Virginia K. DeMarchi

How Judge DeMarchi rules, drawn from 10 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

Court
United States District Court for the Northern District of California
Position
magistrate
Commissioned
2018-06-01
Education
Stanford University (A.B., with distinction, 1990); Harvard Law School (J.D., cum laude, 1993)
Signed orders read
10

How Judge DeMarchi decides

Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

Procedural preferences

She tailors executive discovery to the witness's unique information: a limited deposition may proceed while duplicative custodial-file collection is denied.

“The deposition will be limited to two hours on the record. The parties shall cooperate in the scheduling of the deposition for a date and time convenient to the witness that is on or before August 5, 2026. Teva need not collect, review, and produce documents from Mr. Francis’s custodial files.”

Cautions

She protects nonparties from subpoenas that seek expert opinions rather than unique factual knowledge when equivalent expertise can be obtained elsewhere.

“Dr. Snyder has no relevant factual information, and to the extent Corcept wishes to question him about the practices and concerns of other endocrinologists or endocrinologists generally, the subpoena improperly seeks Dr. Snyder’s expert opinion without establishing that he has any unique expertise that Corcept could not otherwise obtain without undue hardship.”

In the reviewed securities discovery dispute, she protected counsel's work product when the requesting party could obtain the underlying facts by collecting documents and deposing the identified witnesses.

“The Court is not persuaded that defendants have shown a substantial need for disclosure of plaintiff’s counsel’s work product. Defendants know who the former employees are. They can readily assess the accuracy of the FAC’s allegations by obtaining documents relevant to those allegations and questioning the former employees about the pertinent facts and any other facts that might undermine plaintiff’s claims.”

Signed rulings

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

Christopher Allen Amerson v. City of Santa Clara, et al.
23-cv-02109-WHO · 2023-06-09
Screening or pleading dismissal recommendation (court) Granted

“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.”

Orlando Sanchez de Tagle v. Santa Clara County Department of Child Support Services
26-cv-00193-VKD · 2026-03-04
Screening or pleading dismissal recommendation (court) Granted

“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.”

In re Ex Parte Application of Team Co., Ltd.
22-mc-80183-VKD · 2022-08-08
Leave to file reconsideration motion (applicant) Granted

“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.”

Entangled Media, LLC v. Dropbox Inc.
23-cv-03264-PCP (VKD) · 2024-08-28
Discovery dispute (defendant) Granted in part

“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.”

E.H., et al. v. Meta Platforms, Inc.
23-cv-04784-WHO (VKD) · 2025-03-31
Discovery dispute (plaintiff) Denied

“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.”

Martin Medina Arroyo v. California Highway Patrol, et al.
25-cv-00439-PCP (VKD) · 2026-07-02
Motions to compel (plaintiff) Denied

“The Court cannot order defendants to produce recordings they do not have. ... Accordingly, the motion to compel is denied.”

Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Corcept Therapeutics, Inc., et al.
5:24-cv-03567-NW (VKD) · 2026-07-15
Discovery dispute (defendant) Granted in part

“Corcept may take Mr. Francis’s deposition regarding his critique of the nature of Teva’s strategies for promoting generic mifepristone and his ideas for possible solutions. The deposition will be limited to two hours on the record.”

Motion to seal (defendant) Granted

“Good cause appearing, the Court grants defendant’s sealing motion.”

Motion to seal (defendant) Granted

“Good cause appearing, the Court also grants Corcept’s administrative motion to file under seal the documents and deposition excerpts cited in the discovery dispute letter.”

Rule 45 Subpoena Issued to Dr. Peter Snyder in Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Corcept Therapeutics, Inc., et al.
5:26-mc-80173-NW (VKD) · 2026-07-16
Motion to quash subpoena (nonparty) Granted

“The Court grants Dr. Snyder’s motion to quash.”

Motion to seal (nonparty) Granted

“Good cause appearing, the Court grants Dr. Snyder’s sealing motion.”

In re Block Inc. Shareholder Derivative Litigation
5:25-cv-01262-NW (VKD) · 2026-08-24
Discovery dispute (plaintiffs) Granted in part

“the Court orders defendants to produce to plaintiffs the documents defendants previously produced to the DOJ, subject to the limitations explained below. Defendants need not produce any other documents responsive to RFPs 2-4.”

Motion to seal (plaintiffs) Granted

“Good cause appearing, the Court grants plaintiffs’ sealing motion, as narrowed by Block.”

Corinne Gonsalves, et al. v. Block, Inc., et al.
5:25-cv-00642-NW (VKD) · 2026-08-27
Motion for protective order (plaintiff) Granted

“For the reasons explained above, the Court grants plaintiff’s request for a protective order regarding RFPs 1, 2, 5 and 6 in the document subpoenas directed to the former employees.”

E.R.R. v. Frank Bisignano
5:25-cv-04264-VKD · 2026-09-01
Social security appeal (plaintiff) Denied

“Based on the foregoing, the Court affirms the ALJ’s decision. The Clerk shall enter judgment accordingly and close this file.”

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.

Draft for Judge DeMarchi with the record in hand

Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge DeMarchi, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Grounded in Judge DeMarchi's own signed orders
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace