P. Kevin Castel
How Judge Castel decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
He resolves dispositive motions on a clean, often threshold legal ground rather than reaching every issue: where a statute of repose (or limitations) disposes of the claims, he decides on that basis and expressly declines to reach the remaining arguments. A defendant with a clean time-bar should lead with it.
“The defendants now move for summary judgment on the ground that plaintiffs' claims are barred by the statute of limitations and the statute of repose. Because the Court concludes that the claims are barred by the statute of repose, it is not necessary to reach the statute of limitations arguments.”
Procedural preferences
On a Rule 12(b)(6) motion he is disciplined about the record: he will consider only documents incorporated by reference into or integral to the complaint and refuses to convert the motion into summary judgment by considering extrinsic declarations, even when the movant annexes many exhibits.
“I may consider some, but not all of those documents on a motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) without converting it into a motion for summary judgment. Because I decline to convert this motion, I will only consider those documents which are relevant to the arguments raised and were either incorporated by reference into the Complaint or integral to plaintiffs' claims.”
Cautions
At summary judgment in an employment case he holds the non-movant to producing actual pretext evidence, not impressions: once the defendant articulates legitimate non-discriminatory reasons, a plaintiff who offers no evidence of pretext (or that bias was a substantial factor) loses. A discrimination plaintiff opposing MSJ must come forward with specific pretext evidence.
“Defendants have stated legitimate, non-discriminatory, non-retaliatory reasons for the adverse employment actions at issue and plaintiff has failed to come forward with evidence that the reasons are pretextual nor has plaintiff come forward with evidence that discrimination or retaliation was a substantial factor in the employment actions at issue.”
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.
| Motions to dismiss N = 13 |
Granted: 6Granted in part: 6Denied: 1 | 92% granted |
| Summary judgment N = 8 |
Granted: 5Granted in part: 1Denied: 2 | counts only |
| Motion to preclude expert N = 1 |
Granted: 1 | counts only |
| Motion for sanctions N = 1 |
Denied: 1 | counts only |
| Motion for judgment on pleadings N = 1 |
Denied: 1 | counts only |
| Motion to transfer venue N = 1 |
Denied: 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.
“For the reasons more fully explained below, the summary judgment motion is granted because no reasonable fact finder could find in plaintiffs favor.”
“For the reasons stated below, the Moving Defendants' motion is granted in part and denied in part.”
“For the reasons stated below, plaintiffs motion for summary judgment against defendant Shah is denied.”
“Defendants, other than Affordable Hospitality, Inc. ("AHI"), are granted summary judgment on plaintiffs demand for an accounting. In all other respects, defendants' motion for summary judgment is denied.”
“The defendants' motion to preclude plaintiffs expert from testifying at trial is granted.”
“For the reasons stated below, defendants' motion to dismiss is granted.”
“Defendants move for summary judgment under Rule 56(a), Fed.R.Civ.P. For the reasons stated below, defendants' motion for summary judgment is granted.”
“the Court concludes that EIPA does not create a new private right of action for the plaintiffs to sue TD Bank for money damages and that the plaintiffs' common law claims fail as a matter of law. TD Bank's motion to dismiss is granted.”
“Defendants Uchimoto, Newman, and Erbek have moved to dismiss the claims against them. For the reasons set forth below, defendants' motions are granted in part and denied in part”
“Plaintiffs' fraud-based claims -- the four federal securities laws claims, the North Carolina statutory claim, and the fraudulent concealment claim -- survive only insofar as they allege that nondisclosure of the "kickback" payments caused plaintiffs to needlessly pay management fees to TAG VI. The fraud-based claims are otherwise dismissed for failure to allege loss causation and/or proximate cause.”
“the doctrine of res judicata forecloses this action brought by Sheppard's co-owner because the two are in privity and every claim asserted here was already adjudicated on the merits in Sheppard. Therefore, the Court grants the defendants' motions to dismiss and for judgment on the pleadings.”
“The Court also denies the defendants' motion for sanctions.”
“the defendants' motion is granted as to plaintiffs claims under RICO and the Robinson-Patman Act, and those claims are dismissed. I decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining state law claims, and they are remanded to Supreme Court, New York County, from which the case was removed.”
“I grant defendant's motion to dismiss plaintiffs Section 349 claim, and deny defendant's motion to dismiss plaintiffs claim for consequential damages.”
“Both parties have moved for summary judgment in their favor. Rule 56, Fed. R.Civ.P. For the reasons outlined below, Alitalia's motion is denied and ATPCO's motion is granted.”
“Alitalia's motion is denied and ATPCO's motion is granted.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Sample from search_dockets(assigned_judge='P. Kevin Castel'). The visible docket is current and reflects Castel's modern senior-status docket: Schedule-A trademark/copyright enforcement, AI-era copyright (a generative-music defendant), platform/ad-tech disputes against Google, and commercial contract. Reflects current assignments, not a tenure-wide caseload; no case durations were computable (all sampled dockets are pending).