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

Sylvia H. Rambo

United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania district Deceased · served 1979–2024 Appointed by Jimmy Carter (Democratic) 20 signed orders read

Judge Rambo no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.

How Judge Rambo decides

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

What persuades

At the pleading stage, Rambo drew reasonable inferences from the complaint as a whole rather than demanding ideal wording for the plaintiff's intended patient-safety reporting.

“Plaintiffs complaint, taken as a whole, raises a plausible inference that Plaintiff intended to have Defendant forward her reports to a patient safety organization.”

Procedural preferences

She required special-education plaintiffs to use the administrative process when it could develop the factual record and apply educational expertise before judicial review.

“By requiring exhaustion under these circumstances, the court' is enabling ‘the agency to develop a factual record, to apply its expertise to the problem, to exercise its discretion, and to correct its own mistakes.... ’”

Cautions

She enforced clear contractual reservations of rights and declined to infer vested lifetime benefits from bargaining history or general language.

“the reservation of rights language applicable to Subclasses B and F is clear and unambiguous, and forecloses any notion of vesting.”

Signed rulings

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

Emekekwue v. Offor
· 2014-06-12
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“the court will grant Defendant’s motion for summary judgment.”

Bender v. Norfolk Southern Corp.
· 2014-07-08
Motion for judgment as a matter of law (plaintiff) Denied

“Plaintiffs motion for a judgment as a matter of law and motion for a new trial will be denied.”

Motion for new trial (plaintiff) Denied
Webb v. Susquehanna Township School District
· 2015-02-27
Motions to dismiss (defendants) Granted

“Defendants’ motion to dismiss will be grantéd.”

United States v. Pennsylvania
· 2015-05-21
Motions to dismiss (defendants) Denied

“Defendants’ motion to dismiss will be denied.”

York International Corp. v. Liberty Mutual Insurance
· 2015-10-13
Motion for reconsideration (defendant) Granted in part

“Defendant’s motion will be granted in part and denied in part.”

IMAX Corp. v. Capital Center
· 2016-01-11
Judgment on the pleadings (plaintiff) Granted

“Plaintiff will be awarded judgment on the pleadings as to its breach of contract claim as well as Defendant’s counterclaim.”

Request for leave to amend (defendant) Denied

“Defendant’s request for leave to amend its pleading will be denied.”

Grove v. Johnson Controls, Inc.
· 2016-03-31
Motions to strike (plaintiffs) Denied

“the court will deny Plaintiffs’ motion to strike and partial motion for summary judgment and will grant Defendants’ motion for summary judgment in its entirety.”

Summary judgment (plaintiffs) Denied
Summary judgment (defendants) Granted
Eaves-Voyles v. Almost Family, Inc.
· 2016-07-27
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted in part

“Defendant’s motion will be granted in part and denied in part.”

Wevodau v. Pennsylvania, Office of the Attorney General
· 2017-01-04
Motions to dismiss (defendants) Granted

“For the reasons stated herein, the motion will be granted.”

United States v. Baker
· 2017-03-23
Motion to withdraw guilty plea (defendant) Granted

“the court will reject the plea agreement and allow Defendant to withdraw his guilty plea to Count 7 of the Indictment”

Hanan v. J.J. Haines & Co.
· 2018-02-15
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“Defendant's motion for summary judgment will be granted.”

Rodriguez v. Thomas
· 2018-03-06
Motions for summary judgment (defendants) Granted in part

“the motions for summary judgment will be granted as to Defendants Thomas, Crawley, McClintock, and Fosnot. Further, the motion for summary judgment will be denied with respect to Defendants Potter, Eichner, and Knapp”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 151.5 days (N = 10).

The twenty enumerated early-2000 cases included four employee-benefit matters, two habeas petitions, two employment civil-rights cases, two other civil-rights cases, two other statutory actions, and one each involving voting rights, foreclosure, student-loan recovery, insurance, medical malpractice, forfeiture, disability benefits, and contract. All twenty were terminated. This narrow cohort does not establish Rambo's tenure-wide caseload mix.

A historical record

Judge Rambo no longer hears cases. This profile stays available as a record of how they ruled. If you're preparing for a matter, start from the court's current bench.