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”
Motion outcomes
Counted from classified signed orders only. Percentages are shown only where the sample is large enough to be meaningful; smaller samples are reported as raw counts.
| Summary judgment N = 1 |
Granted: 1 | counts only |
| Motion for remand N = 1 |
Denied: 1 | counts only |
| Motion for settlement approval N = 1 |
Granted: 1 | counts only |
A "1 of 1" is one ruling, not a tendency. Treat small samples as illustrative, not predictive.
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”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Provinzino-assigned dockets confirmed via search_dockets (assigned_judge='Laura M. Provinzino'), 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.