Kimberly A. Jolson
How Judge Jolson rules, drawn from 42 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Jolson
Kimberly A. Jolson is a United States Magistrate Judge for the Southern District of Ohio in Columbus. She was appointed on February 10, 2016, and earned degrees from the Ohio State University and the University of Texas School of Law.
Judge Jolson's practices and standing orders
The court's website lists no individual practices or standing orders of Judge Jolson's own (checked October 9, 2026), so the court's local rules and general orders are the place to look (court page ↗).
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).
- General Order 24-02 In Re: Procedures for Requesting, Filing, and Management of Highly Sensitive Documents ↗
- U.S. District Court General Order No. 24-05 ↗
- General Order 23-03 In Re: Automatic Sealing and Procedures for Unsealing of Applications for Search Warrants, Pen Registers, Trap and Trace Devices, or Court Orders Under 18 U.S.C. § 2703(d). ↗
How Judge Jolson decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Procedural preferences
In Jarrar, she denied a discovery stay while a dismissal motion was pending, finding the ordinary expense of discovery outweighed by the delay to the plaintiff.
“On balance, the relevant considerations weigh in favor of the parties moving forward with discovery.”
Cautions
In one consent employment case, Jolson permitted an age discrimination claim to proceed only after the amended pleading connected inaccurate scanner data, differential treatment of younger coworkers, and a transfer that cost the plaintiff seniority. She described the sufficiency question as borderline.
“In short, this is a borderline question.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Plaintiff's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (ECF No. 43) is therefore DENIED.”
“Defendants' Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (Doc. 64) is DENIED.”
“Defendants Ashcraft, Yates, and Berry's motion for summary judgment (Doc. 30) is DENIED as to Plaintiff's excessive force claim against Defendant Ashcraft and failure to intervene claim against Defendant Yates. The motion (Doc. 30) is GRANTED as to Plaintiff's failure to report the claim against Defendant Yates and all claims against Defendant Berry.”
“Defendant Boykin's motion for summary judgment (Doc. 31) is GRANTED.”
“the Magistrate Judge recommended that the Commissioner's non-disability finding be affirmed. ... The Commissioner's decision that Plaintiff is not disabled is AFFIRMED.”
“For the reasons stated, the Undersigned RECOMMENDS that Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 100) be GRANTED.”
“Therefore, the Undersigned RECOMMENDS that Plaintiff's Motion to Dismiss be GRANTED and this action be DISMISSED without prejudice.”
“For the reasons stated, it is RECOMMENDED that the Court GRANT Detective Boerstler's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 14) without prejudice.”
“For the foregoing reasons, it is RECOMMENDED that Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment on Exhaustion be DENIED.”
“For the foregoing reasons, it is RECOMMENDED that Defendants' Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim be DENIED.”
“Based on the foregoing, it is RECOMMENDED the Court SUSTAIN Plaintiff's Statement of Errors (Doc. 12) and REVERSE the Commissioner's non-disability finding and REMAND this case to the Commissioner and Administrative Law Judge under Sentence Four of § 405(g).”
“Based on the foregoing, the Undersigned RECOMMENDS that the Court OVERRULE Plaintiff's Statement of Errors (Doc. 9) and enter judgment in favor of Defendant.”
“For the foregoing reasons, the Undersigned RECOMMENDS that this action be DISMISSED because Petitioner's claims are not cognizable.”
“Accordingly, it is RECOMMENDED that Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (Docs. 188, 190) be DENIED.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Judge Jolson's directly assigned sample consists of criminal-duty search-warrant and subpoena matters. Her prisoner civil-rights, Social Security, and employment work generally appears as recommendations in cases assigned to district judges. The sample is illustrative rather than a measured caseload distribution.
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 | 0 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2025 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2025 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2024 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2024 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2023 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2023 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2022 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2022 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2021 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2021 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2020 | 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 U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, not for Judge Jolson: 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 | 2,199 | 9 months |
| Closed with no court action | 1,037 | 7.5 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 810 | 7.2 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 343 | 15.2 months |
| Closed during trial | 9 | not reported |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 2,199 | 9 months |
| Sep 2024 | 2,137 | 8.2 months |
| Sep 2023 | 2,153 | 9.7 months |
| Sep 2022 | 2,311 | 12.6 months |
| Sep 2021 | 2,287 | 10.4 months |
| Sep 2020 | 2,012 | 9.7 months |
| Sep 2019 | 5,561 | 41.6 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 Jolson with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Jolson, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Jolson's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace