Karoline Mehalchick
How Judge Mehalchick rules, drawn from 35 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Mehalchick
Karoline Mehalchick is a judge of the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania. Appointed by President Joseph R. Biden, Judge Mehalchick received a commission on February 5, 2024.
Judge Mehalchick's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Mehalchick, 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
Filing
Include a Certificate of Use of Generative AI with any filing prepared using such a tool.
“must include with the document a Certificate of Use of Generative AI”
Motions
Head a proposed order “Order” when submitting it with a motion.
“When filing a proposed order with a motion, include a heading as ‘Order’ rather than ‘Proposed Order’ or ‘[Proposed] Order.’”
Discovery
File a docket letter describing a discovery dispute and requesting a conference.
“Counsel is to raise any discovery dispute with the court through the filing of a letter on the docket describing the nature of the dispute and requesting a conference with the court.”
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 Mehalchick decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In an immigration-detention habeas case, the judge holds the government to a demanding, individualized evidentiary burden once a detainee's post-removal-order detention passes the presumptively reasonable six-month mark: aggregate country-wide repatriation statistics, without a case-specific timeline or an indication the receiving country will actually issue travel documents, are treated as speculative and insufficient to rebut the detainee's showing.
“A remote possibility of eventual removal is not analogous to a significant likelihood that removal will occur in the reasonably foreseeable future.”
In Carver v. Talanca, Mehalchick dismissed the unlawful-entry claim without prejudice because the complaint called the officers’ entry unlawful without describing the circumstances beyond an alleged false noise complaint.
“Plaintiffs continuously refer to Police Defendants' entry into their home as unlawful, however, do not detail the circumstances of the entry aside from claiming it was based on a phony noise complaint.”
Procedural preferences
In Van Zandt v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Mehalchick denied the defendants’ reconsideration motion as untimely under the local fourteen-day rule and granted their separate request to clarify the earlier order.
“Because the Commonwealth Defendants did not file the present motion for reconsideration until March 12, 2025, it is not timely.”
In Stafford v. Stevens, Mehalchick found potential claims against two unnamed transport officers but insufficient information to serve them. She directed limited discovery through Stevens to identify the officers and gave Stafford ninety days to amend.
“However, the complaint lacks sufficient identifying information to serve the defendants. Therefore, the Court will direct service of the complaint on Stevens, the ‘Director of State Parole Field Agents,’ for the limited purpose of identifying these John Doe defendants through discovery.”
Cautions
In Shade v. Pennsylvania Department of Corrections, the district judge adopted Mehalchick’s exhaustion recommendation for the medical defendants but declined her proposed summary judgment for the corrections defendants, who had not established that defense.
“[T]he exhaustion analysis conducted in the first report addresses failure to exhaust as to the medical defendants alone and does not apply with equal force to the corrections defendants, who have not yet argued or proven this defense.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1447(c), the case is REMANDED to the Court of Common Pleas of Northumberland County, Pennsylvania, from which is was removed.”
“Petitioner's Petition for Wirt of Habeas Corpus Docket No. 1:14-cv-00039 (Petition 1, Doc. 1), Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus Docket No. 1:14-cv-00054 (Petition 2, Doc. 1), and Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus Docket No. 1:14-cv-00096 (Petition 3, Doc. 1) are each DENIED.”
“The medical defendants' motion (Doc. 51) to dismiss Shade's amended complaint, which has been treated as a motion for summary judgment in accordance with the Third Circuit's decision in Paladino, is GRANTED to the extent that the medical defendants are entitled to summary judgment on grounds administrative exhaustion.”
“Shade's motion (Doc. 78) for default judgment is DENIED.”
“The report and recommendation of Judge Mehalchick (Doc. 19) is ADOPTED IN ITS ENTIRETY as the decision of the court. (2) The defendants' motion for summary judgment, (Doc. 7) is GRANTED.”
“Accordingly, the court grants Defendants Steinhart and Holly's motion for summary judgement in part and denies the motion in part.”
“Moving Defendants' motion to dismiss is GRANTED and they are DISMISSED from this action. (Doc. 120).”
“Defendants' motion to dismiss and for summary judgment is GRANTED. (Doc. 27). Palencia's Amended Complaint (Doc. 19) is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“For the foregoing reasons, Defendants' motion to dismiss is GRANTED and Plaintiffs' complaint is to be DIMISSED. (Doc. 1; Doc. 7). Plaintiffs' claims for punitive damages and state law claims against Defendants are DISMISSED with prejudice. Plaintiffs' Fourth Amendment claims are DISMISSED without prejudice.”
“Based on the foregoing, Soh's motion for summary judgment is GRANTED. (Doc. 127). Soh's negligence claim is DISMISSED.”
“Based on the foregoing, Deuerlein's motion to suppress is DENIED. (Doc. 28).”
“For the foregoing reasons, Commonwealth Defendants' motion for reconsideration will be DENIED. (Doc. 33).”
Criminal sentencing objection to a Presentence Investigation Report, not a standard civil motion type: kept as a pattern data point rather than a classified stats motion. After an evidentiary hearing, the court overruled the defendant's objection to losing the acceptance-of-responsibility guideline adjustment, finding his testimony evasive, contradictory, and blame-shifting despite his guilty plea, and that his obstruction-of-justice conduct (contacting the victim-witness in violation of release conditions) did not present the kind of 'extraordinary case' warranting both an obstruction enhancement and an acceptance-of-responsibility reduction.
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
- Sampled cases span Sec. 2241/2254 habeas corpus (both immigration and federal/state custody), prisoner civil-rights suits, FMLA and Title VII employment claims, insurance and contract disputes, data-breach litigation (one MDL-transferred), TCPA, and personal-injury diversity cases: a broad general civil/criminal docket consistent with an active district judge who inherited a full existing caseload.
- Most terminated cases end in settlement, transfer (venue or MDL), or brief administrative orders rather than a fully-briefed dispositive motion, so several sampled dockets (e.g., Blazer v. Aveanna Healthcare, Werkmeister v. Wayne Bank) show no independently groundable ruling in the record reviewed.
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 | 19 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 0 | 19 |
| Sep 2025 | 5 | 16 |
| Mar 2025 | 0 | 18 |
| Sep 2024 | 21 | 21 |
| Mar 2024 | 0 | 22 |
| Sep 2023 | 0 | 4 |
| Mar 2023 | 0 | 4 |
| Sep 2022 | 0 | 4 |
| Mar 2022 | 0 | 3 |
| Sep 2021 | 0 | 3 |
| Mar 2021 | 0 | 3 |
| 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 Middle District of Pennsylvania, not for Judge Mehalchick: 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 | 1,590 | 8.5 months |
| Closed with no court action | 660 | 6 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 901 | 10.6 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 21 | 39.8 months |
| Closed during trial | 8 | not reported |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 1,590 | 8.5 months |
| Sep 2024 | 1,535 | 8.7 months |
| Sep 2023 | 1,370 | 11 months |
| Sep 2022 | 1,550 | 12.7 months |
| Sep 2021 | 1,420 | 9.4 months |
| Sep 2020 | 1,410 | 10.6 months |
| Sep 2019 | 1,611 | 11 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 Mehalchick with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Mehalchick, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Mehalchick's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace