Matthew Thomas Schelp

United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri Appointed by Donald Trump (Republican) 9 signed orders read

How Judge Schelp decides

Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

What persuades

Where a federal case substantially overlaps with another pending FEDERAL proceeding, abstains by staying rather than dismissing — even if the other forum might not fully resolve the dispute. Ask for a stay, not dismissal, when invoking federal-federal abstention before him.

“the Court denies the Government’s Motion, but issues a temporary stay of Plaintiff’s action in this Court.”

Procedural preferences

Enforces appeal/collateral-attack waivers in plea agreements: a knowing and voluntary §2255 waiver will be enforced and the petition dismissed, absent a miscarriage of justice or a reserved exception (e.g., ineffective assistance).

““A defendant may waive the right to seek collateral relief under § 2255.””

Holds plaintiffs strictly to their burden of establishing personal jurisdiction; will dismiss without prejudice under Rule 12(b)(2) where that burden is not met.

“Because the Court concludes Plaintiff Stifel, Nicolaus & Company, Inc. has failed to establish this Court’s personal jurisdiction over Defendants, the Court will grant Defendants’ Motion and dismiss this action without prejudice.”

Cautions

For pro se complaints, liberal construction has limits — he will not supply missing facts or excuse a failure to plead a cognizable claim. Plead specific facts, not conclusions.

“liberal construction does not mean that [the Court] supply missing facts to a plaintiff’s allegations or ignore a plaintiff’s failure to allege facts setting forth a cognizable claim.”

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.

Motions to dismiss
N = 6
Granted: 4Denied: 2 counts only
Summary judgment
N = 2
Granted: 2 counts only
Motions to remand
N = 1
Denied: 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.

Control Technology & Solutions, LLC v. Omni Energy Partners, LLC
4:21-cv-00686-MTS · 2021-11-10
Motions to remand (plaintiff) Denied

“For the reasons that follow, the Court denies Plaintiff’s Motion.”

Raju J. Mukhi v. United States
4:22-cv-00280-MTS · 2022-12-27
Motions to dismiss (defendant (United States)) Denied

“For the reasons that follow, the Court denies the Government’s Motion, but issues a temporary stay of Plaintiff’s action in this Court.”

Alltru Federal Credit Union v. Allied Solutions, LLC
4:22-cv-00819-MTS · 2023-03-03
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied

“For the reasons that follow, the Court denies Defendant’s Motion.”

Nicolas Cortez Williams v. Matthew Grimes
4:22-cv-00782-MTS · 2023-01-18
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“For the reasons that follow, the Court grants Defendant’s Motion.”

Kevin Sonderegger v. Specialized Loan Servicing, LLC (U.S. Bank, N.A.)
4:20-cv-01026-MTS · 2021-11-03
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“For the reasons set forth below, the Motion is granted.”

Debora Spann v. Neighbors Credit Union
4:21-cv-00405-MTS · 2022-08-16
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“For the reasons set forth below, the Court grants Defendant’s Motion.”

The Ohio Casualty Insurance Company v. Eagle Mist Corporation
4:19-cv-02974-MTS · 2021-12-22
Summary judgment (plaintiff (counter-defendant insurer)) Granted

“For the reasons set forth below, the Court grants Counter-Defendants’ Motion.”

Burhaan Hassan Chambers v. United States
4:22-cv-00132-MTS · 2022-07-12
Motions to dismiss (defendant (United States / respondent)) Granted

“For the reasons that follow, the Court grants Respondent’s Motion.”

Stifel, Nicolaus & Company, Inc. v. Sapient Capital, LLC
4:23-cv-00241-MTS · 2024-03-08
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“Because the Court concludes Plaintiff Stifel, Nicolaus & Company, Inc. has failed to establish this Court’s personal jurisdiction over Defendants, the Court will grant Defendants’ Motion and dismiss this action without prejudice.”