Michael Adrian Ponsor
How Judge Ponsor rules, drawn from 16 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Ponsor
Michael Adrian Ponsor is a judge of the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts. Appointed by President William J. Clinton, Judge Ponsor received a commission on February 14, 1994. Judge Ponsor assumed senior status on August 15, 2011.
Judge Ponsor's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Ponsor, 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
Conferences
The mediation order calls for each party to submit a confidential settlement memorandum of no more than five pages before mediation.
“each party will provide the court a confidential settlement memorandum of no more than five pages”
Conferences
To continue mediation because of a serious conflict, confer and file an agreed motion at least a week before mediation, proposing at least three alternative dates.
“counsel should confer and, as soon as possible but in any event no later than one week prior to the scheduled date, file an assented-to motion to continue the mediation, offering at least three proposed dates and times”
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 Ponsor decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Cautions
In a phone product case heard by designation, he denied arbitration where the clause was buried in a warranty booklet and the consumer lacked reasonable notice. A company seeking to compel arbitration should make the agreement conspicuous enough for assent to be grounded.
“Samsung cannot enforce an arbitration agreement buried inconspicuously in a booklet purporting to offer information about the product and its warranties.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“For the foregoing reasons, Defendant’s Motion for Reconsideration (Dkt. No. 117) and Supplemental Motion to Suppress and Request for an Evidentiary Hearing (Dkt. No. 141) are hereby DENIED.”
“Defendant Tenczar’s motion to dismiss (Dkt. No. 10) is hereby ALLOWED. All seven counts against him, Counts I-VI and Count VIII, are hereby dismissed with prejudice.”
“Defendant Borges’s motion to dismiss (Dkt. No. 12) is hereby ALLOWED. As to Defendant Borges, Counts I, II, III, and TV are dismissed without prejudice, and Counts V, VI, and VII are dismissed with prejudice.”
“Defendant Town’s motion to dismiss (Dkt. No. 15) is hereby ALLOWED. As to Defendant Town, Counts I, II, III, and IV are dismissed without prejudice, and Counts V, VI, VII, and VIII are dismissed with prejudice, with the exception of the requests within Count VIII seeking injunctive relief, which are dismissed without prejudice.”
“Plaintiffs’ motion for a temporary restraining order (Dkt. No. .27) is hereby DENIED.”
“For the foregoing reasons, Defendants’ Motion to Remand (Dkt. No. 47) is hereby ALLOWED, pursuant to the court’s March 13, 2007 Order. Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. No. 46) is also hereby ALLOWED.”
“For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. No. 15) is hereby ALLOWED, and Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. No. 13) is hereby DENIED.”
“For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiffs Motion to Dismiss Counterclaim (Dkt. No. 11) and Motion for Discovery (Dkt. No. 31) are hereby DENIED.”
“For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiffs’ Motion for Damages, Permanent Injunction, and Attorney’s Fees (Dkt. No. 21) is hereby ALLOWED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.”
“For the foregoing reasons, upon de novo review, the court hereby adopts the Report and Recommendation, in part, but for the reasons stated hereby ALLOWS Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. No. 28), in toto.”
“For the foregoing reasons, Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss (Dkt. Nos. 20, 43, 44, 54, 58 & 76) are hereby ALLOWED.”
“For all these reasons, the court hereby DENIES Defendant’s Motion to Suppress.”
“For the foregoing reasons, Defendant Liacopolus’ motions to dismiss (Dkt. Nos. *19214 & 26) are hereby DENIED.”
“The motion to dismiss of the other Defendants (Dkt. No. 24) is ALLOWED as to the individual capacity claims in Count III and the official capacity claims in Counts I, II, and IV. The motion is DENIED in all other respects.”
“For the foregoing reasons, Defendant’s motion to dismiss (Dkt. No. 9) is hereby ALLOWED.”
“For the foregoing reasons, supplementing the reasons stated during the hearing, the court DENIED Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. No. 5).”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 449 days (N = 20).
The 20 located post-appointment cases were all closed and included civil-rights, statutory, personal-injury, copyright, trademark, benefits, habeas, immigration, lending, and judgment-enforcement matters.
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 | 0 |
| Mar 2025 | 0 | 1 |
| 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 |
| 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 District of Massachusetts, not for Judge Ponsor: 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 | 2,682 | 7.3 months |
| Closed with no court action | 1,095 | 3.8 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 881 | 7.1 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 676 | 17.4 months |
| Closed during trial | 30 | 34.8 months |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 2,682 | 7.3 months |
| Sep 2024 | 2,439 | 7.2 months |
| Sep 2023 | 2,756 | 9.1 months |
| Sep 2022 | 2,222 | 10.2 months |
| Sep 2021 | 2,582 | 12.2 months |
| Sep 2020 | 2,391 | 11.2 months |
| Sep 2019 | 4,438 | 23 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 Ponsor with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Ponsor, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Ponsor's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace