🧪 TEST MODE ACTIVE Use test card: 4242 4242 4242 4242

Maria Valdez

U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois magistrate 24 signed orders read

How Judge Valdez decides

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

Procedural preferences

In this sample her Social Security dispositions split between affirming the ALJ (3 of 7) and remanding in part on the claimant's motion (4 of 7, typically for the ALJ's inadequate articulation of a specific finding rather than outright reversal). A claimant should not assume either outcome; her remands here focused narrowly on discrete unaddressed issues (e.g., a symptom or opinion-weighing gap) rather than wholesale reversals.

“For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment [Doc. No. 29] is granted in part and denied in part, and the Commissioner's cross-motion for summary judgment [Doc. No. 31] is denied. The Court finds that this matter should be remanded to the Commissioner for further proceedings consistent with this Order.”

On consent, she decides Social Security appeals to final judgment and will affirm the ALJ where the decision is supported (denying the claimant's motion to reverse/remand and granting the Commissioner's cross-motion). A claimant should not assume a remand; build the substantial-evidence record carefully.

“For the reasons that follow, Plaintiff's motion to reverse or remand the Commissioner's decision [Doc. No. 16] is denied, and the Commissioner's cross-motion for summary judgment [Doc. No. 21] is granted.”

On discovery she tends to split the difference, granting a motion to compel in part and denying it in part rather than ordering wholesale production. Tailor the requests; an all-or-nothing motion is likely to be only partly granted.

“For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel Discovery Responses [Doc. No. 39] is granted in part and denied in part.”

Cautions

On consent she will award substantial statutory attorney's fees to a prevailing party (here $164,955.37). A defendant litigating a fee-shifting claim before her on consent faces real exposure on a full fee petition.

“Plaintiff is awarded $164,955.37 in attorney's fees.”

Signed rulings

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

Kaczmarek v. Berryhill (Acting Commissioner of Social Security)
1:17-cv-02785 · 2018-11-28
Social security review (plaintiff) Denied

“For the reasons that follow, Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment [Doc. No. 19] is denied and the Commissioner's cross-motion for summary judgment [Doc. No. 27] is granted.”

Larry H. v. Kijakazi (Acting Commissioner of Social Security)
1:20-cv-05354 · 2022-09-28
Social security review (plaintiff) Denied

“For the reasons that follow, Plaintiff's motion to reverse or remand the Commissioner's decision [Doc. No. 16] is denied, and the Commissioner's cross-motion for summary judgment [Doc. No. 21] is granted.”

Heard v. Dart (Cook County Sheriff)
1:14-cv-09205 · 2015-10-07
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied

“For the reasons stated herein, Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) [Doc. No. 13] is denied.”

UNITE HERE Health v. La Plaza Secaucus, LLC and Rosdev Hospitality Secaucus, L.P.
1:13-cv-00237 · 2014-01-27
Preliminary injunction (plaintiff) Denied

“For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction [Doc. No. 20] is denied.”

Resurrection Healthcare and Factory Mutual Insurance Co. v. GE Health Care
1:07-cv-05980 · 2009-03-16
Motions to compel (plaintiff) Granted in part

“For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel Discovery Responses [Doc. No. 39] is granted in part and denied in part.”

Petrovic v. City of Chicago, et al.
1:06-cv-06111 · 2008-03-21
Motion to bar testimony (defendant) Granted in part

“For the reasons stated above, Defendants' Motion to Bar J. Thomas' Testimony or in the Alternative to Depose Thomas [Doc. No. 180] is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.”

Brogato v. Proviso Township Mental Health Commission, et al.
1:04-cv-07493 · 2008-03-31
Motion for attorney fees (plaintiff) Granted

“Plaintiff is awarded $164,955.37 in attorney's fees.”

Cotton v. Adams, et al. (City of Chicago police officers)
1:16-cv-04565 · 2017-02-23
Motion to enforce settlement (defendant) Granted

“It is for those aforementioned reasons; the Court respectfully recommends that Defendants' Motion to Enforce Settlement Agreement [Doc. No. 42] be GRANTED.”

Sarah W. v. Kijakazi (Acting Commissioner of Social Security)
1:21-cv-01498 · 2022-09-09
Social security appeal (plaintiff) Granted in part

“For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment [Doc. No. 12] is granted in part and denied in part, and the Commissioner's cross-motion for summary judgment [Doc. No. 17] is denied. The Court finds that this matter should be remanded to the Commissioner for further proceedings consistent with this Order.”

Eric H. v. Saul (Commissioner of Social Security)
1:18-cv-06382 · 2020-06-11
Social security appeal (plaintiff) Granted in part

“For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff's request to reverse the Commissioner's decision is granted in part and denied in part, and the Commissioner's cross-motion for summary judgment [Doc. No. 24] is denied. The Court finds that this matter should be remanded to the Commissioner for further proceedings consistent with this Order.”

Edgar W. v. O'Malley (Commissioner of Social Security)
1:15-cv-07571 · 2024-03-06
Social security appeal (plaintiff) Granted in part

“For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment [Doc. No. 29] is granted in part and denied in part, and the Commissioner's cross-motion for summary judgment [Doc. No. 31] is denied. The Court finds that this matter should be remanded to the Commissioner for further proceedings consistent with this Order.”

Sean P. v. Saul (Commissioner of Social Security)
1:19-cv-00408 · 2020-06-11
Social security appeal (plaintiff) Granted in part

“For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment [Doc. No. 15] is granted in part and denied in part, and the Commissioner's cross-motion for summary judgment [Doc. No. 22] is denied. The Court finds that this matter should be remanded to the Commissioner for further proceedings consistent with this Order.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

Valdez is an active magistrate judge; her enumerable docket under 'Maria G. Valdez' in 2026 is duty-magistrate work (sealed/suppressed search-warrant and grand-jury mc matters, criminal duty assignments). Her civil reasoning work — Social Security consent dispositions, consent civil rulings (12(b)(6), preliminary injunction, protective orders, fee petitions, leave to amend, motions to strike), referred discovery, witness-bar motions, and settlement-enforcement/dismissal R&Rs — is reflected in the 24 published orders above, spanning 2007-2024. She is known for e-discovery expertise and settlement mediation (endorsed The Sedona Conference Cooperation Proclamation).

Put Judge Valdez's record to work

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

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