Katherine Polk Failla
How Judge Failla rules, drawn from 26 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Failla
Katherine Polk Failla is a judge of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. Appointed by President Barack Obama, Judge Failla received a commission on March 5, 2013.
Judge Failla's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Failla, 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 (Fillable) ↗
- Individual Rules of Practice in Civil Cases ↗
- Individual Rules of Practice in Criminal Cases ↗
Key rules
Filing
At reply service, the movant must send one tabbed binder of double-sided courtesy copies of all motion papers.
“D. Courtesy Copies. One courtesy copy of all motion papers, marked as such, shall be mailed or hand-delivered to the Court by the movant at the time the reply is served. All courtesy copies should be double-sided, three-hole-punched, tabbed, and placed in binders.”
Motions
Pre-motion submissions are required for dismissal, summary judgment, judgment on the pleadings, sanctions, and discovery motions.
“A. Pre-Motion Submissions in Civil Cases. Pre-motion submissions are required for motions to dismiss, motions for summary judgment, motions for judgment on the pleadings, motions for 6 Revised: January 3, 2025 sanctions, and motions concerning discovery. Motions concerning discovery are discussed in Rule 3(C) above.”
Discovery
After conferring, file an ECF discovery-dispute letter-motion of no more than three pages.
“ii. Discovery Disputes. The parties are to follow Local Civil 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 seeking discovery shall promptly file on ECF a letter motion, no longer than three pages, explaining the nature of the dispute and requesting an informal conference. Such a letter motion must include 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 Failla decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In Gordon v. Amadeus IT Group, S.A., Judge Failla denied dismissal of the federal antitrust claim but dismissed the state antitrust and consumer protection claims as preempted.
“Defendants' motion to dismiss Plaintiffs' claims for violations of state antitrust and consumer protections laws is granted, while their motion to dismiss Plaintiffs' claim under federal antitrust law is denied.”
Procedural preferences
In Schwartz v. HSBC Bank USA, N.A., Judge Failla converted part of a Rule 12 motion to summary judgment and allowed the plaintiff an additional Rule 30(b)(6) deposition and a surreply to avoid prejudice from the conversion.
“To ensure that Plaintiff would not be prejudiced by this conversion, the Court granted Plaintiff leave to depose an additional witness under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(b)(6), and to file a surreply in opposition to Defendant's motion.”
In a 2025 amendment dispute, she applied Rule 15’s permissive standard because the earlier schedule did not clearly set a Rule 16 good-cause threshold. The amendment made the pending dismissal motion moot.
“Under Sacerdote, the Court does not believe the language in the Schedule Order was sufficiently clear so as to invoke Rule 16.”
Cautions
In Pryor v. Jaffe & Asher, LLP, Judge Failla denied partial dismissal of claims arising from an alleged forcible kiss, explaining that a single extraordinarily severe incident can support a hostile work environment claim.
“If, however, a single incident was ‘extraordinarily severe,’ it can suffice to state a claim.”
In the reviewed investor dispute, the securities-fraud count failed on limitations grounds while the state-law inducement, fiduciary-duty, and promissory-estoppel counts survived dismissal.
“The Court DISMISSES Count I with prejudice.”
In Flycatcher, Failla reduced a fee award tied to an earlier sanctions ruling by 10%, partly because the sanctioned lawyer had limited ability to pay.
“largely motivated by Mr. Feldman’s limited ability to pay the full fees Mr. MacMull seeks”
In Flycatcher, Failla struck a defendant’s dismissal papers and entered default judgment as a sanction after its lawyer repeatedly submitted unverified citations despite warnings.
“If Mr. Feldman could not verify a citation, he should not have cited it.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“For the reasons set forth above, Defendants’ motion to dismiss is DENIED in its entirety.”
“For the reasons stated in this Opinion, the Court finds that the disputed provisions are valid and enforceable, and awards summary judgment in Defendants' favor.”
“The parties have now cross-moved for summary judgment. For the reasons stated in this Opinion, the Court finds that the disputed provisions are valid and enforceable, and awards summary judgment in Defendants' favor.”
“the Court denies Defendants' motions for judgment as a matter of law or a new trial, and grants Plaintiffs motion for judgment as a matter of law as to his assault and battery claims and a new trial for damages.”
“grants Plaintiffs motion for judgment as a matter of law as to his assault and battery claims and a new trial for damages.”
“Defendant's motion to dismiss is converted to a motion for summary judgment in regards to Plaintiffs claim for improper imposition of fees under TILA and for breach of contract, and is granted on those claims. Defendant's motion is denied in regards to Plaintiffs APR disclosure claim.”
“For the reasons stated in this Opinion, Defendants' motion is granted in part; Defendants' motion to dismiss Plaintiffs' claims for violations of state antitrust and consumer protections laws is granted, while their motion to dismiss Plaintiffs' claim under federal antitrust law is denied.”
“For the reasons set forth above, Defendants’ motion to dismiss is DENIED.”
“Defendant’s motion to dismiss is granted with respect to that one image and denied with respect to the remaining three images.”
“Petitioner’s motion to vacate the arbitration award is DENIED; and Respondent’s cross-motion to confirm the award is GRANTED.”
“For the reasons given in this Opinion, Defendants’ motions are GRANTED in full.”
“Respondents’ motion is granted and Petitioner’s motion is denied.”
“CMI has moved for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c). For the reasons set forth in this Opinion, CMI’s motion is granted in full.”
“Defendants’ motion is granted in regards to Plaintiffs claim under New York General Business Law § 349, and denied in all other respects.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
- The visible docket slice is current and 2026-heavy: ADA Title III public-accommodation access suits, a wave of alien-detainee habeas petitions, commercial contract, an FLSA/labor matter, a motor-vehicle case, an ex parte 28 U.S.C. 1782 discovery application, and a Section 2255-style matter (Cedeno v. United States).
- Reflects current assignments, not a tenure-wide caseload; the two terminated dockets are days-long procedural terminations.
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 | 23 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 0 | 23 |
| Sep 2025 | 0 | 11 |
| Mar 2025 | 0 | 12 |
| Sep 2024 | 0 | 10 |
| Mar 2024 | 0 | 18 |
| Sep 2023 | 0 | 19 |
| Mar 2023 | 0 | 15 |
| Sep 2022 | 0 | 16 |
| Mar 2022 | 0 | 16 |
| Sep 2021 | 0 | 21 |
| Mar 2021 | 0 | 20 |
| Sep 2020 | 0 | 22 |
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 Failla: 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 Failla with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Failla, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Failla's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace