Edgardo Ramos

How Judge Ramos rules, drawn from 26 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

Court
United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
Position
District judge
Appointed by
Barack Obama (Democratic)
Commissioned
December 6, 2011
Education
Yale University (B.A., 1982); Harvard Law School (J.D., 1987)
Signed orders read
26

About Judge Ramos

Edgardo Ramos is a judge of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. Appointed by President Barack Obama, Judge Ramos received a commission on December 6, 2011.

Judge Ramos's practices and standing orders

Rules for cases before Judge Ramos, 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

Submit one hard courtesy copy of motion papers, except pro hac vice and letter-motions, as soon as practicable after filing.

“G. Courtesy Copies. One courtesy hard copy of all motion papers (with the exception of motions for admission pro hac vice and letter-motions), shall be submitted to chambers as soon as practicable after filing. Courtesy copies should”

Motions

Most non-discovery civil motions require a pre-motion conference, subject to the listed exceptions.

“ii. A pre-motion conference with the Court is required before making any other motion, except where a litigant believes that delay in filing the motion might result in the loss of a right or where a litigant seeks to make a motion in a case involving an incarcerated pro se litigant, motion for admission pro hac vice, motion for reargument or reconsideration, or motion for temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction. To”

Conferences

File adjournment or extension requests in writing as ECF letter-motions.

“E. Requests for Adjournments or Extensions of Time. All requests for adjournments or extensions of time shall be in writing and filed on ECF as letter- motions (if consistent with the S.D.N.Y. Local Rules and the S.D.N.Y. ‘Electronic Filing Rules and Instructions’), and must include:”

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 8, 2026).

Key rules from these orders · The court's local rules ↗

How Judge Ramos decides

Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

What persuades

In an arbitration dispute, he denied Oracle’s motion to vacate the award and Wilson’s request to modify the interest rate.

“For the following reasons, Oracle's motion to vacate the arbitration award and Wilson's request to modify the rate of interest are DENIED.”

After an opportunity to amend fraud claims, he required facts supporting a plausible inference of fraudulent intent by the alleged underlying actor; assertions added only in an opposition brief did not cure the complaint.

“her complaint is devoid of any allegation that the Town intended to”

In a school-admissions challenge, he found on the preliminary record that the city likely sought the benefits of diversity rather than racial balance, and he denied interim relief.

“the Court finds that Defendants likely intended to achieve the benefits flowing from increased diversity in the specialized schools, not to racially balance them.”

Procedural preferences

In this case, he granted Pilgrim’s Rule 12(b)(2) motion for lack of personal jurisdiction and did not reach the Rule 12(b)(6) issue.

“Defendant Pilgrim's Motion to Dismiss under Rule 12(b)(2) is GRANTED. Because the Court grants dismissal under Rule 12(b)(2), the Court does not reach the Rule 12(b)(6) issue.”

For online arbitration terms, he looked for a clear link between the purchase action and assent to the terms; a checkout page that attached that warning to a separate rewards-program checkbox did not establish agreement to arbitrate.

“Alamo has failed to establish that Presson unambiguously manifested assent to the”

In a contract dispute involving an estate, he denied pre-discovery partial summary judgment without prejudice after the representatives showed that discovery was needed to test disputed facts.

“Abode’s motion for partial summary judgment is denied without prejudice, and the parties are directed to proceed to discovery.”

Signed rulings

A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.

Prospect Funding Holdings, LLC v. Vinson
256 F. Supp. 3d 318 · 2017-06-09
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“Defendant Pilgrim's Motion to Dismiss under Rule 12(b)(2) is GRANTED. Because the Court grants dismissal under Rule 12(b)(2), the Court does not reach the Rule 12(b)(6) issue.”

Motion to amend (plaintiff) Denied

“Prospect's Motion to Amend under Rule 15(a) is DENIED.”

Innovative Biodefense, Inc. v. VSP Technologies, Inc.
176 F. Supp. 3d 305 · 2016-03-31
Summary judgment (plaintiff) Granted in part

“IBD moved for summary judgment to dismiss VSP's counterclaims against it and Defendants counter-moved for both summary judgment of their counterclaims and to dismiss IBD's claims. For the reasons discussed below, IBD's motion is GRANTED in part- and DENIED in part while Defendants' motion is DENIED in its entirety.”

Summary judgment (defendant) Denied

“IBD's motion is GRANTED in part- and DENIED in part while Defendants' motion is DENIED in its entirety.”

V.E.C. Corp. of Delaware v. Hilliard
896 F. Supp. 2d 253 · 2012-09-14
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“For the reasons discussed below, Defendants' motions to dismiss are GRANTED in full.”

Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“Now pending are motions to dismiss the Second Amended Complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) by defendants Ira and Bridget Hilliard ... and by defendants Putnam County National Bank ... For the reasons discussed below, Defendants' motions to dismiss are GRANTED in full.”

L.K. ex rel. Q.S. v. Northeast School District
932 F. Supp. 2d 467 · 2013-03-19
Summary judgment (plaintiff) Denied

“The parties have filed cross-motions for summary judgment. Docs. 11, 28. For the reasons set forth below, Plaintiffs motion for summary judgment is DENIED and the Defendant's motion for summary judgment is GRANTED.”

Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“Plaintiffs motion for summary judgment is DENIED and the Defendant's motion for summary judgment is GRANTED.”

United States v. East River Housing Corp.
90 F. Supp. 3d 118 · 2015-03-02
Summary judgment (defendant) Denied

“East River's motion for partial summary judgment as to the claims pertaining to Stephanie Aaron (the ‘Aaron claims’) and to sever the causes of action pertaining to Eisenberg and Gilbert ... For the following reasons, the Government's motion to strike is GRANTED, and both of Defendant's motions are DENIED.”

Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied

“East River's separate motion to dismiss and/or for summary judgment on the Government's Fifth Cause of Action, which alleges a ‘pattern or practice’ violation under § 3614 ... both of Defendant's motions are DENIED.”

Oracle Corp. v. Wilson
276 F. Supp. 3d 22 · 2017-08-22
Motion to vacate arbitration award (petitioner) Denied

“For the following reasons, Oracle's motion to vacate the arbitration award and Wilson's request to modify the rate of interest are DENIED.”

Motion to modify arbitration award (respondent) Denied
Whitehaven S.F., LLC v. Spangler
45 F. Supp. 3d 333 · 2014-09-10
Motion to compel arbitration (petitioner) Granted

“Presently before the Court is Whitehaven's motion to compel arbitration in accordance with the arbitration clause in the Finance Agreement. Doc. 6 (‘Mem. Supp. Mot. Compel’). For the reasons discussed below, the motion is GRANTED.”

North Jersey Media Group Inc. v. Fox News Network, LLC
312 F.R.D. 111 · 2015-11-20
Motion to sever (third_party_defendant) Granted

“Before this Court is Third Party Defendants' motion, joined by Plaintiff, to sever the Video Counterclaims and the Indemnification Claims from the Photo Claims pursuant to Rule 21 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. For the reasons discussed below, the motion to sever the Video Counterclaims and the Indemnification Claims is GRANTED.”

B.C. ex rel. B.M. v. Pine Plains Central School District
971 F. Supp. 2d 356 · 2013-09-06
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“Defendant has moved to dismiss the Complaint pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6). Def. Mot., Doc. 6. For the reasons set forth below, Defendant's motion to dismiss is GRANTED.”

Seifts v. Consumer Health Solutions LLC
61 F. Supp. 3d 306 · 2014-11-21

Ramos adopted Magistrate Judge Lisa Margaret Smith's unobjected R&R fixing damages after earlier default judgments entered by Judges Holwell and Oetken in a multi-plaintiff ERISA and New York-law benefits action. The court adopted the recommended damages and entered judgment through an inquest rather than adjudicating a contested party motion.

Presson v. Alamo Intermediate II Holdings, LLC
1:24-cv-00170-ER · 2025-03-04
Motion to compel arbitration (defendant) Denied

“Alamo's motion to compel arbitration or, in the alternative, dismiss is DENIED.”

Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied
Morgulis v. Bus Patrol America, LLC
1:24-cv-00113-ER · 2025-04-11
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“BusPatrol's motion to dismiss the complaint with prejudice is GRANTED.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

  • Sample of the judge's current case assignments.
  • The visible slice is recent and 2026-heavy: alien-detainee habeas petitions (463), a Schedule A trademark-counterfeiting suit (840), an international arbitration matter (896), foreign-sovereign/contract litigation (190), and a Section 2255 vacate-sentence petition (510).
  • It reflects current assignments, not a tenure-wide caseload; the motion-to-ruling latencies in this record are grounded from terminated dockets, not from this current-assignment slice.

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 months0
Bench trials submitted more than six months0
Bankruptcy appeals pending more than six months0
Social Security appeals pending more than six months0
Civil cases pending more than three years35
ReportMotions over six monthsCases over three years
Mar 2026035
Sep 2025036
Mar 2025028
Sep 2024036
Mar 2024030
Sep 2023030
Mar 2023033
Sep 2022038
Mar 2022035
Sep 2021040
Mar 2021054
Sep 2020065

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 Southern District of New York, not for Judge Ramos: 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.

CasesMedian time
All civil cases closed9,5655.6 months
Closed with no court action1,7493.5 months
Closed before pretrial6,4165.1 months
Closed during or after pretrial1,31314.1 months
Closed during trial8751.7 months
12 months endingCases closedMedian time
Sep 20259,5655.6 months
Sep 202410,6956.4 months
Sep 202310,3165.6 months
Sep 202211,8186.1 months
Sep 202110,6625.7 months
Sep 202010,1186.6 months
Sep 201911,3576.6 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 Ramos with the record in hand

Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Ramos, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Grounded in Judge Ramos's own signed orders
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace