Charles Esque Fleming
How Judge Fleming rules, drawn from 19 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Fleming
Charles Esque Fleming is a judge of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio. Appointed by President Joseph R. Biden, Judge Fleming received a commission on February 8, 2022.
Judge Fleming's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Fleming, as published on the court's website (checked October 9, 2026). Judges revise these often, so confirm the current version on the court's site before you file.
Key rules
Filing
Deadlines set by the court expire at 5 p.m. on the due date unless otherwise ordered.
“Unless otherwise ordered, ALL FILING DEADLINES SET BY THIS COURT SHALL EXPIRE AT THE CLOSE OF BUSINESS ON THE DATE OF THE DEADLINE. ‘Close of business’ means the action ordered/allowed by the Court must occur by 5:00 PM on the specified date.”
Motions
A request to exceed length limits must show good cause and be filed at least seven days before the filing deadline.
“Motions for relief from the length restrictions must show good cause for such relief and must be made NO LESS THAN seven (7) days before the filing deadline at issue.”
Motions
An opposed motion to continue or extend a deadline must be filed at least seven days before that date.
“If the motion is opposed, it MUST be filed NO LESS THAN seven (7) days before the date/deadline at issue”
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 9, 2026).
How Judge Fleming decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Procedural preferences
When a plaintiff amends with leave of court, denies a pending motion to dismiss or for judgment on the pleadings as moot rather than ruling on the superseded pleading.
“As a result, Defendants' Motion to Dismiss is DENIED AS MOOT.”
On a combined motion to dismiss and compel arbitration, grants it in part, dismissing an improperly joined defendant without prejudice with limited leave to amend and staying the case pending arbitration.
“Defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint and compel arbitration (ECF No. 7) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART; ... Defendant Mindcare is DISMISSED as a defendant WITHOUT PREJUDICE; ... Plaintiffs are GRANTED leave to amend the complaint for the limited purpose of establishing Defendant Mindcare as a 'joint employer'; ... This case is otherwise STAYED pending completion of the arbitration”
In the reviewed immigration detention case, the court declined to address a government objection aimed at a conclusion the magistrate judge had not reached. It adopted the recommendation based on the procedural defect in revoking supervision.
“Since Respondent’s argument finds no footing in the R&R, the Court will disregard it.”
In a drug prosecution, Fleming found probable cause to search a residence after recent surveillance connected it to controlled purchases.
“Given these circumstances, the Affidavit demonstrates a sufficient nexus between illegal drug trafficking activities and 1130 E. 114th Street to establish probable cause.”
In a trade secret dispute, Fleming required the claimed secret to be defined with enough specificity to support the claim at summary judgment.
“Federal has failed to sufficiently define Trade Secret #1.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Defendant's motion to dismiss (ECF No. 5) and DISMISSES the VA as a party to this case.”
“For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff's motion for leave to file a second amended complaint (ECF No. 13) is GRANTED.”
“As a result, Defendants' Motion to Dismiss is DENIED AS MOOT.”
“For the foregoing reasons, the Court GRANTS Defendants' motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 57) and GRANTS summary judgment in their favor on all remaining claims.”
“the amended complaint (ECF No. 7) [is filed] with leave of the Court under Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2).”
“Because Plaintiff has filed an amended complaint with leave of the Court, the Court DENIES AS MOOT Cuyahoga County's motion for judgment on the pleadings (ECF No. 4).”
“Defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint and compel arbitration (ECF No. 7) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART; ... Defendant Mindcare is DISMISSED as a defendant WITHOUT PREJUDICE; ... Plaintiffs are GRANTED leave to amend the complaint for the limited purpose of establishing Defendant Mindcare as a 'joint employer'; ... This case is otherwise STAYED pending completion of the arbitration”
“the Court DENIES the Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 20)”
“Plaintiff's Partial MSJ is DENIED”
“Summary judgment is entered in Defendant Schindler Elevator Corporation's favor”
“the Sale Motion is GRANTED IN PART”
Disability-discrimination action in which the plaintiff's counsel withdrew and the plaintiff then failed to appear at multiple conferences or otherwise participate. The magistrate judge recommended dismissal for failure to prosecute, and no objection was filed. The court adopted the unopposed recommendation and dismissed the amended complaint without prejudice. Excluded from motion statistics as an unopposed failure-to-prosecute dismissal with no adversarial motion decided. Quote: "recommending that the Court dismiss this action, without prejudice".
Pro se civil-rights action challenging state-court divorce and child-custody rulings. Acting on its own motion, the court held it lacked subject-matter jurisdiction under the domestic-relations exception and the Rooker-Feldman and Younger abstention doctrines, and dismissed the action. No motion was pending. Quote: "The Court lacks subject-matter jurisdiction in this case for myriad reasons."
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 533 days (N = 2).
- The sample covers cases filed from 2022 through 2024.
- Fleming sits in the Cleveland-based Eastern Division, with cases across the district's divisions.
- His recent assigned docket is weighted toward federal criminal cases and also includes Social Security appeals referred to magistrate judges, United States civil enforcement, FLSA and wage disputes, prisoner civil rights, DMCA subpoenas, and insurance or subrogation matters.
- The criminal-heavy sample underrepresents the full civil nature-of-suit mix.
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 | 35 |
| Bench trials submitted more than six months | 0 |
| Bankruptcy appeals pending more than six months | 0 |
| Social Security appeals pending more than six months | 2 |
| Civil cases pending more than three years | 6 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 35 | 6 |
| Sep 2025 | 29 | 8 |
| Mar 2025 | 28 | 9 |
| Sep 2024 | 19 | 6 |
| Mar 2024 | 22 | 5 |
| Sep 2023 | 9 | 1 |
| Mar 2023 | 24 | 0 |
| Sep 2022 | 22 | 0 |
| Mar 2022 | 0 | 0 |
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 Northern District of Ohio, not for Judge Fleming: 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 | 2,048 | 7.1 months |
| Closed with no court action | 394 | 3.3 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 1,035 | 5.9 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 607 | 11.4 months |
| Closed during trial | 12 | 18 months |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 2,048 | 7.1 months |
| Sep 2024 | 2,008 | 7.4 months |
| Sep 2023 | 2,137 | 8.5 months |
| Sep 2022 | 2,330 | 9.8 months |
| Sep 2021 | 2,432 | 9.3 months |
| Sep 2020 | 2,788 | 10.3 months |
| Sep 2019 | 3,158 | 9.9 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 Fleming with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Fleming, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Fleming's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace