Laura Margarete Provinzino
How Judge Provinzino decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Procedural preferences
Like the rest of the D. Minn. bench, Provinzino resolves much of her civil docket by adopting magistrate-judge R&Rs (here, Elizabeth Cowan Wright on a Social Security appeal). Absent timely objection, she reviews an R&R only for clear error under Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) and Grinder v. Gammon; she adopts when she finds none.
“No objections have been filed to the R&R in the time period permitted, and it is therefore reviewed for clear error. ... Finding no clear error, ... IT IS ORDERED THAT: The R&R (ECF No. 16) is ADOPTED;”
On class-action settlement approval she applies the full Rule 23 / due-process framework: she preliminarily approves only after finding the settlement 'fair, reasonable, and adequate,' weighing the relative merits, the costs/risks/delay of continued litigation, and the arm's-length, mediator-facilitated negotiation between experienced ERISA counsel, and she makes explicit findings that the notice program is the best practicable notice and that CAFA notice obligations are met before setting a final fairness hearing.
“Upon preliminary review, the Court finds the Settlement is fair, reasonable, and adequate to warrant providing notice of the Settlement to class members. ... the Court has considered the relative merits of the parties' positions; the costs, risks, and delay associated with continued litigation; the good-faith and arm's-length negotiations between experienced counsel facilitated by an independent, professional mediator skilled in ERISA litigation”
On summary judgment against a pro se plaintiff, Provinzino will treat a plaintiff's failure to substantively address a claim or a defense's argument in their opposition brief as a forfeiture of that claim, even accounting for pro se status -- she does not independently search the record for factual disputes the plaintiff did not raise. Defense counsel benefits from methodically addressing every claim in a motion, since an unaddressed claim is likely to be deemed forfeited outright.
“the Court must conclude that she has forfeited each of Counts 2 through 7 against all Defendants and all her claims against Sonsalla”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“The Commissioner's Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 13) is GRANTED;”
“Anthony B.'s Request for Reversal or Remand (ECF No. 11) is DENIED;”
“the Court hereby GRANTS the motion, enters a Preliminary Approval Order”
“IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Reichel's Request for Reconsideration (ECF No. 18) is DENIED.”
“The Amended Petition (ECF No. 13) is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.”
“Data Axle's Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 77) is GRANTED. All claims against Defendant Douglas Ferrara are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.”
“Dusek's petition (ECF No. 1) is DISMISSED without prejudice as moot.”
“The Motion for Expedited Review and Consideration (ECF No. 5) is DENIED as moot”
“Nelson's Application to Proceed IFP on Appeal (ECF No. 265) is DENIED AS MOOT.”
“SPPD's Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 90) is GRANTED; ... Moore's Section 1983 claim against SPPD is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE”
“Moore's Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF Nos. 75, 79, and 87) is DENIED”
“Grandson's Motion for Attorneys' Fees and Costs (ECF No. 80) is GRANTED. Grandson is awarded $107,710.00 in attorneys' fees and $1,334.05 in costs.”
“Defendant Hennepin County's Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 13) is GRANTED; and ... Plaintiff Grant Anthony Judish's claims against Defendant Hennepin County only (ECF No. 1) are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“Plaintiffs' Motion to Exclude Expert Testimony (ECF No. 29) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. The motion is granted as to the Hancock Declaration and denied as to the West Declaration.”
“Defendants' Motion for Leave to File an Amended Expert Declaration (ECF No. 34) is DENIED AS MOOT.”
“The Petition (ECF No. 1) is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Provinzino-assigned dockets confirmed via the docket records, sampled 2026-06-03 (10-docket sample, not exhaustive). Nature-of-suit mix in the sample: a large data-breach class action (In re Eisner Advisory Group Data Breach Litigation, 380), an inherited ERISA class action (Randall v. GreatBanc / Wells Fargo ESOP, 22-cv-2354, reassigned to her), civil rights (Reynolds v. Harper; Smith v. Anderson, 440), contract (Togba v. Nelson, 190), and a heavy wave of alien-detainee 28 U.S.C. 2241 habeas petitions tied to recent immigration enforcement (Sisalema Chango v. Bondi; J.J.P.M. v. Lyons; Lopez Guzman v. Bondi, 463). She inherits cases by reassignment/recusal (Smith v. Anderson came to her on Judge Menendez's recusal; Randall predates her commission). Habeas matters terminate fast (Lopez Guzman ~1d; Sisalema Chango ~11d); Smith v. Anderson ran ~80d (filed 2025-02-21, dismissed 2025-05-12). Not exhaustive.
Put Judge Provinzino's record to work
Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Provinzino actually rules, not a generic AI guess.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Provinzino's own signed orders and cites them.