George Benjamin Daniels
How Judge Daniels decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In PSLRA securities-fraud cases he applies the heightened pleading standard scienter defendant-by-defendant, dismissing as to individual defendants for whom a strong inference of scienter is not particularized while sustaining claims against the corporate issuer and executives where the allegations suffice.
“The motion to dismiss is DENIED as to Defendants sanofi, Le Fur, and Spek. The motion to dismiss is GRANTED as to Defendants Dehecq, Cluzel, Lehner, Greene, and Leroy.”
Procedural preferences
On cross-motions for summary judgment he will deny BOTH and send the case to trial where the record shows genuine disputes of material fact, rather than straining to resolve fact questions on paper.
“there are several material facts in dispute and that neither party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. ... Accordingly, both parties' motions for summary judgment are DENIED.”
He treats the likelihood-of-confusion element of a Lanham Act trademark claim as fact-intensive and generally unsuited to resolution on summary judgment, denying SJ where any record evidence could support a jury verdict for the non-movant.
“Summary judgment is therefore inappropriate "if there is any evidence in the record that could reasonably support a jury's verdict for the non-moving party."”
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.
| Summary judgment N = 6 |
Granted: 2Denied: 4 | counts only |
| Motions to dismiss N = 1 |
Granted in part: 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.
“Defendants' move pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) and 9(b) to dismiss the First Amended Complaint in its entirety against all Defendants for failure to state a claim. The motion to dismiss is DENIED as to Defendants sanofi, Le Fur, and Spek. The motion to dismiss is GRANTED as to Defendants Dehecq, Cluzel, Lehner, Greene, and Leroy.”
“Defendants' motion for summary judgment is therefore GRANTED. Plaintiffs Tenth, and only remaining, Claim for Relief is DISMISSED.”
“On March 1, 2013, BBW filed the instant motion for summary judgment to dismiss Summit's counterclaims and grant BBW declaratory relief. ECF No. 114. BBW's motion for summary judgment is DENIED.”
“this Court has concluded that there are several material facts in dispute and that neither party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a). Accordingly, both parties' motions for summary judgment are DENIED.”
“this Court has concluded that there are several material facts in dispute and that neither party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a). Accordingly, both parties' motions for summary judgment are DENIED.”
“Defendant's motion is GRANTED. Plaintiffs' motions are both DENIED.”
“Plaintiffs moved for partial summary judgment ... granting judgment in Plaintiffs' favor on the gross negligence and UCC claims. ... Defendant's motion is GRANTED. Plaintiffs' motions are both DENIED.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Sample from search_dockets(assigned_judge='George B. Daniels'). As a senior judge he still draws a broad civil/criminal mix: 463 alien-detainee habeas (2026 surge), copyright/trademark, ADA Title III, immigration, criminal, plus he continues to manage MDL 1570 (the 9/11 terrorism litigation, not in this page). Reflects current assignments, not a tenure-wide caseload.