Elizabeth A. Stafford
How Judge Stafford decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
A proposed amendment is more likely to be accepted when it replaces conclusory or confusing rhetoric with understandable factual allegations that state plausible claims; material that neither advances a claim nor supplies supporting facts may be excluded.
“Instead, the amended complaint sets out Lopez's claims in an understandable way. And defendants filed no opposition to the motion to amend nor argued that the claims are futile. Thus, the Court grants Lopez's motion to amend and accepted in part the amended complaint ... as the operative complaint.”
Procedural preferences
She enforces the Rule 26(f) sequencing requirement and will quash discovery served before the parties confer unless a rule, stipulation, or court order authorizes early discovery.
“Akrawi's discovery requests are premature. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(d)(1) precludes parties from seek[ing] discovery from any source before the parties have conferred as required by Rule 26(f) ... FCA's motion to quash is thus GRANTED.”
Discovery responses must make a clear choice between objecting and producing, and must state whether responsive material is being withheld; responses framed as answers 'without waiving' objections are insufficient.
“[A] party cannot cloak its answers in without-waiving objections. ... The Court thus ORDERS Bouie to ... serve defendants with supplemental discovery responses that specify whether he is withholding any discovery based on any objections.”
Cautions
She will strike amended pleadings filed after Rule 15(a)(1)'s deadline when the litigant has not sought leave under Rule 15(a)(2), and she also enforces local limits on unauthorized sur-replies and unattached exhibits.
“Strong's deadline to amend her complaint under Rule 15(a)(1) lapsed on October 9 for GM and October 10 for UAW. Thus, GM's motion is GRANTED, and the amended complaints are STRICKEN.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Magistrate Judge Stafford issued a Report recommending that the Court grant the Commissioner's motion and affirm the Commissioner's decision... Thomas's motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 13) is DENIED”
“the Commissioner's motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 14) is GRANTED, and the ALJ's decision is AFFIRMED under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. 405(g)”
“Magistrate Judge Elizabeth Stafford, issued a report, ECF No. 57, recommending that this Court grant the motion for summary judgment filed by Defendant Talesha Jackson, ECF No. 44... Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 44, is GRANTED”
“deny the motion for summary judgment filed by Plaintiff Ricardo Stubbs, ECF No. 30... Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 30, is DENIED. Plaintiff's Complaint, ECF No. 1, is therefore DISMISSED.”
“the Court RECOMMENDS that the Commissioner's motion, ECF No. 17, be GRANTED; that Carter's motion, ECF No. 16, be DENIED; and that the ALJ's decision be AFFIRMED”
“RECOMMENDS that: ... the Commissioner's motion, ECF No. 17, be GRANTED; and the Commissioner's decision be AFFIRMED under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. 405(g)”
“The Court thus RECOMMENDS that plaintiff's complaint be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE for failure to prosecute... The Court RECOMMENDS that this action be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“Both parties consented to conduct all proceedings before this Court [R. 21]. For the reasons stated on the record during the hearing on December 10, 2015, and as described below, the Court GRANTS Rowe’s motion for remand [R. 15] and DENIES the Commissioner’s motion for summary judgment [R. 17].”
“The Court finds that the administrative law judge’s (ALJ) decision is supported by substantial evidence, and thus: DENIES Mitchell’s motion, ECF No. 15; GRANTS the Commissioner’s motion, ECF No. 16; and AFFIRMS the ALJ’s decision under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).”
“ORDER Denying Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 16), Granting Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 18), And Affirming the Decision of The Commissioner.”
“After review of the record, the Court ORDERS that: Plaintiff’s motion (ECF No. 8) is DENIED; the Commissioner’s motion (ECF No. 10) is GRANTED; and the ALJ’s decision is AFFIRMED under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).”
“After review of the record, the Court ORDERS that: Plaintiff’s motion (ECF No. 11) is DENIED; the Commissioner’s motion (ECF No. 13) is GRANTED; and the ALJ’s decision is AFFIRMED under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).”
“After review of the record, the Court ORDERS that: Plaintiff’s motion (ECF No. 9) is DENIED; the Commissioner’s motion (ECF No. 12) is GRANTED; and the ALJ’s decision is AFFIRMED under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).”
“The parties’ Stipulation to Remand to the Commissioner is granted, and this case is remanded to the Commissioner for further proceedings under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).”
“The parties’ Stipulation to Remand to the Commissioner is granted, and this case is remanded to the Commissioner for further proceedings under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
The reviewed referral matters provide descriptive caseload context rather than a complete count of Judge Stafford's work.
Put Judge Stafford's record to work
Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Stafford actually rules, not a generic AI guess.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Stafford's own signed orders and cites them.