Dulce J. Foster
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Defendant Benjaman Shelabarger's Motion to Dismiss the Amended Complaint (Doc. No. [34]) is DENIED.”
“Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 25) is GRANTED; 4. The Complaint (Doc. No. 9) is DISMISSED with prejudice.”
“Kelley's motion to dismiss the indictment (Doc. No. [24]) is DENIED.”
District Judge Donovan W. Frank adopted Magistrate Judge Foster's July 16, 2024 recommendation (no objections filed). Foster recommended dismissal without prejudice because the plaintiff failed to file proof of service or show cause; the court adopted it and dismissed without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m). It is a sua sponte procedural dismissal resolving no party motion on the merits.
“IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the Report and Recommendation [ECF 13] is ACCEPTED, and Plaintiff's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus [ECF 1] is DISMISSED.”
“3. Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment [Docket No. 13] is DENIED; and 4. Plaintiff's Complaint [Docket No. 1] is DISMISSED with prejudice.”
“U.S. Bank's motion to dismiss [ECF No. 21] is GRANTED and the claims against U.S. Bank are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“Ginnie Mae's motion to dismiss [ECF No. 29] is GRANTED and the claims against Ginnie Mae are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.”
“Defendant Robert Cortez Verser's Pretrial Motion for Suppression of All Evidence Obtained Pursuant to the Execution of a Search Warrant (ECF No. [27]) is DENIED.”
“Defendant Robert Cortez Verser's Pretrial Motion for Suppression of All Evidence Obtained Pursuant to the Execution of a Search Warrant Allowing Law Enforcement To Use a GPS Tracking Device (ECF No. [28]) is DENIED.”
“Santos-Hunter's supplemental motion to suppress evidence obtained as a result of a search and seizure (Doc. No. [33]) is DENIED.”
“Cole's motion to suppress evidence obtained from warrantless arrest (Doc. No. [23]) is DENIED.”
“Cole's motion to suppress evidence from search of cell phones (Doc. No. [24]) is DENIED with respect to the use of the evidence to impeach Cole, DENIED AS MOOT with respect to the use of such evidence in the Government's case-in-chief, and GRANTED for all other purposes.”
In a pro se prisoner civil-rights case, District Judge Laura M. Provinzino adopted in full Magistrate Judge Foster's December 19, 2024 recommendation after clear-error review and no objections. Foster recommended sua sponte screening dismissal under 28 U.S.C. 1915A(b) of most defendants, one with prejudice and the rest without prejudice, leaving a single defendant in the case.
District Judge Jeffrey M. Bryan adopted Magistrate Judge Foster's September 16, 2024 recommendation after clear-error review and no objection, dismissing the action sua sponte and without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for failure to prosecute.
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Foster's consent (636(c)) civil footprint as the assigned judge is dominated by Social Security disability appeals (DIWC/DIWW/SSID); she also handles a heavy volume of criminal magistrate matters (search/tracking warrants, initial appearances). Case-level durations (filed minus terminated) from the docket sample: Wickstrom v. O'Malley ~145 days; Fino v. O'Malley ~259 days; Welch v. Colvin ~293 days; Nicoski v. Kijakazi ~16 months; Eriksson v. Kijakazi ~16 months; Elsenpeter v. Kijakazi ~17 months; Walters v. Kijakazi ~16 months; Braunschweig v. Kijakazi ~15 months; Page v. Kijakazi ~15 months; Hauk v. Kijakazi ~8 months; Townsend v. O'Malley ~11 months; Martinson v. O'Malley ~13 months. Sampled 2026-07-03; not exhaustive.
Put Judge Foster's record to work
Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Foster actually rules, not a generic AI guess.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Foster's own signed orders and cites them.