Elizabeth D. LaPorte

How Judge LaPorte rules, drawn from 16 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

Judge LaPorte no longer sits on this court. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled here.

Court
United States District Court for the Northern District of California
Position
Magistrate judge
Status
Retired 2019
Served
1998–2019
Commissioned
April 4, 1998
Education
Princeton University (A.B., 1975); University of Oxford (M.A., 1977); Yale Law School (J.D., 1982)
Signed orders read
16

About Judge LaPorte

Elizabeth D. LaPorte served as a United States Magistrate Judge for the Northern District of California from April 1998 until October 2019 and was Chief Magistrate Judge from 2013 to 2015. Before joining the bench, she practiced civil rights law and served in the San Francisco City Attorney’s Office. She earned degrees from Princeton University, the University of Oxford, and Yale Law School.

Signed rulings

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

Fu v. Gonzales
3:07-cv-00207-EDL · 2007-05-16
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied

“For the reasons stated above, Defendants’ motion to dismiss is denied.”

Mancheno v. City of Orinda
3:14-cv-04061-EDL · 2015-02-12
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“the Court DENIES Plaintiff’s motion, GRANTS Defendants’ motion, and dismisses the complaint with prejudice.”

Motion for leave to amend (plaintiff) Denied

“Under Heck, leave to amend would be futile. Therefore, the complaint is dismissed with prejudice.”

Sandoval v. M1 Auto Collisions Centers
3:13-cv-03230-EDL · 2015-09-09
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied

“Defendants’ motions are DENIED.”

Class certification (plaintiff) Granted in part

“Plaintiffs’ class certification motion is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. The Court certifies the following class, with no subclasses, limited to Plaintiffs’ rest break and California Labor Code Section 226 claims”

Motion to disqualify counsel (defendant) Denied
Luhr v. Berryhill
3:17-cv-00686-EDL · 2018-03-29
Summary judgment (claimant) Granted

“the Court GRANTS Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment, DENIES Defendant’s motion for summary judgment, and remands for further proceedings consistent with this order.”

Summary judgment (defendant) Denied

“DENIES Defendant’s motion for summary judgment, and remands for further proceedings consistent with this order.”

Thomas v. Colvin
3:13-cv-01009-EDL · 2013-08-26
Summary judgment (claimant) Moot / procedural

“Good cause appearing, the Court remands this matter pursuant to sentence four for an Administrative Law Judge to evaluate Plaintiff’s new medical evidence.”

Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. v. M.R.
3:06-cv-00305-EDL · 2006-06-15
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“Defendants’ motion for summary judgment is GRANTED. Defendants M.R. and R.R. are entitled to share equally in the full insurance proceeds that Plaintiff interpled with the Court.”

Radford v. Union HERE Local 2
3:10-cv-02338-EDL · 2011-06-29
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“the Union’s motion for summary judgment is granted because even viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to Plaintiff, he has failed to establish a prima facie case of discrimination and has not created a triable issue of fact as to pretext.”

Top Grade Construction v. Fluoresco Lighting-Sign Maintenance
3:11-cv-02194-EDL · 2012-04-03
Summary judgment (defendant) Denied

“For the reasons stated in this Order, Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment is denied.”

George v. Sonoma County Sheriff's Dept.
3:08-cv-02675-EDL · 2010-08-09
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted in part

“the Sutter Defendants’ motion for summary judgment is granted in part and denied in part, and Dr. Janian’s motion for summary judgment is granted in part and denied in part.”

Emigh v. UCSF Medical Center
4:12-cv-06533-SBA · 2013-03-06
Sua sponte dismissal Granted

“Plaintiff still has not paid the filing fee or filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis. Therefore, the case should be administratively terminated.”

Ulin v. Lovell's Antique Gallery
3:09-cv-03160-EDL · 2009-07-06
Motions to compel (plaintiff) Granted in part

“GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel.”

Datel Holdings Ltd v. Microsoft Corporation
3:09-cv-05535-EDL · 2011-02-17
Motions to compel (defendant) Granted in part

“The motion is DENIED with respect to documents relating to the Lite Blue Tool and other hacking products, but Datel may possibly in the future be precluded from making assertions about such products if discovery is not provided on these topics”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

She handled a steady volume of consent Social Security disability and supplemental-income appeals decided on cross-motions for summary judgment, alongside a broad civil-discovery calendar for the district's judges.

Pending matters in the official report

Judge LaPorte was last listed in the Civil Justice Reform Act report as of March 31, 2023.

Motions pending more than six months0
Bench trials submitted more than six months0
Bankruptcy appeals pending more than six months0
Social Security appeals pending more than six months0
Civil cases pending more than three years0
ReportMotions over six monthsCases over three years
Mar 202300
Sep 202200
Mar 202200
Sep 202100
Mar 202100
Sep 202000

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.

A historical record

Judge LaPorte no longer sits on this court. This profile stays available as a record of how they ruled here. If you're preparing for a matter, start from the court's current bench.