Katharine Sweeney Hayden
How Judge Hayden rules, drawn from 22 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Hayden
Katharine Sweeney Hayden is a judge of the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. Appointed by President William J. Clinton, Judge Hayden received a commission on September 29, 1997. Judge Hayden assumed senior status on May 30, 2010.
Judge Hayden's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Hayden, as published on the court's website (checked October 8, 2026). Judges revise these often, so confirm the current version on the court's site before you file.
Key rules
Filing
Mail two courtesy copies of proposed orders, motion papers, briefs, and exhibits to chambers.
“Two courtesy copies of proposed orders, motion papers, briefs, and exhibits must be sent by regular mail to Chambers.”
Motions
Include a narrative statement of issue-specific facts in summary judgment briefs.
“Judge Hayden requires that briefs contain a narrative statement of facts specific to the issues raised in the motion.”
Motions
Attach the proposed sur-reply as an exhibit when requesting leave to file one.
“Any request to file a sur-reply must be accompanied by an exhibit consisting of the proposed sur-reply.”
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).
- Second Amended Standing Order 2026-02: In Re Increase in Immigration-Related Habeas Corpus Petitions seeking Emergent Relief ↗
- Standing Order 2025-05: IN RE Procedures for Access to and Service of Sealed Documents ↗
- Standing Order 2025-04: IN RE "Schedule A" Cases ↗
- Standing Order 2024-03: In re: Amendment to Procedures for Requesting, Filing, and Management of Highly Sensitive Documents and Guidance for Same ↗
- Standing Order 2024-02: Electronic Signatures ↗
How Judge Hayden decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In Frazier Industrial Co. v. PPT Industrial Machines, Hayden dismissed the claims against a parent company for lack of personal jurisdiction after finding that the alleged conduct did not establish the required misuse of the corporate form.
“this is a 'difficult standard' to meet, and '[d]isregard of the corporate entity is appropriate only in exceptional circumstances' ... the corporation must be a sham and exist for no other purpose than as a vehicle for fraud”
Procedural preferences
In S. Rotondi & Sons v. Township of Randolph, Hayden dismissed retaliation claims but allowed 14 days to amend them, finding that a revised pleading might address the deficiencies.
“the Third Circuit generally expects district courts to afford plaintiffs alleging civil rights claims an opportunity to amend once even if not requested, so long as amendment would not be inequitable or futile ... Rotondi's retaliation claims (counts 1 and 2) will be dismissed without prejudice, and it may file an amended complaint within 14 days”
In Frazier Industrial Co. v. PPT Industrial Machines, Hayden affirmed the magistrate judge's denial of leave to amend because she found no clear error or legal mistake in that decision.
“Judge Waldor's decision was neither clearly erroneous or contrary to law, and it is affirmed”
Cautions
In the Jiaherb trade secret dispute, Hayden dismissed the claims with prejudice after finding the pleaded trade secrets deficient and further amendment inequitable given the course of the litigation.
“dismissal shall be with prejudice, as MTC's allegations suffer from incurable deficiencies. Moreover, any further delay to this litigation would be inequitable.”
In United States v. Hammary, Hayden denied compassionate release because the defendant did not establish qualifying family circumstances; she also found that the sentencing and public safety factors weighed against a reduced sentence in that case.
“The impact on family members is an inherent feature of any term of incarceration ... the mere existence of COVID-19 in society ... cannot independently justify compassionate release”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“The motions to dismiss are granted as to counts 1, 2, and 4 ... Those claims are dismissed without prejudice to Rotondi filing, within 14 days, an amended complaint that addresses the deficiencies”
“and as to count 3 with respect to James Britton ... Count 3 therefore is dismissed against James Britton without prejudice ... Taking the pleaded facts as true, however, the claim can, at this stage, proceed to discovery [against Britton]”
“Jiaherb's motion to dismiss (D.E. 119) will be granted ... In this case, dismissal shall be with prejudice, as MTC's allegations suffer from incurable deficiencies. Moreover, any further delay to this litigation would be inequitable.”
“Judge Waldor's decision was neither clearly erroneous or contrary to law, and it is affirmed. ... Frazier's appeal (D.E. 301) ... is denied”
“Frazier has failed to meet its burden to show that exercise of personal jurisdiction over Right Lane is appropriate under an alter ego theory, and Right Lane's motion to dismiss is granted.”
“For the above reasons, Hammary's motion for compassionate release is denied.”
“the Court accepts Judge Waldor's report and recommendation (D.E. 16), and AXA's motion to transfer venue (D.E. 8) is granted.”
“ORDERED that plaintiffs' motion [D.E. 26 (12-4042)] is denied”
“ORDERED that defendants' motion [D.E. 26 (12-5379)] is granted.”
“ORDERED that petitioner’s motion for a TRO or a preliminary injunction (ECF No. 2) is denied without prejudice because she has not shown a likelihood of success on the merits with respect to her claims”
“the Court concludes that it retains jurisdiction to consider the petition.”
“The Court grants the writ of habeas corpus and orders respondents to release petitioner from detention within 24 hours.”
“For the foregoing reasons, Lee’s appeal is denied.”
“Plaintiff’s appeal is denied (D.E. 412), and Judge Hammer’s April 8, 2025 order is affirmed.”
“ORDERED that petitioner’s motion for a TRO or a preliminary injunction (ECF No. 2) is denied without prejudice because he has not shown a likelihood of success on the merits with respect to his claim that his detention under § 1231 is unlawful”
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 | 19 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 0 | 19 |
| Sep 2025 | 1 | 20 |
| Mar 2025 | 1 | 20 |
| Sep 2024 | 0 | 25 |
| Mar 2024 | 0 | 28 |
| Sep 2023 | 0 | 27 |
| Mar 2023 | 2 | 29 |
| Sep 2022 | 5 | 27 |
| Mar 2022 | 6 | 28 |
| Sep 2021 | 8 | 25 |
| Mar 2021 | 18 | 30 |
| Sep 2020 | 17 | 27 |
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 U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey, not for Judge Hayden: 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 | 8,970 | 8.1 months |
| Closed with no court action | 370 | 4.6 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 6,266 | 5.3 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 2,317 | 14.4 months |
| Closed during trial | 17 | 36.6 months |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 8,970 | 8.1 months |
| Sep 2024 | 7,921 | 8.1 months |
| Sep 2023 | 8,378 | 10.3 months |
| Sep 2022 | 7,053 | 7.9 months |
| Sep 2021 | 9,064 | 9.2 months |
| Sep 2020 | 9,031 | 9.9 months |
| Sep 2019 | 10,590 | 9 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 Hayden with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Hayden, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Hayden's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace