Katharine H. Parker
How Judge Parker rules, drawn from 12 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Parker
Katharine H. Parker has served as a U.S. magistrate judge for the Southern District of New York since November 2016. She earned her bachelor's degree from Duke University and her law degree from Fordham University School of Law. Before joining the bench, she practiced labor and employment law and clerked for U.S. District Judge Warren W. Eginton.
Judge Parker's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Parker, 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.
- Electronic Device - Wifi Request Form ↗
- Use of AI Rule ↗
- Individual Practices in Civil Cases ↗
- Individual Practices in Criminal Cases ↗
- Discussion Topics for Rule 26(f) Meeting ↗
- Proposed Case Management Order and Report on Rule 26(f) Meeting ↗
- Proposed Case Management Plan For Pro Se Case ↗
- Model Protective Order ↗
- Model ESI Plan and Proposed Order ↗
- Model Video Deposition Protocol ↗
- Settlement Conference Summary Form ↗
Key rules
Motions
A pre-motion conference is required for motions subject to the listed exceptions.
“b. Pre-Motion Conferences. A pre-motion conference is required for all motions except (i) letter motions specified in 1(b) above; (ii) motions that are required by the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure or the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to be made by a certain time, (iii) motions by litigants in actions where a party is incarcerated and pro se, (iv) motions for reconsideration, (v) motions for a new”
Discovery
Confer in person or by telephone before bringing a discovery dispute to the court.
“c. Discovery Disputes. Parties shall follow Local Rule 37.2 with the following modifications. Any party wishing to raise a discovery dispute with the Court must first confer in good faith with the opposing party, in person or by telephone, in an effort to resolve the dispute. If this meet-and-confer process does not resolve the dispute, the party may submit an ECF letter-motion to the”
Conferences
Absent good cause, seek an adjournment or extension at least 48 hours or two business days in advance, whichever is greater.
“c. Requests for Adjournments or Extensions of Time. Absent good cause, any request for extension or adjournment shall be made at least 48 hours or 2 business days, whichever is greater, before the deadline or scheduled appearance.”
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 Parker decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In Brown v. Barnes & Noble, Parker denied nationwide FLSA collective certification without prejudice because the café managers’ declarations did not show that proposed members across stores were similarly situated. She allowed renewal if discovery supplied more support.
“For the reasons stated below, Plaintiffs’ motion is denied without prejudice.”
In a constitutional challenge involving a subpoena to the Governor, Parker granted a motion to quash after evaluating relevance and legislative and other asserted privileges.
“For the reasons that follow, the Governor’s motion to quash is GRANTED.”
Procedural preferences
In Gaughan’s wage suit, Parker recommended denying leave to add a hostile work environment claim against a proposed new defendant because the pleading did not link her conduct to a protected characteristic. The district judge later adopted that recommendation.
“The TAC does not set forth any basis upon which it even could be inferred that Radwan’s conduct was motivated by a discriminatory animus.”
In Orthogen, she denied discovery requests without prejudice after the joint letter exceeded her three-page limit.
“Orthogen’s requests are denied without prejudice due to a failure to follow this Court’s individual rules. As a threshold matter, the letter exceeds this Court’s limit of three pages, as stipulated by Rule I.a.”
In Gaughan’s wage suit, Parker struck some personal allegations from a proposed amended complaint but declined the proposed defendant’s broader redactions because some allegations remained relevant to the claims.
“The Court declines to adopt Radwan’s proposed redactions as a whole, however, because some of the requested redactions encompass allegations that are at least tangentially related to Plaintiff’s claims in this litigation.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“For the reasons stated below, Plaintiffs’ motion is denied without prejudice.”
“For the reasons that follow, the Governor’s motion to quash is GRANTED.”
“For the foregoing reasons, this Court respectfully recommends that Plaintiff’s motion for leave to amend (Doc. No. 33) be denied in part ... This Court grants Plaintiff’s motion for leave to amend (Doc. No. 33) with respect to the following claims:”
“The Court further denies Plaintiff’s motion to strike (Doc. No. 33), and grants Radwan’s request to strike in part, as set forth above.”
“The Clerk of Court is also directed to terminate Plaintiff’s motion for leave to amend pending as Doc. No. 20 as moot.”
“STIPULATION AND ORDER OF REMAND PURSUANT TO SENTENCE FOUR OF 42 U.S.C. § 405(g): IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED ... that the Commissioner's decision be, and hereby is, reversed and that this action be, and hereby is, remanded to the Commissioner of Social Security, pursuant to the fourth sentence of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) ... SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker on 5/14/2026)”
“For the above-stated reasons, the Petition is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.”
“For the reasons set forth above, the motion to quash is GRANTED.”
“the Court finds the requested award be found ‘reasonable,’ and that attorney’s fees be granted in the amount of $8,529.75.”
“For these reasons, Plaintiffs request for an in camera review of the three documents on First Unum’s privilege log noted above is GRANTED.”
“Orthogen’s requests are denied without prejudice due to a failure to follow this Court’s individual rules.”
“Plaintiff’s request to file yet another amended complaint is denied without prejudice.”
“Plaintiff’s request is denied.”
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 | 1 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 0 | 1 |
| Sep 2025 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2025 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2024 | 0 | 2 |
| Mar 2024 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2023 | 0 | 1 |
| Mar 2023 | 0 | 2 |
| Sep 2022 | 0 | 1 |
| Mar 2022 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2021 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2021 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2020 | 0 | 3 |
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 Parker: 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 Parker with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Parker, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Parker's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace