Robert W. Lehrburger
How Judge Lehrburger rules, drawn from 4 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
How Judge Lehrburger decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
For a Section 1782 application, Lehrburger looks for the three statutory prerequisites and then applies the Intel factors. The application succeeded where the targets were located in the district, the evidence was intended for contemplated foreign judicial proceedings, the applicant acted for interested heirs, the foreign court appeared receptive, and the requests were tailored rather than burdensome.
“the Court further finds that the factors set forth in Intel Corp. v. Advanced Micro Devices, Inc., 542 U.S. 241, 264-65, 124 S.Ct. 2466, 2483 (2004) weigh in favor of permitting the discovery requested pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1782”
Procedural preferences
When a pro se employment complaint is too sparse to state Title VII, disability, pregnancy-discrimination, or family-leave claims but the defects may be curable, Lehrburger dismisses without prejudice and permits a first amendment rather than closing the case permanently.
“Perry’s Complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice and with leave to amend.”
Cautions
In the Social Security appeal read here, Lehrburger reversed an ALJ who discounted every medical opinion of record and then assessed the claimant's functional capacity on his own. Practical lesson: he expects the ALJ's residual-functional-capacity finding to rest on at least some medical opinion and to address gaps such as treatment-related absenteeism, rather than the adjudicator's own reading of the raw records.
“an ALJ may not, as the ALJ did here, simply reject medical opinions of record and then substitute his or her own medical judgment in their place”
A discovery respondent should document more than a cursory internal inquiry when the available evidence raises doubt about its answer. Lehrburger required a reasonable search covering both the bond custodian and payment agent, followed by a sworn declaration identifying them or explaining that they could not be found.
“it shall conduct a reasonable search (not merely ‘inquire within’) to determine the identities of the custodian of and the payment agent for the bonds”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Accordingly, pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), Soropoulos’s motion is GRANTED, and the Commissioner’s motion is DENIED. The Clerk of Court is directed to remand the case.”
“The Application for discovery pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1782 is GRANTED;”
“Accordingly, if PepsiCo has not already done so, it shall conduct a reasonable search (not merely ‘inquire within’) to determine the identities of the custodian of and the payment agent for the bonds.”
“For the foregoing reasons, Defendants’ motion to dismiss is GRANTED, and Perry’s Complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice and with leave to amend.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 233 days (N = 16).
Median motion-to-ruling time: 26 days (N = 19).
Sample of consent cases assigned to Lehrburger, filed 2021-2022. The mix below is from case-level metadata; all sampled cases were filed during his tenure (he took the bench in 2017), so none are inherited from a predecessor.
Draft for Judge Lehrburger with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Lehrburger, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Lehrburger's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace