Margo A. Rocconi
How Judge Rocconi rules, drawn from 30 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Rocconi
Margo A. Rocconi has served as a United States magistrate judge for the Central District of California since March 2021. She earned a bachelor’s degree from the University of California, Santa Barbara, a law degree from Pepperdine University, and a Master of Laws from Georgetown University.
Judge Rocconi's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Rocconi, as published on the court's website (checked October 8, 2026). Judges revise these often, so confirm the current version on the court's site before you file.
- Judge's Procedures and Schedules ↗
- MAR - Standing Discovery Order ↗
- Sample Stipulated Protective Order ↗
Key rules
Filing
Courtesy copies are unnecessary except for emergency motions or requests, unless the court orders otherwise.
“UNLESS OTHERWISE ORDERED, NO COURTESY COPIES TO CHAMBERS IS REQUIRED, EXCEPT FOR EMERGENCY MOTIONS OR REQUESTS.”
Discovery
Before filing a discovery motion, counsel must read and be familiar with Judge Rocconi's Standing Order on Discovery Disputes, which is available for download below.
“Before filing a discovery motion, counsel must read and be familiar with Judge Rocconi's Standing Order on Discovery Disputes, which is available for download below.”
Discovery
Responses to document requests may not rely on boilerplate objections that violate Rule 34(b)(2).
“Parties responding to document requests shall not use boilerplate objections that violate Rule 34(b)(2), as amended in December 2015.”
Conferences
Any party who wishes to appear at a hearing by telephone shall make such a request at least five court days before the hearing.
“Any party who wishes to appear at a hearing by telephone shall make such a request at least five court days before the hearing.”
Standing orders for every case in this court
Orders the court applies to all of its cases, whichever judge has them, as published on the court's website (checked October 8, 2026).
- General Order 11-10: Alternative Dispute Resolution Program ↗
- General Order 19-01: Criminal Duty Matters Electronic Filing Pilot Project ↗
- General Order 20-13: Criminal Duty Matters Electronic Filing Pilot Project ↗
- General Order 18-02: Submission of Certain Prisoner Filings Through Electronic Mail ↗
- General Order 24-07: Criminal Justice Act Plan ↗
How Judge Rocconi decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In Martha P. Martinez-Ramirez v. Nissan North America, Inc., Rocconi granted the plaintiff’s motion to remand because the defendant had removed the case too late.
“Because Defendant's removal was untimely, Plaintiff's Motion to Remand is GRANTED.”
In Valtierra Moreno, Rocconi ordered release where immigration officials did not establish a valid arrest warrant or show that the petitioner was likely to escape before they could obtain one. Her order also required notice and a hearing before any renewed detention under the cited statute.
“Respondents do not make a showing that Petitioner was likely to escape before a warrant could be obtained”
Procedural preferences
In Harold C. Lee v. Maranda, Rocconi ordered the prisoner plaintiff to choose one of three listed options by December 23, 2022, if he wanted to pursue the action.
“If Plaintiff desires to pursue this action, he is ORDERED to respond by no later than December 23, 2022, by choosing one of the three (3) options discussed in Part V, below.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO REMAND, DKT. 14 by Magistrate Judge Margo A. Rocconi. Because Defendant's removal was untimely, Plaintiff's Motion to Remand is GRANTED. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED: This action is REMANDED to Los Angeles County Superior Court, 24CMCV00925.”
“ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO REMAND, DKT. 9 by Magistrate Judge Margo A. Rocconi: Plaintiff Elicet Maldonado (‘Plaintiff’) filed the instant [motion to remand].”
“ORDER DENYING MOTION TO REMAND, DKT. 10 by Magistrate Judge Margo A. Rocconi: denying 10 MOTION to Remand Case to State Court.”
“by Magistrate Judge Margo A. Rocconi ... IT IS ORDERED that judgment be entered REVERSING the decision of the Commissioner and REMANDING this action for further administrative proceedings.”
Referral prisoner civil-rights case under 42 U.S.C. 1983 before District Judge Fred W. Slaughter. On sua sponte screening of the amended complaint, Rocconi dismissed with leave to amend, gave the plaintiff three options, and warned that failure to respond would lead her to recommend dismissal with prejudice for failure to state a claim. The non-dispositive screening order did not terminate the case and was not a ruling on a party motion.
“Respondents are ORDERED to immediately release Petitioner from custody subject only to the conditions of his preexisting parole.”
“IT IS HEREBY ADJUDGED that this Petition is GRANTED.”
“IT IS HEREBY ADJUDGED that this Petition is GRANTED.”
“IT IS HEREBY ADJUDGED that this Petition is GRANTED.”
“IT IS HEREBY ADJUDGED that this Petition is GRANTED.”
“IT IS HEREBY ADJUDGED that this Petition is GRANTED, in part.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 190 days (N = 4).
Median motion-to-ruling time: 144 days (N = 3).
Her recent caseload includes immigration-detention habeas petitions, California consumer-warranty and contract cases removed from state court, Social Security disability appeals, antitrust matters, and referred prisoner civil-rights cases.
Pending matters in the official report
Reported by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts under the Civil Justice Reform Act, as of March 31, 2026.
| Motions pending more than six months | 5 |
| Bench trials submitted more than six months | 0 |
| Bankruptcy appeals pending more than six months | 0 |
| Social Security appeals pending more than six months | 0 |
| Civil cases pending more than three years | 0 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 5 | 0 |
| Sep 2025 | 1 | 0 |
| Mar 2025 | 3 | 0 |
| Sep 2024 | 2 | 0 |
| Mar 2024 | 6 | 0 |
| Sep 2023 | 8 | 0 |
| Mar 2023 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2022 | 1 | 0 |
| Mar 2022 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2021 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2021 | 0 | 0 |
A snapshot on that date: matters listed may since have been decided or reassigned. A motion referred to a magistrate judge is counted for both judges. Motions in multidistrict litigation, section 2255 cases and Social Security appeals are not counted, and a very large three-year count is generally a multidistrict docket. Source: Appendix A of the report (PDF); about the report.
How long civil cases take in this court
For the whole of United States District Court for the Central District of California, not for Judge Rocconi: median time from filing to disposition of the civil cases the court closed in the 12 months ending September 30, 2025, as reported by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts.
| Cases | Median time | |
|---|---|---|
| All civil cases closed | 15,190 | 3.9 months |
| Closed with no court action | 4,414 | 3.1 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 10,538 | 4.3 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 103 | 17.9 months |
| Closed during trial | 135 | 25.7 months |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 15,190 | 3.9 months |
| Sep 2024 | 15,348 | 3.9 months |
| Sep 2023 | 13,583 | 4.4 months |
| Sep 2022 | 12,887 | 4.7 months |
| Sep 2021 | 14,213 | 4.7 months |
| Sep 2020 | 14,205 | 5 months |
| Sep 2019 | 13,478 | 4.9 months |
The table leaves out prisoner petitions, land condemnations, deportation reviews, recovery of overpayments and enforcement of judgments, and reports no median for fewer than 10 cases. A district that closed a large multidistrict litigation in the period shows very large counts and long medians for that year. Source: Table C-5, U.S. District Courts (spreadsheet).
Draft for Judge Rocconi with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Rocconi, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Rocconi's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace