Sterling Johnson, Jr.
How Judge Jr. decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
Construes pro se litigants' submissions liberally 'to raise the strongest arguments they suggest,' but still holds them to the substantive standard (e.g., the exceptional-circumstances bar of Rule 60(b), the prima-facie elements of a promissory-note claim). Liberal construction is procedural grace, not a thumb on the merits scale.
“The Court construes pro se litigants pleadings and briefs 'liberally...reading such submissions to raise the strongest arguments they suggest.'”
Procedural preferences
Treats dismissal-with-prejudice as a last resort; on a Rule 41(b) failure-to-prosecute motion he balanced the five Drake factors and chose monetary attorneys'-fee sanctions over dismissal, invoking the Circuit's preference for resolution on the merits. (Tactical read: a defendant moving to dismiss a slow-moving plaintiff for delay should expect fee-shifting, not dismissal, absent extreme willfulness.)
“The Court, mindful that dismissal is an extreme remedy, agrees with Magistrate Judge Scanlon's balancing of the Drake factors, and agrees that monetary sanctions in the form of attorneys' fees are the appropriate remedy in light of the Circuit's preference for resolution on the merits.”
Where a party files only conclusory or rehashed objections to a magistrate's R&R, he reviews the report for clear error rather than de novo -- so weak, non-specific objections rarely disturb an R&R. (Tactical read: objections to an EDNY R&R before him must be specific and substantive, not a re-argument of the original papers.)
“However, '[w]hen a party makes only conclusory, or general objections, or simply reiterates the original arguments, the Court will review the report strictly for clear error.'”
Cautions
Polices the jurisdictional predicate strictly: enforces the residence-vs-domicile distinction and the complete-diversity requirement at the threshold, dismissing under Rule 12(b)(1) before reaching the merits (and warning pro se plaintiffs about the probate exception and Rule 11). Plead domicile (not mere residence) and the amount in controversy precisely.
“As Plaintiff has failed to allege, much less prove, complete diversity, diversity jurisdiction does not exist here. The Court therefore dismisses the Complaint.”
Does not rubber-stamp uncontested defaults: on an unopposed ERISA default he awarded the monetary contributions but denied the requested permanent injunction for failure to show an inadequate legal remedy. A default-judgment movant must still justify each item of relief, especially equitable relief.
“The Report further recommended that Plaintiffs' request for a permanent injunction be denied because Plaintiffs have not demonstrated that their remedy at law is inadequate.”
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.
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.
“In sum, upon review of Judge Scanlon's Report and Defendant's objections, and after reviewing de novo those portions of the record to which the objections were made, the Court adopts the Report and Recommendation and hereby denies Fireman Fund's Motion to Dismiss.”
“For the aforementioned reasons, the Court grants Defendant's motion to dismiss with leave to amend within 20 days.”
“Thus, there is no genuine issue of material fact and an action for recovery on the Promissory Notes is appropriately decided by a motion for summary judgment. For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff's motion is granted.”
“For the foregoing reasons, Defendants' motion is granted in part, denied in part, and reserved in part.”
“Presently before the Court is Plaintiff Adam Bruzzese's motion for reconsideration. Based on the parties' submission and for the reasons stated below, the motion is DENIED.”
“Upon review of the recommendations, this Court adopts and affirms Magistrate Judge Azrack=s Report in its entirety.”
“Upon review of the report, this Court finds no clear error. The Court adopts and affirms Magistrate Judge Reyes's Report in its entirety”
“Accordingly, as recommended by Judge Scanlon, Plaintiff's motion is granted in part and denied in part ... Plaintiff's motion is denied in all other respects.”
Sua sponte dismissal for failure to prosecute under Rule 41(b), with no party motion. The order states: 'Review of the record in the above-referenced action demonstrates that Plaintiffs have failed to prosecute the litigation. The action is therefore dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.'
Sua sponte dismissal for failure to prosecute / failure to serve under Rules 4(m) and 41(b), adopting Magistrate Judge Gold's unopposed show-cause R&R, with no party motion. The order states: 'IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that pursuant to Rules 4(m) and 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the above referenced case is dismissed for lack of prosecution, and the July 15 Report and Recommendation is adopted.'
Order adopting Magistrate Judge Sanket J. Bulsara's unopposed R&R 'in its entirety' in an ERISA Local 813 trust-fund action and directing the Clerk to close the case. The signed order does not recite the underlying motion's disposition (likely a default-judgment damages award), so the specific outcome is not captured here. The order states: 'Upon review of the recommendations, this Court adopts and affirms Magistrate Judge Bulsara's Report in its entirety. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close the case.'
Order adopting Magistrate Judge James Orenstein's unopposed R&R 'in its entirety' and directing the Clerk to close the case. The signed order does not recite the underlying motion's disposition. The order states: 'Upon review of the recommendations, this Court adopts and affirms Magistrate Judge Orenstein's Report in its entirety. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close the case.'
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
A sample of roughly twenty of his cases shows that, as a senior judge (2003-2022), his civil docket was light and skewed toward four kinds of matters: (1) criminal narcotics, firearms, and child-pornography prosecutions (e.g. United States v. Carillo, United States v. Stayman, United States v. Martinez); (2) prisoner habeas and sentence-vacate petitions under 28 U.S.C. 2255 and 2241 (Siddiqui, Freeman, Luna, Ng, Drakopoulos, many of them miscellaneous-docket filings); (3) immigration naturalization-mandamus suits against the Secretary of Homeland Security (Reutskova v. Napolitano, Egorov v. Napolitano); and (4) employment, civil-rights, and labor matters (an ADA case, an FLSA case, and the Section 1983 cases noted above). Several civil cases terminated quickly by settlement, stipulated or voluntary dismissal, or transfer to multidistrict litigation rather than by a contested ruling.