Stephanie Lou Haines
How Judge Haines decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
On a 12(b)(6) timeliness defense she stays strictly within the four corners of the complaint and indisputably authentic documents: an EEOC right-to-sue limitations defense fails where the record (emails sent only to opposing counsel) cannot establish the plaintiff's date of RECEIPT, which is what starts the 90-day clock.
“the August 30 date of issuance set forth in the three EEOC dismissal and notice of rights forms is insufficient in and of itself to start the 90-day clock, as it is the date of receipt that controls”
Procedural preferences
She uses Rule 12(f) sparingly and surgically: she strikes only narrowly objectionable matter (a single loaded term, an unavailable damages category) and leaves pattern-or-practice and retaliation allegations intact as relevant to proving discrimination, granting leave to amend rather than gutting the pleading.
“Defendant's motion to strike hereby is granted only as to the use in Plaintiffs' complaint of the term 'whistleblower(s),' and as to Plaintiffs' request for punitive damages under the Rehabilitation Act. In all other respects, Defendant's motion to strike hereby is denied”
Cautions
On a partial motion to dismiss she will end a specific claim outright -- Count III was dismissed WITH PREJUDICE -- so a defendant's targeted partial MTD can permanently knock out a count even while the rest of the case proceeds.
“Defendant's Partial Motion to Dismiss Count III of Plaintiff's Complaint (ECF No. 8) is GRANTED with prejudice”
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 = 3 |
Granted: 1Granted in part: 1Denied: 1 | counts only |
| Motions to strike N = 1 |
Granted in part: 1 | counts only |
| Judgment on pleadings N = 1 |
Granted in part: 1 | counts only |
| Summary judgment N = 1 |
Granted in part: 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.
“Defendant's motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) hereby is denied”
“Defendant's motion to strike pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(f) hereby is granted in part and denied in part. Defendant's motion to strike hereby is granted only as to the use in Plaintiffs' complaint of the term 'whistleblower(s),' and as to Plaintiffs' request for punitive damages under the Rehabilitation Act. In all other respects, Defendant's motion to strike hereby is denied”
“Plaintiffs' Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings will be GRANTED in part and DENIED in part ... The Court enters Declaratory Judgment in favor of Princeton. Princeton is not required to defend or indemnify Laurel in the Underlying Litigation.”
“Defendant Laurel's Cross Motion for Partial Summary Judgment is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. ... The Court enters Declaratory Judgment in part as to MedPro. It is not required to indemnify Laurel but is liable to defend Laurel as to certain claims.”
“Defendant's Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 32) will be GRANTED in part and DENIED in part”
“Defendant's Partial Motion to Dismiss Count III of Plaintiff's Complaint (ECF No. 8) is GRANTED with prejudice”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Enumerated via assigned_judge='Stephanie L. Haines', order_by dateFiled asc. General civil docket for the Johnstown Division: employment discrimination (Welchko v. UPMC Altoona 3:18-cv-00226, Perrin v. Wal-Mart, Alverson FMLA), Section 1983 civil rights (Shick v. PA DOC 3:18-cv-00253, Iman v. Borough of Meyersdale), product liability (Adams v. Black & Decker 3:18-cv-00244), insurance/ERISA and diversity (Wargo v. Nationwide, Savelli v. Liberty Life ERISA, Deutsche Bank foreclosure), FCRA/consumer credit (Adams v. TransUnion), and bankruptcy appeals (Jager v. InFirst Bank). As of 2026 her newest dockets include the alien-detainee Section 2241 habeas surge. Some pre-2019 dockets are inherited from David S. Cercone (reassignment artifacts).