John F. Heil III
How Judge Heil rules, drawn from 22 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Heil
John Frederick Heil, III is Chief Judge of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma. Appointed by President Donald J. Trump, he received his commission on May 27, 2020. He also serves on the United States District Courts for the Eastern and Western Districts of Oklahoma.
Judge Heil's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Heil, 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
Trial
Power off electronic devices in court unless counsel receives approval for trial use on good cause.
“All electronic devices must be powered off. On a showing of good cause, counsel may obtain approval for the use of electronic devices during trial.”
Trial
Only the attorney questioning a witness should object to that witness’s testimony.
“Only the attorney questioning a witness should raise objections concerning that witness’ testimony.”
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 Heil decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In Ahmed v. Osage County Sheriff, Heil dismissed the claim against Officer Fish after finding that the Osage Nation Police Department was the real party in interest and tribal sovereign immunity applied.
“It is also clear that the Osage Nation Police Department is the real, substantial party in interest, such that tribal sovereign immunity extends to plaintiff's claim against Officer Fish.”
Procedural preferences
In Herd v. Bridges, Heil denied habeas relief after finding the claims procedurally defaulted under state rules and that Herd had not overcome the default.
“Given that the state district court and the OCCA have already applied two (2) procedural bars to decline review of the claims raised in the Petition, this Court unquestionably has grounds to apply an anticipatory procedural bar.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Accordingly, the Court grants Defendants' Motions to Dismiss. Except as specifically discussed herein, the dismissal shall be without prejudice to refiling.”
“The Court concludes that the Petition shall be DENIED because all claims asserted therein are procedurally defaulted and Herd has not shown that he can overcome the procedural default of those claims.”
“The Court adopts the Report and Recommendation by the Magistrate Judge and grants Defendants' Motions to Dismiss.”
“For the reasons set forth below, the Court grants summary judgment in favor of Defendants and denies Defendants' Motion to Strike.”
“denying 64 Motion for Sanctions”
“For the reasons set forth below, the Court grants summary judgment in favor of On the Cusp.”
“Triumph filed its motion for summary judgment on September 29, 2020. Dkt. No. 66. For the reasons set forth below, the Court grants in part and denies in part the Motion.”
“This matter is before the Court on the Motion to Dismiss, or in the Alternative Transfer, filed by Defendant Jelena McWilliams, Chairman of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (‘FDIC’) [Dkt. No. 17]. For the reasons set forth below, the Motion to Transfer is GRANTED.”
“Blanton argues that the Oklahoma state court system is the proper forum for the employment dispute he brings against his former employer... For the reasons stated below, Blanton's Motion is denied.”
“denying 14 Motion for Attorney Fees”
“Before the Court is a motion to dismiss (‘Motion’) filed by Defendant Howden Roots, LLC (‘Howden’). Dkt. No. 8. Plaintiff Roger Blanton (‘Blanton’) opposes the Motion. Dkt. No. 18. For the reasons stated, the Motion is DENIED.”
“This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff Progressive Northern Insurance Company's (‘Plaintiff’) Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings. Dkt. No. 18. For the reasons set forth below, the Court grants Plaintiff's Motion.”
“This matter comes before the Court on the Motion for Summary Judgment Against Plaintiff Michael Turner d/b/a Afton Air and Lights, LLC [Dkt. No. 54] filed by Defendants VeriClaim Inc. (‘VeriClaim’) and Sedgwick Claims Management Services, Inc. (‘Sedgwick’)... For the reasons set forth below, the Court grants summary judgment in favor of Sedgwick.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
- As chief judge, his caseload spans the district's full civil and criminal docket: Section 1983 prisoner and civil-rights suits, federal habeas petitions, Social Security appeals, diversity contract and insurance disputes, employment claims, and federal criminal prosecutions.
- The sampled dockets also included cases removed from state court on diversity grounds and several default-judgment rulings alongside merits dispositions.
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 | 16 |
| 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 | 3 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 16 | 3 |
| Sep 2025 | 14 | 5 |
| Mar 2025 | 35 | 18 |
| Sep 2024 | 39 | 20 |
| Mar 2024 | 55 | 21 |
| Sep 2023 | 130 | 28 |
| Mar 2023 | 132 | 23 |
| Sep 2022 | 184 | 19 |
| Mar 2022 | 191 | 13 |
| Sep 2021 | 132 | 9 |
| Mar 2021 | 68 | 6 |
| Sep 2020 | 0 | 3 |
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 Northern District of Oklahoma, not for Judge Heil: 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 | 525 | 7 months |
| Closed with no court action | 112 | 5.5 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 401 | 7.3 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 9 | not reported |
| Closed during trial | 3 | not reported |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 525 | 7 months |
| Sep 2024 | 491 | 7.5 months |
| Sep 2023 | 487 | 9.4 months |
| Sep 2022 | 526 | 13.4 months |
| Sep 2021 | 481 | 11.3 months |
| Sep 2020 | 563 | 10.8 months |
| Sep 2019 | 544 | 9.8 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 Heil with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Heil, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Heil's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace