Nadia S. Medrano

How Judge Medrano rules, drawn from 12 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

Court
United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas
Position
Magistrate judge
Commissioned
January 7, 2021
Education
St. Mary's University (B.A. Criminology, 2003); University of Texas School of Law (J.D., 2006)
Signed orders read
12

About Judge Medrano

Nadia S. Medrano became a United States Magistrate Judge in the McAllen Division of the Southern District of Texas on January 7, 2021. Before joining the court, she served as an assistant federal public defender in McAllen from 2007 to 2020.

Judge Medrano's practices and standing orders

Rules for cases before Judge Medrano, as published on the court's website (checked October 8, 2026). Judges revise these often, so confirm the current version on the court's site before you file.

Key rules

Contacting chambers

Do not address substantive issues in letters because they are not docketed; file copies of case-related letters through CM/ECF.

“Do not address any substantive issues in letter form as they are not docketed. f. All questions regarding any criminal matters should be directed to Chambers at (956) 618-8080. g. The parties must file copies of all case-related letters to the Court via CM/ECF.”

Filing

File a paper courtesy copy with the district clerk for any submission over 50 pages.

“Parties are reminded that any submission - including motions, briefs, and attachments - that is greater than 50 pages in length requires a courtesy hard copy to be filed with the Distict Clerk’s Office”

Standing orders for every case in this court

Orders the court applies to all of its cases, whichever judge has them, as published on the court's website (checked October 8, 2026).

Key rules from these orders · The court's local rules ↗

How Judge Medrano decides

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

What persuades

In Chay Jr. v. Montiel, she recommended granting Wells Fargo Bank's motion to dismiss on pleading and limitations grounds and recommended against leave to amend. The district judge later adopted that recommendation.

“Judge Medrano made findings and conclusions and recommended that Defendant Wells Fargo Bank’s Motion to Dismiss, (Dkt. No. 47), be granted ... Judge Medrano further recommended that this Court not grant Plaintiff leave to amend his claims against Wells Fargo Bank.”

Procedural preferences

In Chay v. Montiel, Medrano recommended denying two motions for default judgment. District Judge Tipton reviewed the plaintiff’s objections de novo, adopted her recommendation, and denied both motions.

“Plaintiff’s Motion for Entry of Default Judgment, (Dkt. No. 15), is DENIED; and (2) Plaintiff’s Motion for Default Judgment, (Dkt. No. 17), is DENIED.”

Cautions

In Chay v. Montiel, District Judge Tipton reviewed objections to Medrano’s recommendation to dismiss Cameron County, adopted the recommendation in full, and granted the county’s motion to dismiss.

“Finding no error, the Court accepts the M&R and adopts it as the opinion of the Court.”

Signed rulings

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

United States v. 2.859 Acres of Land
7:25-cv-00059 · 2025-07-30
Motion for immediate possession (plaintiff) Granted

“The Government’s Motion for Order of Immediate Possession, (Dkt. No. 63), is GRANTED”

Chay Jr. v. Montiel (default judgment)
7:23-cv-00206 · 2024-08-13
Default judgment (plaintiff) Denied

“Plaintiff’s Motion for Entry of Default Judgment, (Dkt. No. 15), is DENIED; and (2) Plaintiff’s Motion for Default Judgment, (Dkt. No. 17), is DENIED.”

Chay Jr. v. Montiel (Cameron County MTD)
7:23-cv-00206 · 2025-01-31
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“Defendant Cameron County’s Motion to Dismiss, (Dkt. No. 45), is GRANTED; and (2) Defendant Cameron County is DISMISSED from this civil action.”

Chay Jr. v. Montiel (Wells Fargo MTD)
7:23-cv-00206 · 2025-02-19
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“Defendant Wells Fargo Bank’s Motion to Dismiss, (Dkt. No. 47), is GRANTED; and (2) Defendant Wells Fargo Bank is DISMISSED from this civil action.”

Chay Jr. v. Montiel (motion to certify as complex litigation)
7:23-cv-00206 · 2025-04-08
Motion to certify complex litigation (plaintiff) Denied

“Plaintiff’s ‘Motion to Certify [the] Case as Complex Litigation,’ (Dkt. No. 67), is DENIED.”

Edwards v. Lumpkin
7:20-cv-00038 · 2021-06-21
Summary judgment (respondent) Granted

“Respondent’s Motion for Summary Judgment should be GRANTED, that Petitioner’s Motion for Judgment as Matter of Law should be DENIED, that a certificate of appealability should be DENIED, and that Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 should be DISMISSED”

Motion for judgment as matter of law (petitioner) Denied

“Petitioner’s Motion for Judgment as Matter of Law should be DENIED”

Gonzalez-Davila v. Farley
7:19-cv-00025 · 2021-09-09
Habeas petition (petitioner) Denied

“Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 should be DISMISSED and that a certificate of appealability should be DENIED as unnecessary.”

Balderas v. Drug Enforcement Administration
7:07-mc-00074 · 2021-03-21
Motion for return of property (plaintiff) Moot / procedural

“the ‘Petition for Return of Personal Property in U.S. Currencies’ (Docket No. 1) should be DENIED and that this action should be DISMISSED for failure to prosecute.”

Genoveva Garza v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Company
7:25-cv-00328 · 2025-10-20

Medrano recommended dismissing this removed foreclosure action for failure to prosecute after the plaintiff missed two hearings, failed to maintain a current address, and otherwise stopped communicating with the court. The recommendation states: "For the foregoing reasons, the undersigned respectfully recommends that this civil action be DISMISSED for failure to prosecute." District Judge Drew B. Tipton adopted the recommendation in full on February 27, 2026. This was a sua sponte procedural recommendation, not a decision on the defendants' pending dismissal motion.

B.X. v. Federal Officials Responsible for Custody
7:26-cv-00199 · 2026-05-19
Habeas petition (petitioner) Moot / procedural

“be DENIED, and that this action be DISMISSED as moot.”

Chay v. Montiel
7:23-cv-00206 · 2025-08-05
Summary judgment (defendants) Moot / procedural

“motions for summary judgment (Docket Nos. 72-74) be DENIED as moot.”

Summary judgment (defendants) Moot / procedural
Summary judgment (defendants) Moot / procedural
Orozco Roman v. Vergara
7:26-cv-00206 · 2026-07-23
Motions to dismiss (respondent) Granted

“Respondent’s ‘Motion to Dismiss’ (Docket No. 7) be GRANTED”

Habeas petition (petitioner) Denied

“Petitioner’s Writ of Habeas Corpus Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Docket No. 1) be DENIED”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

McAllen Division referral magistrate. The record spans 28 U.S.C. 2254 and 2241 habeas recommendations, pro se civil-rights/RICO complaint recommendations (Rule 12(b)(6) dismissals, default-judgment denials, procedural motions), federal land-condemnation immediate-possession recommendations, and Rule 41(g) property-return petitions. Not a complete caseload census.

Pending matters in the official report

Reported by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts under the Civil Justice Reform Act, as of March 31, 2026.

Motions pending more than six months0
Bench trials submitted more than six months0
Bankruptcy appeals pending more than six months0
Social Security appeals pending more than six months0
Civil cases pending more than three years0
ReportMotions over six monthsCases over three years
Mar 202600
Sep 202500
Mar 202500
Sep 202400
Mar 202410
Sep 202300
Mar 202300
Sep 202200
Mar 202201
Sep 202101
Mar 202100

A snapshot on that date: matters listed may since have been decided or reassigned. A motion referred to a magistrate judge is counted for both judges. Motions in multidistrict litigation, section 2255 cases and Social Security appeals are not counted, and a very large three-year count is generally a multidistrict docket. Source: Appendix A of the report (PDF); about the report.

How long civil cases take in this court

For the whole of United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, not for Judge Medrano: median time from filing to disposition of the civil cases the court closed in the 12 months ending September 30, 2025, as reported by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts.

CasesMedian time
All civil cases closed5,7427.6 months
Closed with no court action2,4426 months
Closed before pretrial2,3717.4 months
Closed during or after pretrial87111.4 months
Closed during trial5831.6 months
12 months endingCases closedMedian time
Sep 20255,7427.6 months
Sep 20245,0867.5 months
Sep 20234,7627.9 months
Sep 20224,5958.8 months
Sep 20214,7458.8 months
Sep 20205,0098.1 months
Sep 20195,2337.5 months

The table leaves out prisoner petitions, land condemnations, deportation reviews, recovery of overpayments and enforcement of judgments, and reports no median for fewer than 10 cases. A district that closed a large multidistrict litigation in the period shows very large counts and long medians for that year. Source: Table C-5, U.S. District Courts (spreadsheet).

Draft for Judge Medrano with the record in hand

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

Opens in Ezel Pro.

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