Halil Suleyman Ozerden
How Judge Ozerden rules, drawn from 17 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Ozerden
Halil Suleyman Ozerden is a judge of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi. Appointed by President George W. Bush, Judge Ozerden received a commission on May 1, 2007.
Judge Ozerden's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Ozerden, 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.
Key rules
Trial
For criminal trials, email proposed jury instructions in an accessible Word file six days before trial, with a copy to opposing counsel.
“Proposed JURY INSTRUCTIONS are to be submitted to the Court via e-mail at [email protected], in an accessible Word format, with a copy to opposing counsel, six (6) days prior to the date for which trial is set”
Trial
For civil trials, submit proposed substantive jury instructions at least 14 calendar days before trial and email them to chambers.
“Requests for instructions shall be submitted not later than fourteen (14) calendar days prior to the date for which trial is set. Proposed substantive jury instructions are to be submitted to the Court via e-mail”
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 Ozerden decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In a wrongful-discharge dispute over a firearm-in-vehicle statute, the judge found the employer's own security-director declaration, admitting gates were rejected as impractical and staffed guard stations as cost-prohibitive, undercut the employer's claim that its parking lot was legally 'restricted', letting the case proceed.
“Ingalls does not contend that the parking lot is gated, or that it has manned, controlled access to its parking lots... Ingalls contends that there were no trespassing signs located at each entrance... Smith and Mergenshroer have testified, however, that the signs were rusted, falling down, and essentially not legible or sufficient to place an individual on notice of the parking lots' restrictions.”
On a disparate-treatment age-discrimination claim, the judge found that specific, concrete evidence undercutting an employer's stated performance-based reasons for firing, inconsistent accounts of who requested a replacement, an email suggesting management pre-planned a corrective-action strategy before documenting complaints, was enough to survive summary judgment, even though the same 'stray remark' evidence failed as direct evidence of discrimination.
“While Rogers has introduced little evidence of discriminatory animus, for purposes of summary judgment he has both met his prima facie burden and called into question the veracity of Medline's legitimate nondiscriminatory reasons for his discharge.”
In an insurance-coverage dispute, the judge gave real weight to a specific policy endorsement's plain language over the insurer's broader, more general policy exclusions, applying the rule that a more specific rider controls over general terms when they conflict.
“there is a conflict between the 'Section I: General Conditions,' 'Section II: General Liability Coverages,' and 'Section III: Ship Repairer's Legal Liability' provisions that would arguably appear to exclude coverage... and the modifying language contained in the 'Other Work Endorsement' which is more specific and arguably appears to provide coverage”
In Goodnight Terminal Services, he let the company’s business-interference claim proceed but dismissed the chief executive’s parallel claim because the pleadings identified no business relationship of his own, independent of the company.
“The business relationship belonged to GTS, and Mackey has identified no separate, independent relationship he shared with any third party.”
Procedural preferences
In Williams v. CIBA Vision Corp., he dismissed an intraocular-lens claim because the complaint offered no facts showing that the alleged manufacturing change violated an FDA-approved requirement; he also found the claims time-barred.
“Plaintiff has not stated any facts to support the conclusory allegation that the alleged ‘buffered tumbling process’ violated the pre-approved manufacturing process or any requirement specific to the MemoryLens IOL.”
For a former public employee’s due process claim, the court required facts about the actual terms of the alleged personnel handbook or other concrete source of continued-employment rights. Merely alleging that a handbook existed did not establish a protected property interest.
“He has merely alleged the existence of a handbook, but he has not provided any facts regarding the handbook’s contents or explained how it created an expectation of continued employment.”
In Roussel, a data breach class action, he dismissed the named plaintiffs’ claims without prejudice because their pleadings did not establish an Article III injury traceable to the breach.
“Because Plaintiffs have not plausibly alleged Article III standing, the Court is without subject-matter jurisdiction to adjudicate their claims, and they should be dismissed without prejudice.”
Cautions
In Pezzarossi v. Sherwin-Williams Company, he dismissed a diversity case without prejudice after the amended complaint still failed to establish the citizenship of the fictitious defendants despite an opportunity to correct the pleading.
“this case must be dismissed without prejudice.”
In Ellsberry v. Mississippi Department of Corrections, he dismissed a habeas petition without prejudice after the petitioner ignored three orders and failed to provide a current address despite warnings.
“Dismissal without prejudice is warranted.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Defendant Huntington Ingalls Incorporated's Motion [67] for Summary Judgment is DENIED.”
“Plaintiff Richard K. Rogers' disparate-impact age discrimination claim is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“Plaintiff Richard K. Rogers' disparate-treatment age discrimination claim will proceed.”
“the Court finds that it lacks personal jurisdiction over Defendant Ford Motor Company in this case. Defendant's Motion [9] should be granted, and Plaintiffs' claims against Defendant should be dismissed without prejudice.”
“the Motion for Summary Judgment [44] filed by Defendant American Bankers Insurance Company of Florida is GRANTED, and Plaintiff Howard Berry's claims in this civil action are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Second Amended Complaint [27] should be granted and that Plaintiff's claims against Defendant should be dismissed.”
“Plaintiffs St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Company and Travelers Property Casualty Company of America's Motion for Summary Judgment [28] is DENIED.”
“the Court finds that Ashoka's Motion to Dismiss [94] should be granted”
“Perret and Leary's Motion to Dismiss [96] should be granted in part and denied in part... All of Plaintiff's claims should be dismissed except for the misrepresentation claims pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 512(f) against Defendants Progress Media Group Limited and Marilyn Smulders contained in Count 3 of the Third Amended Complaint and against Defendants Charles Leary and Trout Point Lodge in Count 5. These two claims will remain.”
“that Slabbed New Media, LLC's Motion to Intervene [101] should be denied.”
“the Court is of the opinion that Defendants Byrd and Thornton are entitled to qualified immunity as to Plaintiff's federal law claims. The Motion should be granted.”
“the Court finds that the Motion [104] for Judgment of Acquittal or Alternatively, Motion for New Trial, and the Motions for Joinder [103], [105], [109] should all be denied. Neither Defendant is entitled to a judgment of acquittal or a new trial.”
“the Motion [12] of Defendants Dominic and Kathy Ovella to Dismiss Plaintiff B & C Construction's Complaint, pursuant to Fed.R.CivP. 12(b)(6), is GRANTED IN PART, and B & C's claim for unjust enrichment is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE... the Ovellas' Motion [12] to Dismiss B & C's Complaint is DENIED IN PART as to B & C's remaining claims for breach of contract, breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing, and tortious breach of contract.”
“the Court finds that because Plaintiffs are unable to maintain their claims as a matter of law against the Pfizer Defendants, they are entitled to summary judgment.”
“The Court further finds that because Plaintiffs' claims against the Watson Defendants are preempted, the Watson Defendants' Motion to Dismiss should be granted.”
“the Court finds that because Liddell is unable to maintain her claims as a matter of law, NGSB is entitled to summary judgment.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
His general docket includes insurance-coverage and bad-faith disputes, employment discrimination, personal-injury and products-liability removals, civil-rights suits (including school-related Section 1983 claims), Social Security appeals, prisoner habeas petitions, forfeiture actions, and criminal cases, drawn primarily from the Gulfport/Biloxi and Hattiesburg divisions.
How long civil cases take in this court
For the whole of U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi, not for Judge Ozerden: 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 | 1,034 | 9.4 months |
| Closed with no court action | 613 | 8.4 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 385 | 9.9 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 26 | 21 months |
| Closed during trial | 10 | 21.5 months |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 1,034 | 9.4 months |
| Sep 2024 | 988 | 8.7 months |
| Sep 2023 | 972 | 11 months |
| Sep 2022 | 1,139 | 11.9 months |
| Sep 2021 | 1,061 | 11.2 months |
| Sep 2020 | 1,605 | 7.2 months |
| Sep 2019 | 1,094 | 9.3 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 Ozerden with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Ozerden, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Ozerden's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace