Thomas S. Kleeh

U.S. District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia district Appointed by Donald Trump (Republican) 22 signed orders read

How Judge Kleeh decides

Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

What persuades

On a discrimination claim, the judge treated the absence of any allegation that the employer knew about protected FMLA activity as fatal on its own, independent of whether the underlying harm was plausible.

“There are no allegations that Defendants knew that Plaintiff had invoked a right under the FMLA. In fact, there are no allegations that Plaintiff ever went on leave.”

On a personal-jurisdiction challenge, the judge focused narrowly on the mechanics of service rather than the defendant's underlying contacts with the forum, and declined to reach the case's other dismissal grounds once service alone was dispositive.

“This Court lacks personal jurisdiction over Ms. Allen because Defendant was not served in compliance with the service of process procedures set forth in West Virginia's long-arm statute.”

Procedural preferences

When no party objects to a magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation, the judge reviews only for clear error rather than conducting an independent merits analysis, and adopts promptly.

“Because no party has objected, the Court is under no obligation to conduct a de novo review. Accordingly, the Court reviewed the R&R for clear error. Upon careful review, and finding no clear error, the Court ADOPTS the R&R.”

Signed rulings

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

Kelley v. West Virginia University
1:24-cv-00079-TSK · 2025-07-03
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“Defendants' motion to dismiss is GRANTED [ECF No. 8]; Plaintiff's request for prospective injunctive relief is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for lack of jurisdiction; Plaintiff's WVHRA claims are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for lack of jurisdiction; Plaintiff's FMLA retaliation claim is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE for failure to state a claim.”

ABB Construction, LLC v. Allen
1:23-cv-00034 · 2024-01-09
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“Defendant's Motion to Dismiss [ECF No. 6] is GRANTED and Plaintiff's Complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.”

State of West Virginia v. Jones
1:24-cv-00026-TSK-MJA · 2024-05-24
Motion for remand (plaintiff) Granted

“Upon careful review, and finding no clear error, the Court ADOPTS the R&R [ECF No. 17]. Plaintiff's Motion to Dismiss and Motion for Remand is GRANTED [ECF No. 10] and the claims are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.”

Varela v. Walmart Supercenter
1:24-cv-00047-TSK-MJA · 2025-01-22
Motion to dismiss recommended (defendant) Granted

“the Court ADOPTS the R&R [ECF No. 12]. Defendant's motion to dismiss is GRANTED [ECF No. 5]... This action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE and STRICKEN from the Court's active docket.”

Callahan v. Kijakazi
1:22cv113 · 2023-07-21
Social security review (plaintiff) Denied

“DENIES Callahan's motion for summary judgment [ECF No. 23]; GRANTS the Commissioner's motion for summary judgment [ECF No. 24]; and DISMISSES WITH PREJUDICE this civil action.”

Tryon v. Snowshoe Mountain, Inc.
2:24-cv-00015-TSK · 2026-06-16
Summary judgment (defendant) Denied

“For the reasons discussed, the motion for summary judgment is DENIED in its entirety [ECF No. 72].”

Lee v. West Virginia University Medical Corporation d/b/a University Health Associates
1:22-cv-00156-TSK · 2025-02-27
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“For the reasons stated herein, Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 117] is GRANTED. Plaintiff's Complaint [ECF No. 1] is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”

Belkadi v. Mayle
1:24-cv-00014-TSK · 2025-03-05
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted in part

“Counts Two and Three of Plaintiff's Complaint for False Arrest and Unlawful Search and Seizure are DISMISSED because the alleged unlawful conduct is duplicative and included within Count Two. Plaintiff's claims in Counts One through Four are further DISMISSED to the extent the claims are brought under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution.”

United States v. Matheny
1:22-cr-00039-TSK-MJA · 2025-02-10
Motion to suppress (defendant) Denied

“Accordingly, the R&R is REJECTED [ECF No. 40], and the motion to suppress is DENIED [ECF No. 24].”

United States v. Bailey
1:24-cr-00061-TSK-MJA · 2025-01-29
Motion to suppress (defendant) Denied

“For the reasons discussed above, the R&R is REJECTED [ECF No. 40], and Defendant's motion to suppress is DENIED [ECF No. 26].”

Always Dreaming, LLC v. Mach 1 Energy Construction, Inc.
1:24-cv-00038-TSK-MJA · 2025-01-27
Default judgment (plaintiff) Granted

“Upon careful review, and finding no clear error, the Court ADOPTS IN PART the R&R [ECF No. 25] and pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(b)(1), GRANTS Plaintiff's motion for default judgment [ECF No. 10].”

Butcher v. Antero Resources Corp.
1:20-cv-00074-TSK · 2023-03-31
Motion to exclude expert (defendant) Denied

“Mr. Petty's opinions are not so unreliable as to warrant exclusion of his testimony and the motion to exclude is DENIED.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

The sampled civil caseload spans employment-discrimination removals, contract and coal-royalty disputes, and prisoner civil-rights suits, with Magistrate Judge Michael J. Aloi handling many referred prisoner and habeas matters. One sampled removal case ended in a voluntary stipulated dismissal with prejudice after the parties reached agreement following a continued trial setting; a second, longer-running contract dispute produced a grounded motion-to-amend ruling before proceeding toward further litigation.

Put Judge Kleeh's record to work

Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Kleeh actually rules, not a generic AI guess.

Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Kleeh's own signed orders and cites them.