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

David Singleton Doty

United States District Court for the District of Minnesota Appointed by Ronald Reagan (Republican) 19 signed orders read

How Judge Doty decides

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

What persuades

On a renewed motion to dismiss, Doty treats fact-bound equitable defenses (in pari delicto, apportionment of fault) as unsuited to the pleading stage — they require a developed record. A defendant who needs the court to weigh competing culpability to win dismissal will usually have to wait for summary judgment.

“At this stage in the proceedings, however, the court cannot determine the extent to which Associated Bank participated in and benefitted from the Ponzi scheme. ... As a result, dismissal on the basis of in pari delicto is not warranted at this time.”

Denies leave to amend as futile when the proposed amendment could not survive a motion to dismiss. Moving to amend in front of him requires a viable theory, not just a new label — futility is an independent ground for denial.

“An amendment is futile when it would not survive a motion to dismiss. ... Because Hennepin County is no longer a defendant in this case, however, Joiner has no basis on which to proceed with the conspiracy claim. As a result, the amendment would be futile and the motion to amend must be denied.”

Procedural preferences

Strictly enforces the magistrate judge's pretrial scheduling order. A party that fails to respond to a dispositive motion within the scheduling-order window risks having it granted by default, and a late extension request must clear Rule 6(b)'s excusable-neglect bar — months of delay will not.

“Plaintiff attempted to seek an extension more than four months after the deadline to respond had passed. ... Finally, plaintiff’s pro se status does not excuse him from complying with court orders.”

Requires a summary-judgment movant to actually carry the Celotex burden of identifying the record basis for the motion; a conclusory MSJ asserting the opponent has no defense is summarily denied.

“The court summarily denies the motion because Joiner has failed to support his motion as required.”

Cautions

Holds pro se litigants to the same procedural and limitations rules as represented parties: pro se status does not toll a statute of limitations or excuse non-compliance with court orders. Liberal construction of pro se pleadings does not extend to forgiving missed deadlines or unpleaded elements.

“A plaintiff’s pro se status does not constitute grounds to equitably toll the statute of limitations.”

Signed rulings

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

Shearer v. Cub Foods
0:05-cv-02159 (DSD/JJG) · 2006-03-20
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted in part

“Defendant’s motion to dismiss [Docket No. 6] is granted as to counts A, C, E and G of plaintiff’s complaint. ... Defendant’s motion to dismiss [Docket No. 6] is denied without prejudice as to counts B and D”

Walker v. Skon
0:06-cv-01396 (DSD/JSM) · 2007-07-25
Motion to dismiss or summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“Defendants’ motion to dismiss and for summary judgment [Doc. No. 21] is granted. ... This action is dismissed with prejudice.”

Motions to compel (plaintiff) Moot / procedural

“Plaintiff’s pro se motion to compel discovery [Doc. No. 34] is denied as moot.”

Maloy v. Burns
0:11-cv-00044 (DSD/JJG) · 2011-08-16
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“The motion to dismiss [ECF No. 4] is granted”

Summary judgment (plaintiff) Denied

“The motion for summary judgment [ECF No. 8] is denied”

Preliminary injunction (plaintiff) Denied

“The motion for a temporary injunction [ECF No. 12] is denied.”

Zayed v. Associated Bank, N.A.
0:13-cv-00232 (DSD/JSM) · 2015-08-04
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied

“Accordingly, based on the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the motion to dismiss [ECF No. 70] is denied.”

Joiner v. Metro Transit Police Department
0:16-cv-02006 (DSD/FLN) · 2017-04-21
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“The motion to strike and dismiss [ECF No. 34] is granted as set forth above”

Motion to amend (plaintiff) Denied

“The motions to amend or supplement [ECF Nos. 32, 37, 42] are denied”

Summary judgment (plaintiff) Denied

“The motion for summary judgment [ECF No. 48] is denied without prejudice.”

Moore v. Indehar
0:05-cv-00451 (DSD/JJG) · 2006-09-20
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendant's motion for summary judgment [Docket No. 21] is granted.”

HealthEast Bethesda Hospital v. United Commercial Travelers of America
0:07-cv-02398 (DSD/JJK) · 2008-10-16
Summary judgment (plaintiff) Granted

“Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment [Doc. No. 42] is granted.”

Summary judgment (defendant) Denied

“Defendant's motion for summary judgment [Doc. No. 50] is denied.”

Vanderford v. Schnell
0:22-cv-00971 (DSD/DJF) · 2023-08-02
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“The motion to dismiss [ECF No. 25] is granted; ... The federal claim is dismissed with prejudice; and ... Any state law claims are dismissed without prejudice.”

In re KFC Corp. Fair Labor Standards Act Litigation
0:08-md-01892 (DSD/JJG) · 2008-09-15
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“KFC did not willfully violate the FLSA or the MFLSA. ... The applicable statute of limitations for all plaintiffs asserting claims under the FLSA and the MFLSA is two years.”

Johnson v. ADP Screening and Selection Services, Inc.
0:10-cv-01643 (DSD/AJB) · 2011-02-24
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the motion for summary judgment [ECF 59] is granted.”

Martin v. Benson
0:11-cv-00465 (DSD/JJK) · 2011-10-26
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 7), is GRANTED; and ... This action is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”

Tichich v. City of Bloomington
0:14-cv-00298 (DSD/SER) · 2014-08-12
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“The motions to dismiss [ECF Nos. 15, 17, 20, 26, 43, 50, 63] are granted;”

Motion to sever (defendant) Moot / procedural

“The motions to sever [ECF Nos. 15, 17, 20, 26, 43, 50] are denied as moot.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

Median motion-to-ruling time: 112 days (N = 1).

From the docket records. Recent assignments (2026) are dominated by alien-detainee § 2241 habeas petitions and criminal matters; older terminated civil cases include Ponzi-receivership fraud, civil-rights, securities, and tax disputes. Senior judge (since 1998) still actively assigned cases in 2026.

Put Judge Doty's record to work

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

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