Nitza I. Quiñones Alejandro

How Judge Alejandro rules, drawn from 24 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

Court
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
Position
district
Appointed by
Barack Obama (Democratic)
Commissioned
2013-06-19
ABA rating
Substantial Majority Qualified, Minority Not Qualified
Education
University of Puerto Rico (B.B.A., cum laude, 1972); University of Puerto Rico School of Law (J.D., 1975)
Signed orders read
24

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.’”

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.

“As such, there exists a sufficient affiliation between Pennsylvania, Moving Defendants' contacts with this forum, and Plaintiffs 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 used in the perjury prosecution against Franklin Lee;”

Signed rulings

A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.

Marshall-Lee v. U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
2:18-cv-02333 · 2018-10-25
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“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.”

Wilson v. Ethicon, Inc.
2:19-cv-01905 · 2019-12-16
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied

“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.”

Motions to transfer (defendant) Granted

“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.”

Stokes v. City of Philadelphia
2:22-cv-00338 · 2022-08-09
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted in part

“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.”

Varga v. Allied World Insurance Company
2:24-cv-03410 · 2025-05-13
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“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.”

Brian J. Lyngaas, D.D.S., P.L.L.C. v. IQVIA, Inc.
2:20-cv-02370 · 2026-03-30
Summary judgment (plaintiff) Granted in part

“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”

Summary judgment (defendant) Denied

“Defendant's motion for summary judgment is DENIED.”

Lynch v. Su
2:22-cv-00091 · 2024-01-24
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“Defendant's motion for summary judgment is GRANTED. Accordingly, JUDGMENT is entered in favor of Defendant, and against Plaintiff.”

Price v. Commonwealth Charter Academy-Cyberschool
2:18-cv-01778 · 2019-08-13
Summary judgment (plaintiff) Denied

“Plaintiffs motion for summary judgment, [ECF 21], is DENIED”

Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“Defendant's motion for summary judgment, [ECF 20], is GRANTED.”

Prince v. Malaugh
2:16-cv-06179 · 2019-01-11
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“Defendants' motion for summary judgment is GRANTED, and JUDGMENT is entered in favor of Defendants and against Plaintiffs on all of Plaintiffs' claims.”

SJ Abstract d/b/a InterstateAbstract.com v. Old Republic National Title Insurance Co.
2:21-cv-01334 · 2024-06-26
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted in part

“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.”

Williams v. Elliott
2:18-cv-05418 · 2024-08-26
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted in part

“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”

Summary judgment (plaintiff) Denied

“Williams' motion for summary judgment is denied as it pertains to his claims.”

Special Risk Insurance Services, Inc. v. GlaxoSmithKline, LLC
2:19-cv-03002 · 2022-04-12
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“upon consideration of Defendant's motion for summary judgment, [34] ... it is hereby ORDERED ... that the motion is GRANTED.”

Chant Engineering Co. Inc. v. Cumberland Sales Company
2:20-cv-04559 · 2021-02-26
Motions to dismiss (defendant) 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).

The sampled 2019 docket includes frequent federal and state habeas matters, along with civil-rights, insurance, contract, consumer-communications, False Claims Act, fraud, and other diversity cases.

Draft for Judge Alejandro with the record in hand

Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Alejandro, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Grounded in Judge Alejandro's own signed orders
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace