Robert Kirsch
How Judge Kirsch rules, drawn from 38 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Kirsch
Robert Andrew Kirsch is a judge of the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. Appointed by President Joseph R. Biden, Judge Kirsch received a commission on May 8, 2023.
Judge Kirsch's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Kirsch, 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
Motions
Request a pre-motion conference by a letter of no more than three single-spaced pages before the listed pleading, remand, venue, and arbitration motions.
“before bringing a motion to dismiss, motion for a more definite statement, motion to remand, motion for change of venue, motion to compel arbitration, or motion for a judgment on the pleadings, a party must submit a letter, not to exceed three (3) single-spaced pages, requesting a pre-motion conference.”
Motions
Within seven days of the pre-motion letter, meet and confer verbally; letters and emails alone do not suffice.
“Within seven (7) days of the filing of this letter, the movant and all adversaries must meet and confer regarding the issues and substance of the movant’s letter in an attempt to resolve some or all of the issues therein.”
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 Kirsch decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In United States ex rel. Bolinger v. 24th Street, Kirsch denied Wakefield's motion to dismiss. He found the relator's False Claims Act allegations sufficient under Rules 12(b)(6) and 9(b) and rejected reliance on a Supreme Court dissent as binding authority.
“For the foregoing reasons, Wakefield's Motion to Dismiss is DENIED.”
Procedural preferences
In Gaffey v. Homebridge Financial Services, Kirsch granted summary judgment on the federal claims in Counts 3 and 5. He declined supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining state-law counts and remanded them to New Jersey Superior Court.
“ORDERED that Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 26) is GRANTED as to Counts 3 and 5; and it is further ORDERED that the Court REMANDS Plaintiff's Complaint as to Counts 1, 2, and 4 to the Superior Court of New Jersey”
Cautions
In Estate of Susie Stevens v. North American Company for Life and Health Insurance, Kirsch granted unopposed default judgment against John Lee but denied it against the other third-party defendants.
“North American's Motions for Default Judgment, (ECF Nos. 55 and 60), are GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Specifically, North American's Motion for Default Judgment is GRANTED as to Third-Party Defendant John Lee ... DENIED as to Third-Party Defendants Dino Marks; Irina Lucki;”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“For the foregoing reasons, Wakefield's Motion to Dismiss is DENIED.”
“For the foregoing reasons, Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED.”
“For the foregoing reasons, Defendants' Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED, and the Petition for Writ of Mandamus and the Complaint are dismissed.”
“North American's Motions for Default Judgment, (ECF Nos. 55 and 60), are GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Specifically, North American's Motion for Default Judgment is GRANTED as to Third-Party Defendant John Lee ... DENIED as to Third-Party Defendants Dino Marks; Irina Lucki; Richard Mitlo; Valentina Mitlo; John Adams; Cathy Nicholas; and Ricky Costa”
“ORDERED that Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 26) is GRANTED as to Counts 3 and 5; and it is further ORDERED that the Court REMANDS Plaintiff's Complaint as to Counts 1, 2, and 4 to the Superior Court of New Jersey”
“Defendants' Motions to Dismiss are GRANTED. ... Plaintiff's claims are thus DISMISSED with prejudice.”
“Plaintiff's Motion to Vacate is therefore DENIED as moot.”
“Plaintiff's Motion to Reopen the Case is, thus, GRANTED and the Case is REOPENED.”
“ORDERED that the United States’ Motion for Default Judgment, (ECF No. 22), is DENIED without prejudice”
“Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 6) is DENIED as moot.”
“Mason's Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 22) is GRANTED and DeNoia's Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 26) is GRANTED. Balliro's Counterclaims are DISMISSED.”
“For the foregoing reasons, the Moving Defendants' Motions to Dismiss are GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.”
Sua sponte screening of a prisoner civil-rights complaint challenging a prison mailroom policy of refusing mail from post-office boxes. Ruling on no party motion, the court granted the in forma pauperis application and, applying the Section 1915(e)(2)(B) standard, allowed the First and Fourteenth Amendment claims to proceed against the mailroom sergeant and the supervisory and injunctive-relief claims to proceed against the named administrators. Grounding: "the First Amendment and Fourteenth Amendment due process claims shall PROCEED against Michael Kostbar in his personal capacity" and "Plaintiff's IFP application pending at ECF No. 1-3 is GRANTED."
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 | 31 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 0 | 31 |
| Sep 2025 | 0 | 30 |
| Mar 2025 | 0 | 27 |
| Sep 2024 | 2 | 33 |
| Mar 2024 | 24 | 29 |
| Sep 2023 | 0 | 24 |
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 Kirsch: 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 Kirsch with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Kirsch, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Kirsch's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace