Susan M. Bazis
How Judge Bazis decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
On a motion to suppress, Bazis (as magistrate, after a live evidentiary hearing) resolves Fourth Amendment standing on witness CREDIBILITY: a defendant claiming overnight-guest status must put on a credible witness, and a standing witness with a prior false-report conviction who admits lying to police will be found not credible, defeating standing without reaching the search's merits. Her in-person credibility finding was treated as 'virtually unassailable' and adopted on de novo review.
“In her written Findings and Recommendation, Judge Bazis concluded that Kuany's testimony was not credible. ... Upon de novo review, the Court agrees with Judge Bazis that Mr. Kuany's testimony was not sufficiently credible to establish that the Defendant had standing to challenge the search based on his claim that he was an overnight guest.”
Bazis treats Second Amendment challenges to the felon-in-possession statute (18 U.S.C. 922(g)(1)) as foreclosed by binding Eighth Circuit precedent, which requires no felony-by-felony as-applied analysis. A motion to dismiss a 922(g)(1) charge on Bruen/2A grounds is a losing posture in this district.
“As Judge Bazis correctly concludes, Gatkuoth's jurisdictional, standing, and dual sovereignty challenges lack all merit ... '[T]here is no need for felony-by-felony determinations regarding the constitutionality of 922(g)(1) as applied to a particular defendant.'”
Procedural preferences
Failure to file timely, specific written objections to her Findings & Recommendation waives the right to review (NECrimR 59.2; Fed. R. Crim. P. 59(b)). Post-F&R filings that were mailed before the F&R issued cannot be construed as objections.
“Because Gatkuoth did not file objections to Judge Bazis's Findings and Recommendation, he has waived his right to review.”
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.
| Motion to suppress N = 1 |
Denied: 1 | counts only |
| Motions to dismiss 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.
“After reviewing the matter, the Court overrules Gatkuoth's objection, adopts Judge Bazis's Findings and Recommendation in its entirety, and denies Gatkuoth's Motion to Suppress.”
“Judge Bazis's Findings and Recommendation, Filing 119, is adopted in its entirety; ... Gatkuoth's Motion to Dismiss, Filing 108, is denied; and ... Gatkuoth's Superseding Motion to Suppress, Filing 120, is denied.”
Bazis's OWN signed DISTRICT-era Memorandum and Order (signature 'Susan M. Bazis, United States District Judge'). On de novo review with no objections, adopts the magistrate judge's Findings & Recommendation on Plea of Guilty (Filing 102), finds the plea knowing/intelligent/voluntary with a factual basis, accepts the plea, finds defendant guilty, and defers acceptance of any plea agreement until PSR review. Rules on no contested party motion; counts as an order read, not toward motion stats.
Bazis's OWN signed DISTRICT-era Order accepting a guilty plea: on de novo review with no objections, adopts the magistrate judge's Findings & Recommendation on Plea of Guilty (Filing 30), accepts the plea, finds defendant guilty. Rules on no contested party motion; counts as an order read, not toward motion stats.
Bazis's OWN signed MAGISTRATE-era sua sponte recusal under 28 U.S.C. 455(a): after reviewing the pretrial services report and confirmations at the Stuart detention hearing, she recused herself and referred the file to the Chief Judge for reassignment to a different magistrate judge. Rules on no party motion (court's own motion); counts as an order read, not toward motion stats. Useful signal that she will self-recuse on a 455(a) appearance-of-partiality concern.
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 701 days (N = 4).
Median motion-to-ruling time: 48 days (N = 1).
Not systematically enumerated. Bazis-assigned dockets observed are predominantly consent-jurisdiction CIVIL cases (636(c)) from her 2017-2024 magistrate tenure, spanning employment/ADA (Cushman v. Union Pacific), contract (Convention of States Action v. NS Consulting; First State Bank v. Tri State Ag), trade secrets (NEBCO v. Butler), insurance (Halo Synergy), and motor-vehicle/PI (Hillebrandt), plus same-day mc search-warrant matters. Recent district-era civil filings (e.g. Kalo v. Goldman, immigration, 4:24-cv-03211) are still pending. Her criminal footprint is largely as the referral magistrate issuing F&Rs (captured in the reasoning layer) and, since 2024-04, as the district judge accepting pleas / ruling on objections.