David Stewart Cercone
How Judge Cercone rules, drawn from 26 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Cercone
David S. Cercone is a judge of the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania. Appointed by President George W. Bush, Judge Cercone received a commission on August 2, 2002. Judge Cercone assumed senior status on November 24, 2017.
Judge Cercone's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Cercone, 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.
- Chambers’ Rules ↗
- Case Management Order Form — Jury and Nonjury ↗
- Case Management Order — Patent ↗
- Plea Colloquy ↗
- Trial Management Order — Civil ↗
- Trial Management Order — Criminal ↗
Key rules
Contacting chambers
In an urgent situation, Judge Cercone permits correspondence or a call to chambers.
“In an urgent situation, Judge Cercone permits either correspondence or contact by telephone with his chambers.”
Filing
Provide courtesy copies only if the judge requests them.
“Judge Cercone does not accept courtesy copies of motions and papers unless such copies have been requested from counsel.”
Motions
File a brief with a motion unless it is among the listed exceptions.
“Judge Cercone requires that briefs be filed with all motions except motions for a continuance, an extension of time, to compel discovery or to present an uncontested matter.”
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 Cercone decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
At the pleading stage in an insurance-broker negligence case, he treated a plausible mismatch between the insured's stated business needs and the procured coverage as sufficient where a third-party misdesignation appeared reasonably foreseeable.
“plaintiff has raised a plausible basis to support a finding that as an insurance broker, defendant fell short in properly inquiring and explaining the coverage needed to meet the insured's stated goals under the attendant circumstances.”
In an immigration detention case, the court read the admission statute as inapplicable to a person already present in the United States and ordered an individualized bond hearing.
“Aliens, like petitioner, who are ‘already present in the United States,’ are not subject to § 1225 detention because they cannot be said to be ‘seeking admission’ as Congress used that term.”
Cautions
A recusal motion must identify an objective basis to question impartiality; disagreement with prior rulings, case management, or the pace of post-trial decisions is insufficient without evidence of an extrajudicial source of bias.
“a party’s displeasure with legal rulings does not form an adequate basis for recusal ... evidence of bias must normally stem from an ‘extrajudicial source’”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“IT IS ORDERED that [73], [77] the motions be, and the same hereby are, granted. Summary judgment is granted against plaintiff and in favor of these defendants on all remaining claim in the case”
“[18], [28], [35] and [85] - the Motions to Dismiss filed by Defendants Mack, Vogel, the Erie Police Department, Erie County Prison, Warden Sutter, and DeJohn are granted in their entirety with prejudice; these Defendants are dismissed from this civil action; any concomitant request for leave to amend is denied as futile”
“[42] - the Motion to Dismiss filed by Defendant I. Asar, M.D., is granted to the extent Plaintiff is seeking to assert an alleged HIPAA violation and denied insofar as it seeks to dismiss any medical negligence claim for failure to file a Certificate of Merit”
“[99], [100] - the motion for judgment filed by plaintiff is denied”
“IT FUTHER IS ORDERED that [10] defendant Owl Cleaner's motion to dismiss be, and the same hereby is, denied as moot.”
“IT IS ORDERED that [142] the defendants' motion for partial summary judgment be, and the same hereby is, granted”
“[145] plaintiff's motion for partial summary judgment be, and the same hereby is, denied.”
“IT IS ORDERED that [50] the Defendant=s Motion for Summary Judgment be, and the same hereby is, denied.”
“IT IS ORDERED that defendant's motion for summary judgment (Doc. No. 15) be, and the same hereby is, granted. Accordingly, final judgment is granted in favor of defendant and against plaintiff on all claims in the case.”
“IT IS ORDERED that plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment (Document No. 25) be, and the same hereby is, GRANTED.”
“We have found nothing of concern, must less anything that would entitle Rega to habeas relief or further review by the Third Circuit Court of Appeals through the issuance of a Certificate of Appealability. ... Accordingly, a Certificate of Appealability will be denied.”
“plaintiff's motion to exclude the testimony of David Nasser and Christopher Kercsmar will be denied”
“defendants' motion to exclude the expert testimony of Jeffrey Somerlot will be denied”
“having found that Rutila's opinions meet the foundational requirements for admission under Rule 702, plaintiff's motion will be denied without prejudice.”
“plaintiff's motion seeking to preclude the expert testimony of Philip R. Urwin [174] will be denied.”
“Defendants' motion to exclude the expert testimony of W. Michael Birmingham [185] will be granted in part and denied in part. The motion will be granted to the extent it seeks to prohibit Birmingham from testifying as to Farrell's opinions and the related portions of the Rhodes Report. The motion will be denied in all other aspects.”
“plaintiff's motion to exclude the expert testimony and report of James V. Farrell will be granted in part and denied in part. The motion will be granted to the extent it seeks to prohibit Farrell from testifying as to the burden of proof for lost damages and/or whether it has been met. The motion will be denied in all other aspects.”
“Defendants' motion to exclude the expert testimony and report of Mark M. Gleason and Gregory Landgraf will be denied.”
“Those warrants were not fruit of the poisonous tree. As a result, defendant's motion to suppress on this ground also will be denied.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
The 2019-2023 sample includes employment-discrimination, insurance bad-faith, wage-and-hour, consumer-credit, commercial, criminal, post-conviction, and prisoner civil-rights matters. Many sampled employment, insurance, and wage cases were referred to mediation early and settled before a dispositive ruling.
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 | 5 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 0 | 5 |
| Sep 2025 | 2 | 4 |
| Mar 2025 | 0 | 5 |
| Sep 2024 | 0 | 8 |
| Mar 2024 | 0 | 8 |
| Sep 2023 | 0 | 4 |
| Mar 2023 | 0 | 6 |
| Sep 2022 | 0 | 8 |
| Mar 2022 | 2 | 11 |
| Sep 2021 | 0 | 10 |
| Mar 2021 | 0 | 7 |
| Sep 2020 | 1 | 4 |
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 Western District of Pennsylvania, not for Judge Cercone: 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 | 1,965 | 6.5 months |
| Closed with no court action | 665 | 4.6 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 659 | 5.1 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 632 | 8.4 months |
| Closed during trial | 9 | not reported |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 1,965 | 6.5 months |
| Sep 2024 | 1,871 | 6.3 months |
| Sep 2023 | 2,021 | 5.9 months |
| Sep 2022 | 1,988 | 6.5 months |
| Sep 2021 | 1,891 | 6.3 months |
| Sep 2020 | 1,939 | 5.6 months |
| Sep 2019 | 1,766 | 6.9 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 Cercone with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Cercone, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Cercone's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace