Romero v. Core Civic, Inc.

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO RUBEN ROMERO, Plaintiff, v. No. 1:21-cv-0544 KG/DLM CORE CIVIC, INC., et al., Defendants. ORDER OF REFERENCE In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. $$ 636(b)(1)(B) and (b)(3) and Virginia Beach Federal Savings & Loan Ass’n v. Wood, 901 F.2d 849 (10th Cir. 1990), Plaintiff's Motion for Sanctions for Discovery Misconduct (Doc. 144) is referred to United States Magistrate Judge Damian L. Martinez to conduct hearings, if warranted, including evidentiary hearings, and to perform any legal analysis required to recommend to the Court an ultimate disposition of the motion. The Magistrate Judge will submit an analysis, including findings of fact, if necessary, and recommended disposition, to the District Judge assigned to the case, with copies provided to the parties. The parties shall be given the opportunity to object to the proposed findings, analysis, and disposition as described in 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Objections must be filed within 14 days after being served with a copy of the proposed disposition. A party waives the right to challenge a magistrate judge’s findings and recommendation if the party does not file timely and specific objections. See Martinez v. Barnhart, 444 F.3d 1201, 1208 (10th Cir. 2006); Soliz v. Chater, 82 F.3d 373, 375 (10th Cir. 1996). IT IS SO ORDERED.

UNITED STATES DISTRI UDGE