Virginia K. DeMarchi
How Judge DeMarchi decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
Recommends dismissing pro se cases that are barred by res judicata or fail to state a plausible claim or basis for jurisdiction.
“On May 18, 2023, Magistrate Judge Virginia K. DeMarchi issued a Report and Recommendation, recommending that this pro se case be dismissed as plaintiff's claims are barred by the doctrine of res judicata. ... Having reviewed the Report and Recommendation and the full record of this case, I ADOPT the Report and Recommendation in full and DISMISS this case with prejudice as barred by res judicata.”
Procedural preferences
Resolves discovery disputes granularly, tailoring production (e.g., capping invalidity contention charts) rather than granting wholesale relief.
“Within three court days of this order, Dropbox may identify five invalidity contention charts per asserted patent, each with a single prior art reference per chart (for a total of 10 invalidity contention charts); however, four of the prior art references must be the same/overlap as between the two patents, with only one unique prior art reference per patent. ... Dropbox may identify no more than seven total terms or phrases across both patents for which Dropbox asserts an invalidity challenge under 35 U.S.C. Section 112.”
Cautions
Denies motions to compel where the discovery sought is overbroad and not proportional, or where the responding party does not possess the material.
“The Court agrees with Meta that Interrogatory No. 7 is overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant nor proportional to the needs of this case. ... Accordingly, the Court denies plaintiffs' request for an order requiring Meta to comply with the full scope of Interrogatory No. 7.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“On May 18, 2023, Magistrate Judge Virginia K. DeMarchi issued a Report and Recommendation, recommending that this pro se case be dismissed as plaintiff's claims are barred by the doctrine of res judicata. ... Having reviewed the Report and Recommendation and the full record of this case, I ADOPT the Report and Recommendation in full and DISMISS this case with prejudice as barred by res judicata.”
“the allegations in the amended complaint fail to state a plausible claim for relief or a basis for the Court to exercise subject matter jurisdiction, and the Court finds no basis to conclude that there are additional facts that could be alleged on a further amendment to cure the deficiencies identified above. Accordingly, the Court recommends that the amended complaint be dismissed without further leave to amend.”
“As the motion for leave appears to contain the arguments Team Co says it would make if given leave to file a motion for reconsideration, the Court grants the motion for leave and will reconsider its July 20, 2022 order based on grounds set forth in Team Co's motion for leave. ... the Court declines to postpone service on Google and to defer the question of consent/declination to magistrate judge jurisdiction until after the Court decides Team Co's Section 1782 application.”
“Within three court days of this order, Dropbox may identify five invalidity contention charts per asserted patent, each with a single prior art reference per chart (for a total of 10 invalidity contention charts); however, four of the prior art references must be the same/overlap as between the two patents, with only one unique prior art reference per patent. ... Dropbox may identify no more than seven total terms or phrases across both patents for which Dropbox asserts an invalidity challenge under 35 U.S.C. Section 112.”
“The Court agrees with Meta that Interrogatory No. 7 is overbroad and seeks information that is neither relevant nor proportional to the needs of this case. ... Accordingly, the Court denies plaintiffs' request for an order requiring Meta to comply with the full scope of Interrogatory No. 7.”
“The Court cannot order defendants to produce recordings they do not have. ... Accordingly, the motion to compel is denied.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
As an initially assigned San Jose magistrate judge, DeMarchi handles a broad mix that is notable for foreign-discovery and other miscellaneous discovery applications, alongside Social Security appeals, immigration and administrative-review matters, civil rights, False Claims Act, copyright, prisoner and habeas cases, and criminal-magistrate duties. The durations measure filing to termination, not motion-to-ruling time.
Put Judge DeMarchi's record to work
Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge DeMarchi actually rules, not a generic AI guess.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge DeMarchi's own signed orders and cites them.