F.A. Gossett III
How Judge Gossett decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In the ERISA benefits case (Monnier) Gossett resolved cross-motions for summary judgment on the administrative record in the claimant's favor and then awarded attorney's fees under 29 U.S.C. 1132(g). Practical lesson: in ERISA matters before him expect a record-based cross-MSJ disposition followed by a fees motion if the claimant prevails.
“ORDER granting 38 plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment; denying 39 defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment. Pursuant to 29 U.S.C. 1132(g), plaintiff may file a Motion for Attorney Fees.”
Procedural preferences
Gossett actively manages summary-judgment timing and ripeness: in Brizendine he set a firm response deadline and a date the MSJ would be 'deemed ripe for decision', and in Monnier he issued a briefing-schedule order setting a single cross-MSJ deadline with NECivR 56.1/7.0.1 briefing windows. Counsel before him should expect court-set SJ briefing schedules and strict ripeness dates.
“All parties are given until 7/20/2009 to file cross-motions for summary judgment and briefs in support thereof. Responses to the summary judgment motions shall be filed within 20 calendar days of service, as provided in NECivR 56.1(b)(2).”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment 19 is denied as moot as to these defendants. Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment 19 is denied as to the City of Omaha and Omaha Police Officer Frank Platt, individually and in his official capacity.”
“MEMORANDUM AND ORDER granting in part and denying in part 78 Motion for Summary Judgment. The motion is granted as to plaintiff's state law claims and denied in all other respects.”
“MEMORANDUM AND ORDER denying 76 Motion for Summary Judgment. Ordered by Magistrate Judge F. A. Gossett.”
“ORDER granting 38 plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment; denying 39 defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment. Pursuant to 29 U.S.C. 1132(g), plaintiff may file a Motion for Attorney Fees.”
“ORDER granting 38 plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment; denying 39 defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment.”
“The Findings and Recommendation, ECF No. 30, issued by United States Magistrate Judge F.A. Gossett, are adopted in accordance with this Memorandum and Order; The Motion to Suppress filed by the Defendant Keith Noden, ECF No. 23, is denied”
“IT IS RECOMMENDED that the defendants' motions to compel initial disclosures (Filings 138, 140 and 142) be granted, as follows: 1. Carper's claims against Wiebusch & Associates, Inc., Kearney Realty, LLC, Sobatka, Roper, Schumacher & Company, NP Realty, Inc. and Kerri Pearson, should be dismissed with prejudice pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(b)(2)(A)(v).”
“The government's motion for a new competency evaluation (8:04CR69, Filing No. 77; 8:06CR78, Filing No. 121) is denied”
“The Defendant's motion to dismiss (8:06CR78, Filing No. 128) is denied.”
“The Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation (Filing No.64) are adopted in their entirety; All claims asserted by Plaintiff SJT Development, Inc. are dismissed, without prejudice, as against all Defendants”
“Plaintiff Sandra M. Triantafillos's Motion to Dismiss (Filing No. 65) is granted, and all claims asserted by her are dismissed, without prejudice, as against all Defendants”
“I find that dismissal is appropriate under Rule 48(b)(3). Considering the record and the defendant's condition, I find that the dismissal should be with prejudice. IT THEREFORE IS RECOMMENDED that defendant's MOTION TO DISMISS FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION (#55) be granted and that the indictment be dismissed with prejudice.”
“I construe the Objection as a Motion for Reconsideration. The petitioner states that he needs a copy of the Motion for Postconviction relief which was denied on October 28, 2002, not the Motion dated August 5, 2003. Therefore, filing no. 13 is granted”
“Also before the court is filing no. 14, the petitioner's Motion for Extension of Time, in which he requests an extension of time after the requested records have been provided to him in which to respond to the respondent's Motion for Summary Judgment. Filing no. 14 is granted.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 97 days (N = 17).
The 20 sampled cases, filed from 2005 through 2015, are weighted toward consumer-credit disputes and government collection matters involving student loans, taxes, and forfeiture. Those matters generally ended more quickly than the contested consent civil cases in the sample.
Put Judge Gossett's record to work
Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Gossett actually rules, not a generic AI guess.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Gossett's own signed orders and cites them.