Gail A. Weilheimer
How Judge Weilheimer rules, drawn from 25 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Weilheimer
Gail A. Weilheimer is a judge of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. President Joseph R. Biden Jr. appointed her, and she received her commission on January 2, 2025. She previously served on the Montgomery County Court of Common Pleas.
Judge Weilheimer's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Weilheimer, as published on the court's website (checked October 8, 2026). Judges revise these often, so confirm the current version on the court's site before you file.
- Judge Weilheimer’s Guidelines ↗
- Consent to a Magistrate Judge ↗
- Meet and Confer Requirements ↗
- Order Governing Electronic Discovery ↗
- Pretrial Conference Requirements ↗
- Rule 26 Joint Report ↗
- Rule 26 Joint Report for Patent Cases ↗
- Settlement Conference Requirements ↗
- Speedy Trial Waiver ↗
Key rules
Contacting chambers
Docket communications about substantive issues.
“All communication regarding substantive issues must be docketed.”
Motions
Confer verbally with opposing counsel at least five days before filing a discovery, Rule 12(b), or other dispositive motion.
“Prior to filing discovery motions, 12(b) motions, or other dispositive motions, counsel contemplating the filing of these motions shall contact opposing counsel to discuss the substance of the anticipated motion and to provide an opportunity to cure any alleged deficiencies or to try to resolve the conflict prior to the filing of the Motion. This communication must occur at least five days prior to the filing of the Motion.”
Conferences
Submit the joint Rule 26(f) report five days before the Rule 16 conference.
“Five days in advance of the Rule 16 Conference, the parties shall jointly submit a Rule 26(f) report.”
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 8, 2026).
- Standing Order on Procedure for Case Opening ↗
- Standing Order on Highly Sensitive Documents ↗
- Standing Order on Access and Management of Sealed Documents ↗
- Standing Order on Filing Procedures in Alien Detainee Cases ↗
- Second Amended Standing Order on Guilty Pleas and Sentencing ↗
- Standing Order on Electronic Document Submission for Unrepresented Litigants ↗
- Standing Procedural Order for Cases Seeking Social Security Review ↗
- Superseding Standing Order on Procedural Matters in Pro Se Civil and Habeas Cases ↗
- Standing Order on Electronic Access to Civil and Criminal Transcripts ↗
How Judge Weilheimer decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In one criminal case, the court suppressed phone evidence after finding that the warrant lacked probable cause and the good-faith exception did not apply.
“the subject warrant and attached affidavit lack probable cause and the good faith exception to the exclusionary rule does not apply”
In one freight-loss trial, the court examined the parties’ agreement and their conduct during the shipment to decide that the defendant assumed a carrier’s responsibility despite calling itself a broker.
“The bulk of the evidence at trial establishes that RSA acted as something more than a mere broker.”
Procedural preferences
The court requires counsel to discuss pleading deficiencies before filing certain motions to dismiss or strike.
“THIS CONFERENCE SHALL TAKE PLACE AT LEAST SEVEN (7) DAYS BEFORE THE FILING OF THE MOTION”
Cautions
The court denied broad corporate-deposition topics where their relevance to the insurance dispute was insufficient.
“This sort of discovery request could ‘properly be characterized as a fishing expedition, causing needless expense and burden to all concerned.’”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“For the foregoing reasons, the Motion is without merit and will therefore be denied”
“Intervening Defendant’s Motion in Limine is without merit and is therefore denied”
“For the reasons explained above, Defendants’ Motion is granted in its entirety”
“For the reasons stated above, the Court denies summary judgment”
“The Motion is Granted, and the evidence from the phone and its poisonous fruit is suppressed”
“Accordingly, this Court properly denied his Motion”
“Defendants’ motions to sever all denied”
“Accordingly, this Court properly denied the Motion”
“This memorandum accompanies this Court’s June 18, 2026 Order (Dkt. 248) denying the Motions to Suppress”
“The Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus is DENIED”
“Counts I through IV are dismissed, without prejudice.4 The remaining claims can go forward”
“Plaintiff’s Motion to Strike Defendant’s Objections and to Compel 30(b)(6) Corporate Designee Deposition is without merit and is therefore denied”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median motion-to-ruling time: 41.0 days (N = 6).
The ten sampled cases include employment, civil rights, product liability, consumer credit, antitrust, and immigration matters. This small fixed selection does not establish a courtwide caseload 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 | 1 |
| 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 | 1 | 0 |
| Sep 2025 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2025 | 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 Eastern District of Pennsylvania, not for Judge Weilheimer: 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 | 5,730 | 5.1 months |
| Closed with no court action | 1,952 | 3.2 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 2,834 | 4.7 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 898 | 10 months |
| Closed during trial | 46 | 17.8 months |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 5,730 | 5.1 months |
| Sep 2024 | 6,200 | 4.6 months |
| Sep 2023 | 6,595 | 7 months |
| Sep 2022 | 5,221 | 6.6 months |
| Sep 2021 | 5,245 | 6.5 months |
| Sep 2020 | 4,686 | 5.7 months |
| Sep 2019 | 5,374 | 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 Weilheimer with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Weilheimer, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Weilheimer's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace