Mario Garcia
How Judge Garcia rules, drawn from 3 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Garcia
Mario Garcia was sworn in as a United States Magistrate Judge for the Southern District of Indiana on April 5, 2021. He graduated from Ball State University in 1995 and Indiana University School of Law in Indianapolis in 1999. Before joining the court, he practiced at Brattain & Minnix, later Brattain Minnix Garcia, where he became a partner and managing member.
Judge Garcia's practices and standing orders
The court's website lists no individual practices or standing orders of Judge Garcia's own (checked October 9, 2026), so the court's local rules and general orders are the place to look (court page ↗).
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).
- General Order Re: Procedures for Sealed Filings ↗
- General Order Re: Procedures for the Filing, Service, and Management of Highly Sensitive Documents ↗
- Order Regarding Prisoner Electronic Filing Program ↗
- General Order/Administrative Policy 2024-35 - Electronic Submissions to the Court by Pro Se Litigants ↗
- General Order Re: Presentation of Contaminated Materials for Filing ↗
How Judge Garcia decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In a consent Social Security appeal, Garcia remanded where the administrative law judge did not explain how daily naps and medication-related fatigue affected the symptom analysis and residual functional capacity.
“Because the ALJ failed to address Plaintiff's asserted need to nap daily, the Court is unable to ‘trace the path of [his] reasoning,’ and thus, remand is warranted.”
Cautions
In Wyatt, continued harassment after warnings and an earlier sanction supported terminating sanctions. Garcia limited the contact restraint to harassment connected to the litigation, rather than all contact.
“The undersigned recommends dismissal of this action with prejudice.”
Garcia granted exhaustion summary judgment in Ingram, but the later appellate decision required a hearing on whether staff had withheld a response required for the next appeal. That partial remand limits reliance on the original availability analysis.
“For those reasons, Defendants' motion for summary judgment, dkt. [77], is GRANTED.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“For the reasons detailed herein, the Court REVERSES the ALJ's decision denying the Plaintiff benefits and REMANDS this matter for further proceedings.”
“Based on the foregoing, the undersigned RECOMMENDS the Court GRANT Defendant Five Star's Motion for Sanctions, [52], to the extent that:”
“For those reasons, Defendants' motion for summary judgment, dkt. [77], is GRANTED. Mr. Ingram's claims are DISMISSED without prejudice.”
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 | 0 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2025 | 0 | 1 |
| Mar 2025 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2024 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2024 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2023 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2023 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2022 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2022 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2021 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2021 | 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 U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, not for Judge Garcia: 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 | 2,443 | 11.2 months |
| Closed with no court action | 70 | 2.3 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 1,083 | 5.1 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 1,283 | 26.3 months |
| Closed during trial | 7 | not reported |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 2,443 | 11.2 months |
| Sep 2024 | 2,243 | 9.9 months |
| Sep 2023 | 2,050 | 9.6 months |
| Sep 2022 | 2,896 | 12.7 months |
| Sep 2021 | 2,988 | 11.9 months |
| Sep 2020 | 2,419 | 7.3 months |
| Sep 2019 | 3,168 | 8.2 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 Garcia with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Garcia, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Garcia's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace