Dulce J. Foster
How Judge Foster rules, drawn from 26 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Foster
Dulce J. Foster was sworn in as a United States Magistrate Judge for the District of Minnesota in August 2022 and sits in Minneapolis. She earned her law degree at the University of Minnesota Law School and previously led a law firm's white collar and regulatory defense practice.
Judge Foster's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Foster, as published on the court's website (checked October 9, 2026). Judges revise these often, so confirm the current version on the court's site before you file.
- Magistrate Judge Dulce J. Foster's Practice Pointers ↗
- 26(f) Report Template - General - PDF ↗
- 26(f) Report Template - General - DOCX ↗
- 26(f) Report Template - ERISA - PDF ↗
- 26(f) Report Template - ERISA - DOCX ↗
- 26(f) Report Template - Patent - PDF ↗
- 26(f) Report Template - Patent - DOCX ↗
Key rules
Contacting chambers
Keep IDR letters to three pages and email them at least two business days before the conference.
“letter submissions shall be no more than three (3) pages long and must be emailed to Chambers and all parties at least two (2) business days before the Zoom video conference.”
Filing
Email chambers a Word courtesy copy of the Rule 26(f) report when filed.
“When you file the Rule 26(f) report, please email a courtesy copy in Word format to [email protected].”
Motions
For contested motions, request a hearing date before filing even if the parties want decision on the papers.
“A hearing date must be requested before the motion is filed, even if the parties agree that no hearing is necessary.”
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).
- Amended Administrative Order: Procedures for Storage and Management of Sealed Documents ↗
- General Order No. 1: Filing Sealed Documents with Highly Sensitive Information ↗
- General Order No. 2: Removing Sealed Documents with Highly Sensitive Information from CM/ECF ↗
- Administrative Order: Encryption of Electronic Materials and Cloud Storage Links ↗
How Judge Foster decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Procedural preferences
In one franchise dispute, Foster rejected a requested automatic bankruptcy stay because the debtor had filed the suit and faced no counterclaims. A stay request based only on the plaintiff’s bankruptcy did not satisfy the cited statute.
“Section 362 automatically stays proceedings against debtors who have filed for bankruptcy; it does not stay proceedings initiated by such debtors.”
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.
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 | 0 |
| Mar 2025 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2024 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2024 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2023 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2023 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2022 | 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 District of Minnesota, not for Judge Foster: 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 | 2,681 | 8.2 months |
| Closed with no court action | 1,499 | 5.6 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 645 | 7.4 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 525 | 13.3 months |
| Closed during trial | 12 | 39.4 months |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 2,681 | 8.2 months |
| Sep 2024 | 2,636 | 8.3 months |
| Sep 2023 | 2,579 | 7 months |
| Sep 2022 | 2,701 | 5.8 months |
| Sep 2021 | 2,737 | 7.7 months |
| Sep 2020 | 3,259 | 14.3 months |
| Sep 2019 | 8,151 | 21.6 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 Foster with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Foster, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Foster's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace