Sally J. Berens
How Judge Berens rules, drawn from 29 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Berens
Sally J. Berens became a United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of Michigan in November 2019. Before joining the bench, she clerked for the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, practiced civil litigation, and served as an assistant United States attorney.
Judge Berens's practices and standing orders
The court's website lists no individual practices or standing orders of Judge Berens'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).
How Judge Berens decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In Dykes v. Finco, Berens recommended summary judgment for a retired prison official after finding he could not have been personally involved in conduct that occurred years after his retirement.
“Defendant Finco has shown that he could not have been personally involved in the alleged violations, which occurred in 2017 and 2018, because he retired in June 2015 and has had no involvement with MDOC decisions since that time.”
In a Social Security appeal, Berens found that the administrative law judge had failed to explain why she rejected a treating physician’s more restrictive limitations and that the Commissioner’s later rationale did not supply the required explanation.
“the ALJ failed to articulate specifically why she chose not to credit his opinion of more restrictive limitations regarding Plaintiff's abilities to interact appropriately with supervisors ... the Commissioner's post hoc rationale on appeal is not a substitute for the 'good reasons' an ALJ must provide.”
In Wimberly, Berens recommended denying summary judgment on exhaustion after reading the entire grievance as indicating the defendant’s involvement, despite the defense argument that it did not identify him.
“Moreover, a fair reading of the 0620 Grievance as a whole indicates that Defendant Trefil had some involvement with the misconduct. Therefore, this argument lacks merit.”
Procedural preferences
In Durr v. VanderWiel, Berens recommended summary judgment on exhaustion grounds after applying the misconduct-hearing process to the prisoner’s retaliatory-ticket claim.
“the Sixth Circuit confirmed that claims concerning decisions made in the misconduct hearing process must be exhausted through that process, not the prison grievance procedure.”
In Jones v. Snyder, Berens treated the unserved defendants as nonparties whose consent was unnecessary to enter a final screening decision, then denied the prisoner leave to proceed without prepaying fees under the three-strikes rule.
“Because the named defendants have not yet been served, the undersigned concludes that they are not presently parties whose consent is required to permit the undersigned to enter an opinion, order, and judgment.”
Cautions
In Cooper-Keel v. State of Michigan, Berens granted summary judgment on a challenge to a court’s Facebook comment policy because the page barred comments from all users regardless of viewpoint.
“Precluding all users/visitors from commenting on Circuit Court posts is both reasonable in light of the purpose of the Facebook page and viewpoint neutral, as all users are precluded from posting comments, regardless of viewpoint.”
In Walker v. Vitalcore Health Strategies, Berens recommended dismissal with prejudice for failure to prosecute after mail to the detainee was returned and he had not provided a current address; she found that the court could not warn him while unable to reach him.
“This is a willful failure by Plaintiff which prejudices Defendants' ability to defend against Plaintiff's claims. The Court is unable to even warn Plaintiff, given its inability to reach him.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“the State Defendants' ... Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 53) is GRANTED and the federal claims as to those Defendants are DISMISSED with prejudice.”
“I recommend that the Court deny Defendant Jennett's motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim.”
“In sum, I recommend that the Court take the foregoing actions and dismiss this action with prejudice.”
“I therefore recommend that this action be dismissed with prejudice for Plaintiff's failure to prosecute.”
“the undersigned recommends that Plaintiffs Rodney and Misty Davis's claims be dismissed with prejudice.”
“the Court will deny Plaintiff leave to proceed in forma pauperis. The Court will dismiss this action without prejudice to Plaintiff's right to refile his complaint as a new action in this Court with the full civil action filing fees.”
“the Court will grant Defendant Valdez's motion and dismiss Plaintiff's claim against him without prejudice.”
“the Court will grant Defendants' motions for summary judgment and dismiss Kelley's complaint with prejudice.”
“the motion will be denied as moot.”
“the Court will GRANT the motion and dismiss this action with prejudice.”
“these rules indicate that a Rule 41(a) dismissal is not warranted ... the Court finds that a Rule 41(b) dismissal is not appropriate.”
“I recommend that the Court grant Defendant Finco's Motion for Summary Judgment ... and dismiss Plaintiff's complaint with prejudice.”
“I recommend that the Court grant Defendants' motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 24) and dismiss Plaintiff's claims without prejudice for failure to exhaust his administrative remedies.”
“I recommend that Defendant Bastian's motion to dismiss (ECF No. 11) be GRANTED and that he be dismissed from this action along with Defendants Boysen and Spieldenner.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
- Berens's directly-assigned caseload includes a substantial Social Security consent-jurisdiction cohort (28 U.S.C. sec. 636(c)), claimants and the Commissioner routinely consent to have her enter final judgment on DIB/SSI appeals, alongside prisoner civil-rights and PLRA screening matters, general civil suits (contract, FDCPA, employment, FOIA), and criminal-adjacent matters (search-warrant/forfeiture miscellaneous filings).
- The 2020 filing-year window alone shows well over a dozen Social Security appeals directly assigned to her.
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 | 1 |
| Mar 2025 | 0 | 0 |
| 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 Western District of Michigan, not for Judge Berens: 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 | 1,042 | 7.6 months |
| Closed with no court action | 107 | 2.8 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 714 | 6.7 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 217 | 14.2 months |
| Closed during trial | 4 | not reported |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 1,042 | 7.6 months |
| Sep 2024 | 906 | 6.8 months |
| Sep 2023 | 847 | 6.1 months |
| Sep 2022 | 1,033 | 6.2 months |
| Sep 2021 | 1,081 | 9.1 months |
| Sep 2020 | 844 | 7.4 months |
| Sep 2019 | 893 | 7.8 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 Berens with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Berens, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Berens's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace