Chelsey M. Vascura
How Judge Vascura decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Procedural preferences
At the pleading and screening stage Vascura narrows prisoner civil-rights suits to the viable claim: she recommended allowing only a single First Amendment legal-mail claim to proceed, dismissing the remaining claims and denying the preliminary injunction.
“this Court hereby ADOPTS the R&R (ECF No. 5-1). Accordingly, Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction (ECF No. 3) is DENIED. ... The rest of his claims are DISMISSED.”
Cautions
She enforces the PLRA three-strikes bar and the fee/prosecution rules: after recommending denial of in forma pauperis status and dismissal for non-payment, a plaintiff's own summary-judgment motion is denied as moot.
“Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 3) is DENIED as MOOT.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
42 U.S.C. 1983 prisoner suit (retaliation + due process arising from a prison Rules Infraction Board proceeding). Vascura's R&R (2019-10-29) recommended sua sponte DISMISSAL of both claims under 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2) and 1915A(b)(1) for failure to state a plausible claim (Twombly/Iqbal). Adopted by Chief Judge Marbley 2020-06-03; plaintiff's motion for reconsideration DENIED 2020-08-24 (the order read here, which recites the recommendation, adoption, and dismissal). As a screening dismissal, it is excluded from the motion statistics. Quote: 'On October 29, 2019, the Magistrate Judge issued her Report and Recommendation (Doc. 6) recommending that the Court dismiss Plaintiff's claims pursuant to ss 1915(e)(2) and 1915A(b)(1).... both of his claims were dismissed.' Grounds the complaint-to-screening-recommendation latency (43d).
“Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 3) is DENIED as MOOT.”
Pro se civil-rights suit. Vascura's R&R (2024-04-05) recommended DISMISSING the action WITHOUT prejudice under Rule 4(m) for failure to timely effect service on the remaining defendant within 90 days (after an unanswered show-cause order). District Judge Sargus overruled plaintiff's objection, ADOPTED AND AFFIRMED, dismissed without prejudice. As a sua sponte service dismissal, it is excluded from the motion statistics. Quote: 'The Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED and AFFIRMED.... The action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE under Rule 4(m) for failure to timely effect service of process.'
“this Court hereby ADOPTS the R&R (ECF No. 5-1). Accordingly, Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction (ECF No. 3) is DENIED. ... The rest of his claims are DISMISSED.”
“REMAND this matter pursuant to Sentence 4”
“Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 32) is GRANTED”
“Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 33) is DENIED”
“RECOMMENDED that this action be DISMISSED WITH”
“DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE pursuant to Rule 4(m) for failure to”
Initial statutory screening of an amended pro se civil-rights complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). Grounding quote: recommended that the amended complaint be dismissed 'for failure to state a claim under § 1915(e)(2).'
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
A 2025-2026 sample of Judge Vascura's directly assigned work is dominated by Social Security appeals and criminal-duty search- and tracking-warrant matters. Her prisoner and other civil-rights merits work generally appears as recommendations in cases assigned to district judges. The sample is illustrative rather than a measured caseload distribution.
Put Judge Vascura's record to work
Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Vascura actually rules, not a generic AI guess.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Vascura's own signed orders and cites them.