Martin K. Reidinger
How Judge Reidinger rules, drawn from 13 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Reidinger
Martin Karl Reidinger is a judge of the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina. Appointed by President George W. Bush, Judge Reidinger received a commission on September 12, 2007.
Judge Reidinger's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Reidinger, 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.
- Asbestos Litigation Pretrial Order and Case Management Plan ↗
- Asbestos Related Litigation Standing Order ↗
- Pretrial Order and Case Management Plan ↗
- Proposed Order Governing Release of Pathology Materials ↗
Key rules
Motions
A response-extension motion must be filed before the response deadline expires.
“If counsel need more than fourteen (14) days to file a response, they shall 8 file a motion for extension of time to respond prior to the expiration of the response deadline.”
Discovery
A motion to compel must state that the parties tried to resolve the dispute in good faith.
“A motion to compel must include a statement by the movant that the parties have conferred in good faith in an attempt to resolve the dispute and are unable to do so.”
Discovery
In asbestos cases, the pretrial order requires mediation.
“Mediation IS ordered in this case.”
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 Reidinger decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In Shook v. McNally, Reidinger granted summary judgment because the treatment delay showed at most negligence and the record did not connect the delay to additional injury.
“the Motions for Summary Judgment filed Defendants Charles J. McNally [Doc. 47] and Norma Biddix [Doc. 53] are GRANTED, and this action is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
Cautions
In Peters v. Aetna, Reidinger dismissed the civil-RICO counts with prejudice because the alleged enterprise lacked a structure independent of the defendants' ordinary commercial relationship, while allowing the ERISA fiduciary claims to proceed.
“OptumHealth Care Solutions, Inc.'s Motion to Dismiss the Complaint [Doc. 37] ... [is] hereby GRANTED IN PART and Counts I and II of the Complaint are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. In all other respects, the Defendants' Motions [Docs. 37, 39] are DENIED.”
In Jones v. Dismukes, Reidinger dismissed the habeas petition as untimely where the self-represented petitioner did not address the limitations issue or offer a basis for equitable tolling.
“The Respondent's Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 16] is GRANTED. ... The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus [Doc. 1] is DISMISSED.”
In Dmarcian, Inc. v. DMARC Advisor BV, Reidinger denied a late request to supplement the complaint after finding that the plaintiff had delayed addressing its canceled trademark registration; the new registration could instead be raised at trial if relevant.
“The Plaintiff simply has not acted diligently”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“OptumHealth Care Solutions, Inc.'s Motion to Dismiss the Complaint [Doc. 37] ... [is] hereby GRANTED IN PART and Counts I and II of the Complaint are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. In all other respects, the Defendants' Motions [Docs. 37, 39] are DENIED.”
“the Motion of Defendants Aetna, Inc. and Aetna Life Insurance Company to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint [Doc. 39] are hereby GRANTED IN PART and Counts I and II of the Complaint are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. In all other respects, the Defendants' Motions [Docs. 37, 39] are DENIED.”
“The Respondent's Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 16] is GRANTED. ... The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus [Doc. 1] is DISMISSED.”
“The Petitioner's renewed Motion to Appoint Counsel [Doc. 12] and his Motion to Dismiss his state charges and sentence [Doc. 13] are both DENIED as moot.”
“the Motions for Summary Judgment filed Defendants Charles J. McNally [Doc. 47] and Norma Biddix [Doc. 53] are GRANTED, and this action is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART”
“Motion to Dismiss [Doc. 9] is GRANTED, and the Plaintiff”
“Motions to Dismiss [Docs. 12, 22] are DENIED”
“the Plaintiff’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment is denied;”
“the Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment is denied;”
“Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 22] is GRANTED”
“the decision of the Commissioner is REVERSED, and the case is hereby REMANDED”
“Motion to Dismiss [Doc. 25] is GRANTED, and this action is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE”
“Supplement the Complaint [Doc. 464] is hereby DENIED.”
“Scheduling Order [Doc. 58] is GRANTED”
“Accordingly, the Defendant’s motion to allow for a response to the Government’s Proposed Scheduling Order Supplement is denied.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 54 days (N = 9).
The sampled caseload includes a substantial number of self-represented prisoner civil-rights and habeas matters, along with False Claims Act, Administrative Procedure Act, insurance, and diversity cases. Several prisoner matters in the sample ended at initial review, while newer 2025-2026 filings include multiple insurance disputes removed from state court.
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 | 6 |
| 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 | 2 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 6 | 2 |
| Sep 2025 | 6 | 3 |
| Mar 2025 | 25 | 11 |
| Sep 2024 | 24 | 10 |
| Mar 2024 | 14 | 10 |
| Sep 2023 | 4 | 8 |
| Mar 2023 | 3 | 4 |
| Sep 2022 | 2 | 2 |
| Mar 2022 | 4 | 6 |
| Sep 2021 | 8 | 4 |
| Mar 2021 | 0 | 1 |
| Sep 2020 | 0 | 3 |
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 North Carolina, not for Judge Reidinger: 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 | 1,033 | 5.9 months |
| Closed with no court action | 193 | 3 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 586 | 5.1 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 248 | 13.2 months |
| Closed during trial | 6 | not reported |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 1,033 | 5.9 months |
| Sep 2024 | 1,154 | 5.5 months |
| Sep 2023 | 958 | 6.9 months |
| Sep 2022 | 1,210 | 10.1 months |
| Sep 2021 | 951 | 10.3 months |
| Sep 2020 | 873 | 8.5 months |
| Sep 2019 | 816 | 9.1 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 Reidinger with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Reidinger, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Reidinger's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace