Virginia A. Phillips
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Plaintiff Mag Instrument, Inc.'s 'Motion to Strike, or Alternatively, for Judgment on the Pleadings' came before the Court for hearing on December 15, 2008. ... the Court GRANTS the Motion in part and DENIES the Motion in part.”
“The Court accepts the findings and recommendations of the Magistrate Judge. ... The undersigned recommends that the Court grant the Second Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus as to its second, third, and fourth claims if the State of California does not retry Petitioner. The undersigned recommends that the Second Amended Petition be denied as to its first claim for relief.”
“ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ... After considering the papers and arguments in support of, and in opposition to, the Motion, the Court GRANTS Defendants' Motion.”
“Order Granting Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment and Denying Plaintiff's Motion for Class Certification [DOC. No. 50] ... After reviewing and considering all papers filed in support of, and in opposition to, the Motion, as well as the arguments advanced at the January 30, 2017 hearing, the Court GRANTS the Motion.”
“Order Granting Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment and Denying Plaintiff's Motion for Class Certification [DOC. No. 50]”
“For the reasons stated above, the Court GRANTS in part and DENIES in part Defendants' Motion. ... Plaintiff's Second claim is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Plaintiff's Fourth claim is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. The Court DENIES Defendants' Motion to dismiss Plaintiff's Third Claim.”
“For the foregoing reasons, the Court GRANTS Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment as to all of Plaintiffs claims.”
“After consideration of the papers in support of, and opposition to, the Motion, and arguments advanced at the March 7, 2011, hearing, the Court GRANTS Defendants’ Motion in part.”
“For the reasons stated above, Defendants' Motion is GRANTED. All of Plaintiffs' claims against all defendants in this case are hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiffs’ Motion for Final Approval of the Settlement and Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Incentive Payments are DENIED without prejudice.”
“For the reasons stated above, Plaintiff has failed to show that there are no genuine issues of material fact as to his rest and meal break claims. Accordingly, the Court DENIES Plaintiffs motion.”
“Accordingly, the Court GRANTS the motion to decertify the Meal and Rest Period Classes.”
“For the reasons stated above, the Court GRANTS Defendant’s Motion for Decertifi-cation of the Meal and Rest Period Claims and DENIES Plaintiffs Motion for Leave to File a Third Amended Complaint.”
“For the foregoing reasons, the Court DENIES Defendant Adecco’s Motion in full and GRANTS IN PART AND DENIES IN PART Plaintiffs’ Motion as follows:”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Case-level sample of her assigned docket (not measured outcomes). Unlike the active Central District judges, her senior docket is not dominated by the 2026 alien-detainee habeas surge; her recent intake skews toward a federal criminal calendar, 28 U.S.C. 2255 motions to vacate sentence, ADA Title III access suits, immigration mandamus, labor / FLSA, and contract. The durations below are filed-minus-terminated for the terminated dockets in the sample.
Put Judge Phillips's record to work
Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Phillips actually rules, not a generic AI guess.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Phillips's own signed orders and cites them.