Nitza I. Quiñones Alejandro
How Judge Alejandro decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In insurance-coverage cases she applies Pennsylvania's 'four corners' rule and construes 'arising out of' exclusions broadly ('but for' causation): an exclusion barring claims arising out of an excluded actor's conduct defeats the duty to defend AND any derivative bad-faith claim at the pleading stage.
“Despite Plaintiff's assertion of negligence claims against Harmony, the ultimate injury connected to these claims (the death of Ms. Fidalgo) is alleged to be caused by the 'actual or alleged act, error, omission of . . . David Frankel.' ... coverage for Plaintiff's claims against Harmony are precluded by the Frankel Exclusion.”
On personal jurisdiction over out-of-state corporate defendants she follows Bristol-Myers Squibb and the PA Superior Court Ethicon line: where a product component was manufactured in Pennsylvania at the defendant's direction and specification, specific jurisdiction lies even absent general jurisdiction.
“Plaintiff has alleged that she was injured by the negligent and defective design and manufacture of the TVT pelvic mesh device, which Moving Defendants manufactured using the defective mesh made by Secant in Pennsylvania. ... there exists a sufficient affiliation between Pennsylvania, Moving Defendants' contacts with this forum, and Plaintiff's claims.”
Procedural preferences
She adjudicates motions to dismiss count-by-count and theory-by-theory, dismissing specific theories (e.g. fabrication-of-evidence-based due-process claims) while expressly preserving the rest of the complaint rather than dismissing wholesale.
“The motion to dismiss is GRANTED as to Stokes' § 1983 claims for deprivation of liberty without due process and for civil rights conspiracy (Counts II and III), but only with respect to those claims related to Defendant's alleged participation in the fabrication of evidence ... The motion to dismiss is DENIED in all other respects.”
Cautions
A large share of her docket is § 2255 motions to vacate and pro se filings that close administratively ('Statistical closing' in the FJC IDB) rather than on the merits -- read the disposition codes accordingly, not as merits rulings.
“When determining whether an insurer had a duty to defend ... a court must consider the factual allegations asserted in the underlying complaint.”
Motion outcomes
Counted from classified signed orders only. Percentages are shown only where the sample is large enough to be meaningful; smaller samples are reported as raw counts.
| Motions to dismiss N = 10 |
Granted: 5Granted in part: 3Denied: 2 | 80% granted |
| Summary judgment N = 10 |
Granted: 4Granted in part: 3Denied: 3 | 70% granted |
| Motions to transfer N = 1 |
Granted: 1 | counts only |
A "1 of 1" is one ruling, not a tendency. Treat small samples as illustrative, not predictive.
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“the Motion is GRANTED. ... The FTCA's limited waiver of the United States' sovereign immunity does not extend to Plaintiff's claims against the United States, and, thus, those claims are DISMISSED for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.”
“Moving Defendants' motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction is denied. ... there exists a sufficient affiliation between Pennsylvania, Moving Defendants' contacts with this forum, and Plaintiff's claims.”
“Defendants' alternative motion to transfer venue is GRANTED. The Clerk of Court is directed to TRANSFER this matter to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404.”
“The motion to dismiss is GRANTED as to Stokes' malicious prosecution claims filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and Pennsylvania state law (Counts I and VII); The motion to dismiss is GRANTED as to Stokes' § 1983 claims for deprivation of liberty without due process and for civil rights conspiracy (Counts II and III), but only with respect to those claims related to Defendant's alleged participation in the fabrication of evidence used in the perjury prosecution against Franklin Lee; and The motion to dismiss is DENIED in all other respects.”
“For the reasons set forth above, the motion to dismiss is granted and this matter is dismissed. ... because Plaintiff's bad faith claim is premised solely on the allegation that Allied World had no basis to deny coverage, the claim fails as a matter of law since this Court has determined that Allied World had no duty to defend.”
“Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment is GRANTED, insofar as it has established Defendant's liability on its TCPA claim. Accordingly, a separate Judgment Order will be entered in Plaintiff's favor against Defendant in the amount of $2,000; Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment is DENIED in all other respects, including its request that Plaintiff be awarded treble damages and a permanent injunction”
“Defendant's motion for summary judgment is DENIED.”
“Defendant's motion for summary judgment is GRANTED. Accordingly, JUDGMENT is entered in favor of Defendant, and against Plaintiff.”
“Plaintiffs motion for summary judgment, [ECF 21], is DENIED”
“Defendant's motion for summary judgment, [ECF 20], is GRANTED.”
“Defendants' motion for summary judgment is GRANTED, and JUDGMENT is entered in favor of Defendants and against Plaintiffs on all of Plaintiffs' claims.”
“Defendant's motion is GRANTED as to Plaintiff's breach of contract claim premised on the deposition disclosure; and ... DENIED as to Plaintiff's breach of contract claim premised on the voicemail disclosure.”
“Elliott's motion for summary judgment is granted as to all of Williams' claims premised on Aaliyah's Heartbroken; (2) Elliott's motion for summary judgment is denied as to Williams' claims premised on the SISTA Songs”
“Williams' motion for summary judgment is denied as it pertains to his claims.”
“upon consideration of Defendant's motion for summary judgment, [34] ... it is hereby ORDERED ... that the motion is GRANTED.”
“the motion to dismiss is GRANTED, and the claims asserted against Cumberland are dismissed for lack of personal jurisdiction.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 190 days (N = 10).
Enumerated via assigned_judge='Nitza I. Quinones Alejandro' over 2019 filings. Docket is mixed: § 2255 motions to vacate (510, frequent), state habeas (530), civil-rights/§1983, insurance, contract (190), TCPA (890), qui tam False Claims Act (375), and other-fraud/diversity matters. Referral magistrate seen: Lynne A. Sitarski (Fischbein v. IQVIA).