Denise Page Hood
How Judge Hood rules, drawn from 27 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Hood
Denise Page Hood is a judge of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan. Appointed by President William J. Clinton, Judge Hood received a commission on June 16, 1994. Judge Hood assumed senior status on May 1, 2022.
Judge Hood's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Hood, as published on the court's website (checked October 8, 2026). Judges revise these often, so confirm the current version on the court's site before you file.
Key rules
Filing
A courtesy copy of ALL MOTIONS (Dispositive & Non-Dispositive), including responses and replies, and all accompanying exhibits should be submitted to chambers.
“A courtesy copy of ALL MOTIONS (Dispositive & Non-Dispositive), including responses and replies, and all accompanying exhibits should be submitted to chambers.”
Filing
Courtesy copies of all Notice of Removals must be provided to chambers, including all attached exhibits.
“Courtesy copies of all Notice of Removals must be provided to chambers, including all attached exhibits.”
Motions
If no actual conversation occurs, the moving party must show that reasonable efforts were undertaken to conduct a conference and specifically describe those efforts in the motion papers.
“If no actual conversation occurs, the moving party must show that reasonable efforts were undertaken to conduct a conference and specifically describe those efforts in the motion papers.”
Trial
The Joint Pretrial Order is due one week prior to Final Pretrial Conference.
“The Joint Pretrial Order is due one week prior to Final Pretrial Conference.”
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 8, 2026).
- Procedures for Access, Service, and Management of Sealed Documents ↗
- Procedures for the Filing, Service and Management of Highly Sensitive Documents ↗
- Standing Order for Discovery and Inspection and Fixing Motion Cut-Off Date in Criminal Cases ↗
- Pro Se Filings (Revised & Amended) ↗
- Filing a New Civil Case or Civil Initiating Papers Under Seal ↗
How Judge Hood decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In Everman v. Commissioner of Social Security, she denied the Commissioner's jurisdictional motion to dismiss a challenge to a refusal to reopen benefits because the claimant alleged a colorable constitutional claim.
“Since Plaintiff alleges a colorable constitutional claim, the existence of which is determined by the court, this case will not be dismissed.”
Procedural preferences
In Estrada v. Commissioner of Social Security, she adopted the magistrate judge's report and recommendation after the objection period passed, denied Estrada's summary-judgment motion, and granted the Commissioner's cross-motion.
“The Court ACCEPTS and ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation, DENIES Estrada’s Motion for Summary Judgment and GRANTS the Commissioner’s Motion for Summary Judgment.”
Cautions
In Jenkins v. Cook, she denied reconsideration of a dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) because the petitioner added allegations about the merits but did not address the reason his case had been dismissed.
“Petitioner’s motion for reconsideration completely fails to address the grounds for dismissal. His motion ... contains additional factual allegations regarding the merits of his underlying claims. The motion presents no arguments why the dismissal under § 1915(g) was incorrect.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff Estrada’s Motion for Summary Judgment [#14] is DENIED.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant Commissioner of Social Security’s Motion for Summary Judgment [#17] is GRANTED.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff Weredick’s Motion for Summary Judgment [#10] is GRANTED.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant Commissioner of Social Security’s Motion for Summary Judgment [#12] is DENIED.”
“Defendant Commissioner of Social Security’s Motion to Dismiss [Docket No. 9, filed September 3, 2013] is DENIED.”
“it is ORDERED that Petitioner's motion for reconsideration, ECF No. 7, is DENIED.”
“IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 19) is GRANTED.”
“IT IS SO ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss First-Amended Complaint for Declaratory Relief to Compel Appraisal and the Appointment of an Umpire Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) [ECF No. 10] is GRANTED;”
“IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings or to Dismiss the Counterclaim (Doc. No. 16) is GRANTED under Rule 12(b)(6).”
“Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Based on Failure to State a Claim and Qualified Immunity [Docket No. 8, filed on May 26, 2009] is GRANTED.”
“IT IS ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss [Docket No. 3, filed on February 24, 2010] is GRANTED and this case is DISMISSED without prejudice.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Remand [Docket No. 9, filed on March 8, 2010] is DENIED.”
“IT IS ORDERED that the Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss and to Compel Arbitration, or alternatively to Stay Litigation Pending Arbitration [Docket No. 3, filed on May 9, 2011] is DENIED.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc # 42) is GRANTED.”
“IT IS SO ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction is DENIED.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median motion-to-ruling time: 237 days (N = 13).
The selected civil matters include consumer credit, insurance, employment, Social Security, civil rights, copyright and habeas cases. Later chief-judge assignments also included many warrant and miscellaneous duty matters, which are not treated as merits cases. This describes sampled case types, not a courtwide mix.
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 | 61 |
| Bench trials submitted more than six months | 4 |
| Bankruptcy appeals pending more than six months | 0 |
| Social Security appeals pending more than six months | 0 |
| Civil cases pending more than three years | 28 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 61 | 28 |
| Sep 2025 | 65 | 29 |
| Mar 2025 | 50 | 30 |
| Sep 2024 | 35 | 29 |
| Mar 2024 | 49 | 39 |
| Sep 2023 | 85 | 39 |
| Mar 2023 | 127 | 37 |
| Sep 2022 | 139 | 31 |
| Mar 2022 | 174 | 32 |
| Sep 2021 | 144 | 22 |
| Mar 2021 | 107 | 17 |
| Sep 2020 | 34 | 11 |
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 Eastern District of Michigan, not for Judge Hood: 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 | 2,926 | 8.3 months |
| Closed with no court action | 410 | 2.9 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 1,246 | 4.1 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 1,252 | 15.3 months |
| Closed during trial | 18 | 35.8 months |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 2,926 | 8.3 months |
| Sep 2024 | 2,615 | 7.9 months |
| Sep 2023 | 2,616 | 8.5 months |
| Sep 2022 | 2,541 | 9.2 months |
| Sep 2021 | 2,405 | 10.2 months |
| Sep 2020 | 2,677 | 9 months |
| Sep 2019 | 3,237 | 8.6 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 Hood with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Hood, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Hood's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace