Lisa J. Cisneros
How Judge Cisneros rules, drawn from 19 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
How Judge Cisneros decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In the naturalization case, undisputed facts and a statutory question supported final relief for the applicant rather than a remand to the agency.
“Azarmanesh's first application for adjustment to LPR status was lawfully granted, because Azarmanesh was married to a refugee (specifically, an asylee) at the time he submitted that application, and he was not required to remain married when USCIS later adjudicated it.”
Procedural preferences
She limits jurisdictional discovery to what is proportional to the narrow question before the court, rejecting a wide-ranging corporate deposition when targeted written discovery was sufficient.
“Given the scope of jurisdictional discovery, a wide-ranging 30(b)(6) deposition of Samsung's corporate representative is not warranted.”
She treats forensic examination of personal devices as exceptional relief and looks for serious questions about preservation, reliability, or completeness before allowing it.
“This standard appropriately applies before a forensic examination may be authorized because it is a particularly invasive form of discovery, and especially where Deel is Rippling's commercial competitor.”
Cautions
A challenge to agency action during an ongoing removal proceeding failed because the action was not yet final or reviewable. The district judge adopted that jurisdictional recommendation over the litigant's objection.
“the 'actions' challenged by Trifu are not reviewable by this Court under the Administrative Procedures Act, and Trifu's removal proceedings remain pending with the San Francisco Immigration Court.”
Before recommending dismissal for a self-represented litigant's failure to prosecute, she issued an order to show cause and warned that missing the response deadline could lead to dismissal.
“The order advised Justin that if he did not file a response by the May 21, 2025 deadline, the Court might recommend dismissal for failure to prosecute.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“The Court has reviewed Magistrate Judge Lisa J. Cisneros's Report and Recommendation recommending dismissal of this case for failure to prosecute, failure to comply with a court order, and failure to state a claim ... The court finds the Report correct, well-reasoned and thorough, and adopts it in every respect. Accordingly ... this case is DISMISSED without prejudice”
“Judge Cisneros recommended granting Trifu's motion to proceed in forma pauperis and dismissing Trifu's complaint with prejudice for lack of jurisdiction over Trifu's still-pending immigration removal proceeding. ... The Court therefore overrules Trifu's objections, ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation in full, and DISMISSES Plaintiff's Complaint with prejudice.”
“Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED, and Azarmanesh's Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED. ... Reviewing Azarmanesh's naturalization application de novo pursuant to 8 U.S.C. 1421(c), the Court finds and concludes that Azarmanesh is eligible for naturalization, and GRANTS the application.”
“Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED, and Azarmanesh's Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED.”
Cisneros gave the self-represented plaintiff an additional opportunity to respond before deciding the agency's pending dismissal motion. The order is retained for context but does not resolve the motion.
“CM HK's request for discovery relief is DENIED in PART and GRANTED in PART.”
“Samsung's request that CM HK produce additional documents regarding transfer of funds between CyWee Entities is granted in part.”
“Midjourney's request that Plaintiffs supplement their responses to the four interrogatories is DENIED in part and GRANTED in part.”
“No further responses or production to Requests 36/29 are warranted at this time.”
“Accordingly, by February 27, 2026, Plaintiff's counsel shall file a supplemental declaration identifying how Plaintiff, Ms. Stenson, and Paul accessed the portions of the draft report; describing the format in which the draft report was made available to them; addressing if they retained copies of the draft report or disseminated copies to other individuals; and describing all steps taken to retrieve copies of the draft report that Plaintiff, Ms. Stenson, and Paul accessed. Oura's requested relief is otherwise denied.”
“Accordingly, Fandom may serve each of the proposed subpoenas attached as Exhibits A through E to the Declaration of Ciara McHale.”
“For the following reasons, Plaintiff's request for an award of $4,772.50 is GRANTED.”
“Accordingly, Fandom may serve each of the proposed subpoenas attached as Exhibits 2 through 4 to the Declaration of Ciara McHale.”
Cisneros required the parties to cure a potential enforcement defect in a proposed fee-payment order. The order is retained for context but does not resolve the stipulation or a motion.
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
- The terminated-case sample covers matters filed in 2024.
- It includes immigration-delay actions, Social Security disability appeals, consumer-credit, employee-benefit, copyright, product-liability, and labor cases.
- A separate look at 2026 filings was predominantly pending and included civil-rights, disability-access, labor, and personal-injury matters.
- Case durations measure filing to termination, not motion-to-ruling time.
Draft for Judge Cisneros with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Cisneros, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Cisneros's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace