David John Novak
How Judge Novak rules, drawn from 10 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
How Judge Novak decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In the Capital One litigation, he resolved a Rule 12(b)(6) motion count by count, dismissing four claims and allowing the others to proceed. Parties should address each claim separately rather than assuming an all-or-nothing result.
“The Court hereby GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART Defendants' Motion to Dismiss. (ECF No. 29.) Counts XVI, XX, XXII and XXIII of the Consolidated Amended Complaint ... are hereby DISMISSED. This matter shall proceed on all other Counts ...”
Procedural preferences
In the Capital One litigation, he declined to certify a proposed question of Virginia law to the Supreme Court of Virginia and retained the issue for decision. A certification request should explain concretely why the federal court cannot reliably resolve the state-law question.
“The Court hereby DENIES Defendants' Motion to Certify Question to the Supreme Court of Virginia (ECF No.53).”
In complex litigation he uses active case management. In the Capital One matter he appointed a Rule 53 special master for discovery, set page limits, required positions on Lexecon waivers, and established a detailed pretrial schedule.
“The Court hereby DIRECTS the Special Master to begin the execution of his duties as set forth above, and to ‘proceed with all reasonable diligence.’ Fed. R. Civ. P. 53(b)(2).”
He scrutinizes class settlements independently rather than treating an unopposed agreement as presumptively adequate. He rejected the first Capital One proposal for inadequate relief and unequal treatment, then approved a revised $425 million agreement after the parties addressed those concerns.
“the proposed class action settlement fails to meet the standard laid out in Rule 23(e), specifically as to the adequacy of the proposed settlement and the equitable treatment of class members”
Cautions
Ten of the 13 written-order outcomes come from the Capital One multidistrict litigation, and the other three come from one immigration-detention case. The sample therefore does not establish a cross-docket grant rate or a general merits tendency, and much of Novak's broader docket remains outside the written-order slice.
“The Court hereby GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART Defendants' Motion to Dismiss.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“The Court hereby GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART Defendants' Motion to Dismiss. (ECF No. 29.) Counts XVI, XX, XXII and XXIII of the Consolidated Amended Complaint, (ECF No. 10), are hereby DISMISSED. This matter shall proceed on all other Counts asserted in the Consolidated Amended Complaint.”
“The Court hereby DENIES Defendant's Motion to Strike (ECF No. 31).”
“The Court hereby DENIES Defendants' Motion to Certify Question to the Supreme Court of Virginia (ECF No.53).”
“The Court hereby GRANTS Plaintiffs' Unopposed Motion for Appointment of Lead Counsel (ECF No. 4) on the terms set out above.”
“the Court hereby DENIES AS MOOT Defendants' Motion to Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint in Savett v. Capital One, N.A., No. 1:23cv890 (ECF No. 32).”
“the Court hereby GRANTS Capital One's Motion (ECF No. 27). Capital One shall file an Answer no later than August 12. 2024.”
“the Court DENIES Plaintiffs’ Motion (ECF No. 196)”
“Because Lewis’s filing — in the midst of the settlement approval process — is untimely, the Court DENIES Lewis’s Motion (ECF No. 262).”
“Court approves settlement.”
“the Court GRANTS Plaintiffs Motion (ECF No. 323)”
“The Court therefore DENIES Petitioner's Motion for a TRO (ECF No. 4 -1).”
“the Court hereby DENIES AS MOOT Petitioner's Motion for a Stay (ECF No. 5 ).”
“The Court hereby DENIES this Motion because it has already ruled that it would not stay Petitioner's removal.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 79 days (N = 12).
The sampled matters include pro se and prisoner cases, consumer-credit disputes, Social Security appeals, employment and product cases, complex multidistrict litigation, immigration detention, and federal criminal matters. Case assignment alone is not used to attribute an order; each included ruling is tied to Novak's signature.
Draft for Judge Novak with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Novak, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Novak's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace