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

Susan K. Gauvey

United States District Court for the District of Maryland magistrate 7 signed orders read

How Judge Gauvey decides

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

What persuades

In a reviewed benefits case, Gauvey denied both summary-judgment motions and remanded because the administrative law judge still needed to apply the governing standards to alleged loans and countable income.

“Therefore, this Court hereby REMANDS this case to the Commissioner for further proceedings consistent with this letter order.”

Procedural preferences

On a diversity fraud claim she denies a defendant's summary-judgment motion where factual disputes remain and denies a plaintiff's post-discovery motion for leave to amend as futile and prejudicial.

“For the foregoing reasons, defendant's motion for summary judgment is DENIED, and plaintiff's motion for leave to amend the pleading is DENIED.”

She requires authentication at summary judgment and excludes a form letter when no knowledgeable witness, distinctive characteristic, or reliable system evidence connects it to the sender.

“Given that Defendant has failed to properly authenticate the blank form dunning letter, the Court concludes that it is inadmissible.”

She applies Rule 11 where a pleading's own facts foreclose personal liability under settled agency law, emphasizing that an individual agent should not be kept in a case merely in case a different theory later emerges.

“It is objectively unreasonable for a complaint to be filed (and maintained) against a known agent (rather than her principal) on the possibility that that agent might have been acting outside the scope of her authority, might have misrepresented her authority or that the employer might repudiate her authority, making her liable.”

Signed rulings

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

L. Hall v. Astrue (Commissioner of Social Security)
1:09-cv-01086-SKG · 2011-02-10
Social security appeal (plaintiff) Granted

“Therefore, this Court hereby REMANDS this case to the Commissioner for further proceedings consistent with this letter order.”

Murphy v. Astrue (Commissioner of Social Security)
1:08-cv-00870-SKG · 2009-07-13
Social security appeal (plaintiff) Granted

“this Court VACATES the decision of the Commissioner, DENIES plaintiff's motion for summary judgment and DENIES defendant's motion for summary judgment and REMANDS for further consideration in light of this opinion.”

Blonder v. Buckhantz
1:04-cv-03732-SKG · 2006-02-16
Summary judgment (defendant) Denied

“For the foregoing reasons, defendant's motion for summary judgment is DENIED, and plaintiff's motion for leave to amend the pleading is DENIED.”

Motion for leave to amend (plaintiff) Denied

“the proposed amendment is clearly insufficient on its face... even though the new allegations arises from the same facts, defendant would be prejudiced by the amendment... in the interest of justice, plaintiff's motion is denied.”

Reynolds v. Astrue
1:11-cv-00559-SKG · 2012-03-30
Social security appeal (plaintiff) Granted

“Accordingly, the Court DENIES Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 13), DENIES Defendant’s motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 14-1), and REMANDS this case for further proceedings.”

Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Riggs Distler & Co.
1:11-cv-02203-SKG · 2012-04-20
Motions to dismiss (third_party_defendant) Granted

“For reasons set forth below, the Court GRANTS both the Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 27) and the Motion to Stay Discovery (ECF No. 38).”

Motion to stay discovery (third_party_defendant) Granted
Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Riggs Distler & Co.
1:11-cv-02203-SKG · 2013-09-06
Motion for sanctions (third_party_defendant) Granted in part

“For reasons set forth below, the Court GRANTS in part and DENIES in part both the Motion for Order (ECF No. 34-2) and the Motion for Sanctions (ECF No. 35).”

Motion for sanctions (third_party_defendant) Granted in part
Webster v. ACB Receivables Management, Inc.
1:12-cv-03620-SKG · 2014-04-22
Summary judgment (plaintiff) Granted in part

“For the reasons set forth above, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment as to the first, second, and third counts but DENIES her motion as to the fourth count.”

Summary judgment (defendant) Granted in part

“The Court DENIES Defendant’s motions for summary judgment as to the first, second, and third counts, but GRANTS the same as to the fourth count.”

Motions to strike (plaintiff) Denied

“The Court also DENIES Plaintiff’s motion to strike.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 262 days (N = 6).

Median motion-to-ruling time: 239 days (N = 1).

Her consent docket under 28 U.S.C. 636(c) included Social Security review, fraud and other diversity tort and product-liability suits, motor-vehicle personal injury, an employment-discrimination case, and a Federal Tort Claims Act matter, alongside petty-offense assignments. Several sampled personal-injury cases ended within months, while the reviewed contested rulings centered on Social Security appeals, fraud, and wage-and-hour claims.

Put Judge Gauvey's record to work

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

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