Karen K. Caldwell
How Judge Caldwell rules, drawn from 25 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Caldwell
Karen K. Caldwell is a judge of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky. Appointed by President George W. Bush, Judge Caldwell received a commission on October 24, 2001.
Judge Caldwell's practices and standing orders
The court's website lists no individual practices or standing orders of Judge Caldwell'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 25-7 - Motions Under U.S.S.G. § 5K1.1 and 18 U.S.C. § 3553(e) ↗
- General Order 23-08 - Plea Agreements and Supplements in Criminal Cases ↗
- General Order 22-15 - Standing Procedures for Social Security Actions ↗
- Joint General Order 21-1 - Electronic Case Filing Administrative Policies and Procedures ↗
- General Order 21-1 - Procedures for Highly Sensitive Documents ↗
- General Order 14-11 - Possession and Use of Electronic Devices by Bar ↗
How Judge Caldwell decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In Oak 44 Property Management, LLC v. Maddix, she dismissed the claim after finding a later-formed same-name entity could not cure the plaintiff’s lack of capacity when the claim accrued.
“Defendants' motion to dismiss (DE 48) is GRANTED; and 3. the Court will enter a judgment consistent with this opinion.”
Procedural preferences
In a prisoner medical-negligence case, she let discovery proceed before considering the government’s dismissal or summary-judgment arguments, including its contention that the plaintiff lacked expert support.
“the United States’ arguments regarding the substance of Martinez-Diaz’s FTCA claim are premature.”
In a delayed-naturalization case, she remanded the application to the immigration agency for an initial decision rather than deciding it herself.
“The Court concurs that USCIS should be afforded the first opportunity to decide the matter and concludes that remand is warranted here.”
Cautions
In B.B. v. United States, she granted the government’s motion to dismiss the FTCA claims for lack of jurisdiction and failure to state a claim.
“the United States' motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted (DE 13) is GRANTED.”
In Crowe v. Trustgard Insurance Co., she denied summary judgment because intent and credibility questions remained for the jury.
“defendant Trustgard's motion for summary judgment (DE 198) is DENIED.”
In King v. Bear, she considered the body-camera footage and found probable cause for the arrest.
“Upon review of the body-worn camera footage, the only reasonable determination is that Officer Bear had probable cause to arrest King.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Defendants' motion to dismiss (DE 48) is GRANTED; and 3. the Court will enter a judgment consistent with this opinion.”
“Defendants' motion to expedite release of lis pendens (DE 20) is GRANTED to the extent that Oak 44 SHALL REMOVE the lis pendens notice from the Property within fourteen (14) days of the entry of this order”
“the United States' motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted (DE 13) is GRANTED.”
“defendant Trustgard's motion for summary judgment (DE 198) is DENIED.”
“the Defendants' motion for summary judgment (DE 57) is GRANTED.”
“Defendant's motion for summary judgment (DE 66) is GRANTED in full;”
“Plaintiffs' cross-motion for partial summary judgment (DE 78) is DENIED;”
“Defendant Memorial Kentucky's Motion for Summary Judgment (R. 56) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART”
“The Plaintiff's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (R. 13) is DENIED”
“The Motion to Remand (R. 3) is GRANTED”
“The Motion to Dismiss (R. 8) is DENIED as MOOT”
“the defendants' motion (R. 5) for partial dismissal is GRANTED”
“American Drill's motion for summary judgment (DE 73) is GRANTED”
“Campbell's motion to dismiss (DE 10) is GRANTED and DENIED in part as follows: a. GRANTED with respect to the Plaintiffs' negligent training and supervision claim; and b. DENIED with respect to the Plaintiffs' negligent hiring and retention claim;”
“Back's motion to dismiss (DE 35) is DENIED”
“the Plaintiffs' motion for leave to file an amended complaint (DE 34) is GRANTED”
“that the Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (R. 19) is GRANTED.”
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 | 0 |
| Civil cases pending more than three years | 8 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 4 | 8 |
| Sep 2025 | 0 | 10 |
| Mar 2025 | 0 | 7 |
| Sep 2024 | 0 | 9 |
| Mar 2024 | 0 | 10 |
| Sep 2023 | 0 | 12 |
| Mar 2023 | 0 | 10 |
| Sep 2022 | 0 | 219 |
| Mar 2022 | 1 | 170 |
| Sep 2021 | 6 | 142 |
| Mar 2021 | 0 | 71 |
| Sep 2020 | 0 | 5 |
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 Eastern District of Kentucky, not for Judge Caldwell: 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 | 725 | 8.3 months |
| Closed with no court action | 107 | 7 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 602 | 8.3 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 6 | not reported |
| Closed during trial | 10 | 37.4 months |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 725 | 8.3 months |
| Sep 2024 | 653 | 8.5 months |
| Sep 2023 | 935 | 14 months |
| Sep 2022 | 810 | 11.6 months |
| Sep 2021 | 811 | 11 months |
| Sep 2020 | 804 | 8.7 months |
| Sep 2019 | 1,098 | 12 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 Caldwell with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Caldwell, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Caldwell's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace