Michael Jay Newman
How Judge Newman rules, drawn from 23 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Newman
Michael Jay Newman is a judge of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio. Appointed by President Donald J. Trump, Judge Newman received a commission on November 10, 2020.
Judge Newman's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Newman, 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.
- Standing Order Governing Civil Cases ↗
- Standing Order Governing Criminal Cases ↗
- Standing Order re: Opportunities for Oral Arguments, in Civil Cases, by Newer Attorneys ↗
Key rules
Filing
Do not use AI to prepare a filing submitted to Judge Newman; the order excludes ordinary legal search and office software.
“No attorney for a party, or a pro se party, may use Artificial Intelligence (‘AI’) in the preparation of any filing submitted to the Court.”
Discovery
Absent extraordinary circumstances, participate in an informal discovery conference before filing a discovery motion.
“participated in an informal discovery dispute conference”
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 Newman decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Procedural preferences
In a civil case, Newman denied the defendant’s dismissal motion and allowed discovery on the remaining claims, explaining that summary judgment was the appropriate stage for the parties’ arguments.
“Defendant's motion to dismiss (Doc. No. 11) is DENIED. To clarify, the following complaint claims remain ... counts 1, 2, 4 and 5 ... the efficient and appropriate way forward is to permit discovery to occur and consider the parties' arguments on summary judgment, not earlier at the motion-to-dismiss phase of litigation.”
Cautions
In Fetters v. DeJoy, Newman granted summary judgment on the plaintiffs' disability-discrimination claims after they failed to address those claims in opposition, treating them as abandoned. He denied summary judgment on the separate failure-to-accommodate claims.
“the Court GRANTS IN PART AND DENIES IN PART Defendant's motions for summary judgment (Doc. Nos. 42, 43, 44, 45). Each Plaintiff's individual claim for disability discrimination is DISMISSED, and summary judgment is GRANTED as to those claims. The failure to accommodate claims, however, remain active, and summary judgment is DENIED as to those claims.”
In Scaccia v. Lyft, Inc., he denied reconsideration because the movant repeated arguments the court had already rejected with a different framing.
“Scaccia's motion for reconsideration is DENIED ... The Court will not revisit earlier arguments made with a 'different spin' that it previously dismissed ... Scaccia does not get a second opportunity, so the Court rejects these repetitious arguments.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Defendant WPAFB's motion to dismiss (Doc. No. 11) is GRANTED ... the Court concludes that it lacks jurisdiction over Plaintiff's claims against Defendant WPAFB ... Plaintiff's claims against Defendants WPAFB, Judge Cross, and Hollins are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“Defendant Judge Cross's renewed motion to dismiss (Doc. No. 6) is GRANTED ... Plaintiff's Complaint shall be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE with respect to Judge Cross.”
“Plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction (Doc. No. 13) is DENIED ... Because Plaintiff has not pled legally cognizable claims ... she necessarily cannot demonstrate a strong likelihood of success on the merits.”
“Defendant's motion to dismiss (Doc. No. 11) is DENIED. To clarify, the following complaint claims remain ... counts 1, 2, 4 and 5 ... the efficient and appropriate way forward is to permit discovery to occur and consider the parties' arguments on summary judgment, not earlier at the motion-to-dismiss phase of litigation.”
“the Court GRANTS IN PART AND DENIES IN PART Defendant's motions for summary judgment (Doc. Nos. 42, 43, 44, 45). Each Plaintiff's individual claim for disability discrimination is DISMISSED, and summary judgment is GRANTED as to those claims. The failure to accommodate claims, however, remain active, and summary judgment is DENIED as to those claims.”
“Scaccia's motion for reconsideration is DENIED ... The Court will not revisit earlier arguments made with a 'different spin' that it previously dismissed ... Scaccia does not get a second opportunity, so the Court rejects these repetitious arguments.”
“For good cause shown, American Power LLC's motion for leave to file under seal (Doc. No. 232) is GRANTED.”
“the motions to dismiss (Doc. Nos. 7, 18) are DENIED.”
“motion to dismiss (Doc. No. 17) is thus GRANTED”
“the Court hereby DENIES the parties”
“The Court also GRANTS on the merits Defendants”
“pending motion for summary judgment is premature and DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.”
“motions to dismiss (Doc. Nos. 14, 16, 18) are CONDITIONALLY GRANTED.”
“PREJUDICE for failure to prosecute and as premature.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
A 2021-2023 sample and more recent cases from Judge Newman's Dayton docket include Social Security appeals, civil-rights and employment actions, fair-housing claims, employee-benefits disputes, immigration mandamus petitions, personal-injury cases, and consumer matters. The sample is illustrative rather than random.
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 | 2 |
| Mar 2024 | 0 | 1 |
| Sep 2023 | 0 | 2 |
| Mar 2023 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2022 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2022 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2021 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2021 | 0 | 1 |
| 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 Newman: 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 Newman with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Newman, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Newman's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace