Joy Flowers Conti
How Judge Conti decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
For a noncitizen already present in the country rather than seeking admission at a port of entry, she applied the discretionary-detention framework in 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) and ordered an individualized bond hearing.
“The court joins the other judges of this district court in holding that § 1226(a), rather than the mandatory detention provision of § 1225(b), applies to aliens similarly situated to Petitioner, who are not seeking admission at a port of entry but rather are already present in the country.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“the motion by the Graham plaintiffs to be relieved of the deadlines in the DMO (Misc. No. 21-1230, ECF No. 3113; crossfiled at Civ. No. 22-224, ECF No. 84), will be DENIED.”
“the court finds there is substantial evidence in the record to affirm the ALJ's decision. The court will affirm the decision of the Commissioner.”
“Plaintiff filed a motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 11) which was denied as moot because the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Supplemental Rules for Social Security do not contemplate that kind of motion.”
“Here there was no showing an exception applied, and the motion for alternative service must be denied without prejudice.”
Pro se prisoner deliberate-indifference case. Adopting the magistrate judge's report and recommendation, the court sua sponte dismissed the amended complaint under 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2)(B) without prejudice to seeking leave to amend. This was a screening disposition rather than a ruling on a party motion. Even with no objections filed, she independently reviewed for clear error before adopting; the complaint conceded timely medical attention, defeating deliberate indifference.
“the court is satisfied that the R&R contains no clear error and will therefore accept the recommendation of the magistrate judge that Wexford's motion to dismiss (ECF No. 29) be granted. The court observes that the dismissal of count III will be with prejudice; and the dismissal of the remaining counts will be without prejudice.”
PLRA prisoner screening under Sections 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) and 1915A, adopting the magistrate judge's report and recommendation; the complaint was dismissed with prejudice for failure to state a claim. The court held that an inmate who files a Rule 41(a) voluntary-dismissal notice after an adverse recommendation but before the district court's disposition cannot thereby avoid a Section 1915(g) strike: the court retains power to dismiss under PLRA screening, so the dismissal counts as a strike. This was a screening disposition rather than a ruling on a party motion.
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 31) is GRANTED and that Defendant City of Pittsburgh is dismissed with prejudice.”
“the Motion to Preclude the Proffered Expert Testimony of Graeme Norval (ECF No. 86) will be GRANTED IN PART”
“the Motion to Exclude Certain Testimony of Plaintiff’s Expert Mark Gleason and Gleason & Associates (ECF No. 89) will be GRANTED”
“Thus, the motion to compel (ECF No. 65) will be denied as moot.”
“The motion for sanctions (ECF No. 83) will be denied for the reasons stated herein.”
“it is hereby ORDERED that the motion to remand this case to the state court (ECF No. 9) is granted.”
“The court will grant defendant’s motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 26) and deny plaintiff’s motion (ECF No. 23) for the reasons set forth below.”
“The court will deny plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 7) and defendant’s cross-motion for summary judgment. (ECF No. 10).”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
The 2021-2024 sample is dominated by personal-injury product-liability cases in the Philips CPAP multidistrict litigation, many of which resolve through coordinated settlements rather than individual dispositive motions. Outside that litigation, the sample includes Social Security, criminal, post-conviction, intellectual-property, commercial, and prisoner civil-rights matters.
Put Judge Conti's record to work
Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Conti actually rules, not a generic AI guess.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Conti's own signed orders and cites them.