Terrence George Berg
How Judge Berg decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Procedural preferences
Enforces the statute of limitations rigorously at the pleading stage in antitrust cases: a plaintiff invoking equitable tolling must plead fraudulent concealment with specificity -- affirmative acts of concealment, not merely that the defendant later used information it lawfully obtained. Without that, time-barred Sherman Act (and dependent unjust-enrichment) claims are dismissed with prejudice.
“Plaintiffs’ Sherman Act claims could not be equitably tolled because there was no showing of fraudulent concealment, so too is Plaintiffs’ unjust enrichment claim barred. ... Accordingly, Plaintiffs’ unjust enrichment claim is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE as untimely.”
Like his mied colleagues, resolves many dispositive motions through the magistrate-judge R&R process; when no party objects he adopts the recommendation without independent record review (Thomas v. Arn). Make the substantive argument to the magistrate.
“Where, as here, neither party objects to the report, the district court is not obligated to independently review the record. ... the Court will accept the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation as this Court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law.”
Motion outcomes
Counted from classified signed orders only. Percentages are shown only where the sample is large enough to be meaningful; smaller samples are reported as raw counts.
| Summary judgment N = 2 |
Granted: 1Denied: 1 | counts only |
| Motions to dismiss N = 1 |
Granted: 1 | counts only |
| Motion for judgment on pleadings N = 1 |
Granted in part: 1 | counts only |
| Motion to transfer venue N = 1 |
Denied: 1 | counts only |
| Class certification N = 1 |
Moot / procedural: 1 | counts only |
A "1 of 1" is one ruling, not a tendency. Treat small samples as illustrative, not predictive.
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss, ECF Nos. 38, 40, are GRANTED. ... The First Amended Complaint is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“Defendants’ Motion to Transfer Venue, ECF No. 39, is DENIED.”
“Plaintiffs’ Motion to Certify Class, ECF No. 29, is DENIED AS MOOT.”
“Defendant City of Detroit’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. The motion is GRANTED as it relates to ... Plaintiff’s Title VII religious discrimination and related hostile work environment claims for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. The motion is DENIED to the extent that it seeks dismissal of (1) Plaintiff’s ADA disability discrimination and related hostile work environment claims ...; and (2) Plaintiff’s federal claims as untimely.”
“Commissioner Andrew Saul’s motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 15) is GRANTED.”
“Plaintiff Terrance Frazier’s motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 13) is DENIED.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Nature-of-suit mix observed across his enumeration + the GovInfo dockets. Berg carries qui tam / False Claims Act, antitrust, employment-discrimination, Social Security, a notable criminal docket, drug/civil forfeiture, and the usual duty-docket search/seizure-warrant matters (not counted as merits cases). Consistent with his prosecutorial background, his docket leans criminal/government-enforcement-heavy.