Robert Lowell Miller Jr.

How Judge Miller rules, drawn from 19 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

Judge Miller no longer sits on this court. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled here.

Court
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Indiana
Position
District judge
Status
No longer serving
Appointed by
Ronald Reagan (Republican)
Commissioned
December 17, 1985
Education
Northwestern University (A.B., 1972); Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law (J.D., 1975)
Signed orders read
19

About Judge Miller

Robert Lowell Miller, Jr. served on the United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana after receiving a commission on December 17, 1985. Appointed by President Ronald Reagan, he became a senior judge on January 11, 2016. The court announced his retirement from active judicial work at the end of August 2023, and he is now an inactive senior judge.

Signed rulings

A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.

Bolden v. Caravan Facilities Management, LLC
112 F. Supp. 3d 785 · 2015-06-08
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“the court GRANTS the defendant’s motion for summary judgment (Doc. No. 22)”

Shoun v. Best Formed Plastics, Inc.
28 F. Supp. 3d 786 · 2014-06-23
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied

“Based on the foregoing, the court GRANTS the renewed motion to take judicial notice [docket # 13] and DENIES the motion to dismiss the amended complaint [docket # 14]”

Motion to reconsider (defendant) Denied

“Because denial of the company's motion to dismiss was proper, the court DENIES the motion to reconsider [docket # 19]”

Whitaker v. Appriss, Inc.
266 F. Supp. 3d 1103 · 2017-07-18
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“Based on the foregoing, the court GRANTS Appriss's motion for summary judgment [Doc. No. 175] and directs the Clerk to enter judgment accordingly.”

Sahlhoff v. Gurley-Leep Automotive Management Corp.
136 F. Supp. 3d 1003 · 2015-09-28
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“the complaint must be dismissed for failure to state a claim on which relief can be granted, so the court GRANTS the defendant's motion to dismiss (doc. # 25). The court will give Mr. Sahlhoff 21 days from the date of this order within which to file an amended complaint.”

Brown v. Biomet Orthopedics, LLC
244 F. Supp. 3d 810 · 2017-03-26
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“For the foregoing reasons, Biomet's motion for summary judgment [Doc. No. 137] is GRANTED.”

Whitaker v. Appriss, Inc.
229 F. Supp. 3d 809 · 2017-01-17
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied

“Based on the foregoing, the court DENIES Appriss's motion to dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction [Doc. No. 150] and ends the stay on proceedings.”

Wright v. Mishawaka Housing Authority
225 F. Supp. 3d 752 · 2016-12-01
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted in part

“The court GRANTS MHA'S MOTION TO DISMISS [Doc. No. 30] IN PART as to Ms. Wright's fourth, sixth, and seventh claims, DENIES THE MOTION IN PART as to Ms. Wright's first, second, third, and fifth claims, and GRANTS MHA's motion to strike the class allegations [Doc. No. 32].”

Motions to strike (defendant) Granted

“GRANTS MHA's motion to strike the class allegations [Doc. No. 32].”

Gary/Chicago International Airport Authority v. Zaleski
144 F. Supp. 3d 1019 · 2015-11-17
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“Third-party defendant OXY USA's motion to dismiss the third-party complaint (Doc. No. 43) is GRANTED. The amended third-party complaint (Doc. No. 41) is DISMISSED with prejudice.”

In re FedEx Ground Package System, Inc., Employment Practices Litigation (Illinois/Missouri class-certification reconsideration)
273 F.R.D. 516 · 2010-05-19
Motion to amend class certification denial (plaintiffs) Denied

“For the foregoing reasons, the court DENIES the plaintiffs’ motions to amend the court’s denial of the class certification orders [Doc. nos. 1326, 1333, 1339, 1340, 1341, 1342, 1855,1861,1866],”

Motion to amend class certification denial (plaintiffs) Denied
Motion to amend class certification denial (plaintiffs) Denied
Motion to amend class certification denial (plaintiffs) Denied
Motion to amend class certification denial (plaintiffs) Denied
Motion to amend class certification denial (plaintiffs) Denied
Motion to amend class certification denial (plaintiffs) Denied
Motion to amend class certification denial (plaintiffs) Denied
Motion to amend class certification denial (plaintiffs) Denied
Women's Health Link, Inc. v. Fort Wayne Public Transportation Corp.
44 Media L. Rep. (BNA) 1171 · 2016-01-05
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“For all of these reasons, the court GRANTS Citilink's motion for summary judgment [Doc. No. 51], and DENIES Women's Health Link's motion for summary judgment [Doc. No. 54].”

Summary judgment (plaintiff) Denied

“DENIES Women's Health Link's motion for summary judgment [Doc. No. 54].”

Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. Dometic Corp.
371 F. Supp. 3d 472 · 2019-03-06
Judgment on the pleadings (plaintiff) Granted in part

“GRANTS Liberty Mutual's motion for judgment on the pleadings, [Doc. No. 37], with respect to Count I of its complaint, which seeks a declaratory judgment of no duty to defend or indemnify under the 2004-2005 policy based on exhaustion; DENIES Liberty Mutual's motion for judgment on the pleadings, [Doc. No. 37], with respect to Count II of its complaint.”

Judgment on the pleadings (defendant) Granted in part

“GRANTS Dometic's motion for judgment on the pleadings, [Doc. No. 39], with respect to Count II of Liberty Mutual's complaint to the extent it seeks a declaratory judgment of no duty to defend; DENIES Dometic's motion for judgment on the pleadings, [Doc. No. 39], with respect to Count II ... to the extent it seeks a declaratory judgment of no duty to indemnify.”

United States v. Blake (Garnett)
817 F. Supp. 2d 1082 · 2011-09-23
Motion to dismiss indictment (defendant) Denied

“For all these reasons, the court DENIES the defendant's motion to dismiss (doc. # 94).”

Pending matters in the official report

Judge Miller was last listed in the Civil Justice Reform Act report as of March 31, 2023.

Motions pending more than six months24
Bench trials submitted more than six months0
Bankruptcy appeals pending more than six months0
Social Security appeals pending more than six months0
Civil cases pending more than three years2
ReportMotions over six monthsCases over three years
Mar 2023242
Sep 2022222
Mar 202203
Sep 202106
Mar 202125
Sep 202024

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.

A historical record

Judge Miller no longer sits on this court. This profile stays available as a record of how they ruled here. If you're preparing for a matter, start from the court's current bench.