“Where a party, such as here, fails to provide adequate legal argument regarding a motion to dismiss, the underlying claim is waived.”
In the Langley plaintiffs' challenge to Illinois's firearm registration rule, he denied summary judgment after finding no concrete personal injury to a named plaintiff and declined to decide arguments made for hypothetical citizens.
“it will not entertain arguments made on behalf of hypothetical Illinois citizens; the movants must present concrete evidence, not scattershot theories regarding how PICA and the associated administrative rules might be interpreted.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“the Court GRANTS in part and DENIES in part Defendant City of Herrin and Dylan Sollers' Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 38). On Counts I, II, III, IV, and V, summary judgment is DENIED. On Counts VI, VII, VIII, IX, and X, summary judgment is GRANTED. Those counts are DISMISSED with prejudice.”
During screening under 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2) and 1915A, the court dismissed with prejudice a pro se inmate's diversity amended complaint alleging legal malpractice and intentional infliction of emotional distress against his former criminal-defense attorney. A criminal-malpractice plaintiff must plead actual innocence, the conviction had not been overturned, and the claim was also time-barred. Grounding quote: 'pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915A(b)(2), the Court DISMISSES this Complaint with prejudice for failure to state a cause of action.' This screening disposition did not resolve a party motion. Leave to amend was denied because this was the second pleading after an earlier dismissal without prejudice and with leave to amend.
“Defendants' Motions to dismiss (Docs. 65, 70, 72, 101) are GRANTED. All other motions are DENIED as moot. The Complaint (Doc. 53) is DISMISSED with prejudice. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to enter judgment and close this case on the Court's docket.”
“the Court DENIES defendant's Motion to Dismiss with respect to COUNT I and GRANTS the Motion with respect to Count IV. As such, Numotion is ORDERED to answer count I within fourteen days”
“the motion to dismiss for failure to serve is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. (Doc. 43). The December 4, 2023 services of process on Defendants Connors and Matevousian were ineffective and are therefore QUASHED.”
“The second motion for appointment of counsel is DENIED. (Doc. 41).”
“the Langley Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 133) is DENIED because they have failed to meet their burden to prove that PICA-mandated registration requirement is unconstitutional under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments.”
“Director Kelly's Cross Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Doc. 151) is GRANTED. This ruling is confined to the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment challenge brought by the Langley Plaintiffs in Count 1 of their Complaint only.”
“Session's Motion for Reconsideration fails under the standards of both Rule 59(e) and Rule 60(b). ... The Court correctly granted Summary Judgment in Menasha's favor, and the Motion for Reconsideration (Doc. 54) is DENIED.”
“the Court GRANTS the Motion for Summary Judgment in its entirety. This action is DISMISSED with prejudice and the Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to close the case and enter judgment accordingly.”
“the Court GRANTS in part and DENIES in part the Motion for Summary Judgment: ... the Court DENIES summary judgment on McReaken's excessive force claims. The Court GRANTS summary judgment on Toliver's excessive force claim against Cleland. ... the Court GRANTS summary judgment on all denial of medical care claims.”
“the request for sanctions is DENIED.”
“Defendant Eric Wangler's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 55) is GRANTED. This case is DISMISSED with prejudice.”
“the Court DENIES Plaintiffs' Motion for Leave to File Third Amended Complaint”
“GRANTS with Prejudice the Motion to Dismiss filed by defendant United States Department of Interior. Additionally, this action shall be REMANDED to the First Judicial Circuit Court, Williamson County, Illinois as this Court no longer has jurisdiction.”
“Marvelle Deshaun Woodard's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Doc. 1) is DENIED. This action is DISMISSED with prejudice.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 315 days (N = 20).
Median motion-to-ruling time: 84 days (N = 7).
The reviewed cases are a limited slice of Judge McGlynn's docket rather than a complete caseload census, so the case mix is descriptive only.
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 | 0 |
| Civil cases pending more than three years | 14 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 0 | 14 |
| Sep 2025 | 0 | 12 |
| Mar 2025 | 0 | 12 |
| Sep 2024 | 0 | 10 |
| Mar 2024 | 1 | 9 |
| Sep 2023 | 0 | 8 |
| Mar 2023 | 0 | 11 |
| Sep 2022 | 0 | 11 |
| Mar 2022 | 0 | 14 |
| Sep 2021 | 0 | 16 |
| Mar 2021 | 0 | 18 |
| Sep 2020 | 0 | 0 |
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 McGlynn: 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 McGlynn with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge McGlynn, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge McGlynn's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace