Jeannette A. Vargas
How Judge Vargas rules, drawn from 31 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Vargas
Jeannette Anne Vargas is a judge of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. Appointed by President Joseph R. Biden, Judge Vargas received a commission on November 6, 2024.
Judge Vargas's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Vargas, 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.
- Civil Case Management Plan and Scheduling Order ↗
- Individual Rules and Practices for Hearings and Trials ↗
- Individual Rules and Practices in Civil Cases ↗
- Individual Rules and Practices in Civil Pro Se Cases ↗
- Individual Rules and Practices in Criminal Cases ↗
- Model Protective Order ↗
- Recusal Rule for USAO-SDNY ↗
Key rules
Filing
Do not submit courtesy copies unless the court orders otherwise.
“E. No Courtesy Copies. Unless the Court orders otherwise, parties should not submit courtesy copies of any submissions.”
Motions
Pre-motion conferences are required only for discovery disputes.
“C. Pre-Motion Conferences in Civil Cases. Pre-motion conferences are not required, except for disputes concerning discovery, which are governed by Section 6 below.”
Discovery
Before raising a discovery dispute, confer in person, by video, or by phone; email alone is insufficient.
“i. Meet and Confer. Any party wishing to raise a discovery dispute with the Court must first confer in good faith at least once with the opposing party—in person, by videoconference, or by telephone—to resolve the dispute. E-mail communication alone will not satisfy the meet-and-confer requirement. Where a”
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).
- Amended Standing Order on Highly Sensitive Documents ↗
- Second Amended Standing Order on Civil Case Opening ↗
- Amended Standing Order on Miscellaneous Civil Case Opening ↗
- Standing Order on Applications to File a Civil Case Under Seal ↗
- Standing Order on Emergency Relief and Section 2255 Filing Procedures ↗
- Notice on Immigration Custody Habeas Petitions and Emergency Relief ↗
How Judge Vargas decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In the Drake v. UMG defamation case, the court gave heavy weight to the overall public context of a mutual rap battle in deciding that inflammatory accusations were nonactionable opinion rather than fact, and was unpersuaded by isolated social-media commentary suggesting some listeners took the lyrics literally.
“In a world in which billions of people are active online, support for almost any proposition, no matter how farfetched, fantastical or unreasonable, can be found with little effort in any number of comment sections, chat rooms, and servers.”
On a fee-shifting motion, the court closely audited the reasonableness of billed hours and was willing to cut a large law-firm team's time by half where the same legal issue had already been resolved in the movant's favor by hundreds of other courts, treating an outsized hours claim as itself in tension with the fee applicant's own argument that the government's position was unjustified.
“It is difficult to reconcile K.B.'s argument that the Government's litigation position was so substantially unjustified that litigating against it merits an award of attorneys' fees and costs on the one hand, and K.B.'s simultaneous argument that the petition raised such complex and evolving issues as to warrant more than 100 hours of legal work on the other.”
In a challenge to a nationality-based immigrant-visa suspension, Vargas found that the Secretary of State had exceeded statutory authority and ordered the policy vacated. The order turned on the text of the immigration statutes and the limits they place on categorical visa refusals.
“The Court holds that the Policy is contrary to law and was issued in excess of Secretary Rubio’s statutory authority. The Policy is therefore vacated under the Administrative Procedure Act (‘APA’).”
Procedural preferences
In Graham v. UMG Recordings, Inc., Judge Vargas declined to stay discovery pending a motion to dismiss and expressly stated that the court does not routinely grant such stays.
“It is not the practice of this Court to routinely stay discovery pending the outcome of a motion to dismiss.”
In Grayson v. Combs, she dismissed claims against five defendants without prejudice under Rule 4(m) after finding that the plaintiff waited months to attempt service, sought an extension only after an order to show cause, and offered no exceptional explanation for the delay.
“borders on flagrant disregard for Rule 4.”
Cautions
In Mamatkulov v. Haynes, she granted a habeas petition and ordered release after the government conceded that the case was materially indistinguishable from Mcdonald v. Francis; she applied her earlier due process ruling to the petitioner’s detention.
“the Petition is GRANTED.”
In Grayson v. Combs, Judge Vargas dismissed the claims against Delta with prejudice after the plaintiff had already been given an opportunity to amend the same pleading defects.
“As Plaintiff has previously been afforded the opportunity to amend her pleadings to address the issues raised by Delta's Motion to Dismiss, no further opportunity to amend the complaint with respect to the claims involving Delta shall be granted, and the dismissal is with prejudice.”
In an arbitration dispute, a respondent sought vacatur more than three months after the award. Vargas enforced the statutory deadline and confirmed the award. A party challenging an award should preserve the Federal Arbitration Act deadline.
“Respondent’s motion to vacate is time-barred.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Defendant's motion to dismiss is GRANTED. The Clerk of the Court is respectfully directed to terminate ECF Nos. 42, 78, and 81, and to close the case.”
“Plaintiff's motion for alternate service on Mr. Asamoah is GRANTED.”
“The Court DENIES the motion to reconsider, as the Court does not find that the proposed amicus submission would aid the Court in its consideration of this matter.”
“Petitioner's request for leave to proceed under pseudonym is GRANTED.”
“In total, K.B. seeks attorneys’ fees and costs in the amount of $23,682.29. ... Accordingly, the Court awards $12,448.36 in fees and costs to K.B.”
“For the reasons previously set forth in Mcdonald, the Court holds that Section 1225(b)(2)(A) does not govern and that Respondents violated Petitioner's due process rights in exercising its discretionary authority to detain Petitioner under Section 1226(a). Accordingly, the Petition is GRANTED.”
“Accordingly, the Petition is DENIED. The clerk of court is directed to close this case and terminate all pending motions.”
“For the reasons stated herein, the Petition is GRANTED. The Court ORDERS Respondents to immediately release Petitioner from custody and to certify compliance with this order by 5:00 p.m. on February 19, 2026.”
“Plaintiffs' motion to remand this matter to state court is GRANTED and Defendant's cross-motion to transfer is DENIED.”
“Because abstention and remand are warranted, the motion to transfer venue is denied as moot.”
“For the reasons stated on the record during the hearings held on February 4, 2026, Defendant's motion to suppress evidence, ECF No. 17 is DENIED.”
“ORDER denying as moot 128 Motion to Dismiss”
“Accordingly, the Court DENIES Defendant's Motion for Sanctions under 28 U.S.C. § 1927 and the Court's inherent power due to a lack of evidence to substantiate a clear showing of bad faith. Defendant's Motion for Sanctions is thus DENIED.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 52 days (N = 5).
Median motion-to-ruling time: 97.5 days (N = 8).
- A broad general civil/criminal docket typical of a new SDNY judge: contract and insurance disputes, ADA/consumer-protection cases, trademark/copyright, ERISA benefit-fund collection, securities enforcement, a substantial recurring immigration-detention habeas docket (multiple 28 U.S.C. 2241 petitions challenging ICE detention authority), and a general criminal calendar.
- Two of her cases carry significant public profile: Graham v. UMG Recordings, Inc. (the Drake/Kendrick Lamar 'Not Like Us' defamation suit) and the New York Attorney General's 2025 suit over DOGE access to Treasury payment systems.
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 | 57 |
| Bench trials submitted more than six months | 0 |
| Bankruptcy appeals pending more than six months | 1 |
| Social Security appeals pending more than six months | 0 |
| Civil cases pending more than three years | 15 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 57 | 15 |
| Sep 2025 | 27 | 11 |
| Mar 2025 | 0 | 12 |
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 Vargas: 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 | 9,565 | 5.6 months |
| Closed with no court action | 1,749 | 3.5 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 6,416 | 5.1 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 1,313 | 14.1 months |
| Closed during trial | 87 | 51.7 months |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 9,565 | 5.6 months |
| Sep 2024 | 10,695 | 6.4 months |
| Sep 2023 | 10,316 | 5.6 months |
| Sep 2022 | 11,818 | 6.1 months |
| Sep 2021 | 10,662 | 5.7 months |
| Sep 2020 | 10,118 | 6.6 months |
| Sep 2019 | 11,357 | 6.6 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 Vargas with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Vargas, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Vargas's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace