Kathleen M. Tafoya
How Judge Tafoya decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
Treats subject-matter jurisdiction as a threshold the court must satisfy itself of: recommends dismissal (without prejudice) where injunctive-relief claims are mooted by a prisoner's release, or where a federal hook (e.g. state action under Section 1983) is missing.
“Magistrate Judge Tafoya concludes that the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over the instant action because Plaintiff is no longer incarcerated at the Weld County Jail.”
Holds that a plaintiff may not effectively amend a complaint by raising new facts or theories in a brief opposing a motion to dismiss -- the operative pleading governs.
“Plaintiff may not effectively amend his complaint by alleging new facts in his response to a motion to dismiss.”
Procedural preferences
Her recommendations denying dismissal are detailed enough that district judges adopt them as 'thorough and comprehensive' on clear-error review -- in this sample she recommended denial of dismissal as readily as grant (2 of 5 motions recommended denied), including in an SEC enforcement action and a pro se prisoner medical case.
“Magistrate Judge Tafoya's thorough and comprehensive analyses and recommendations are correct and that there is no clear error on the face of the record.”
Cautions
Her recommendations are not rubber-stamped: in the Beltran au pair class action the district judge, on de novo review after objections, expressly accepted the recommendation in part and rejected it in part (declining to adopt the Colorado wage-claim conclusion); in Lucero the district judge reached the same grant but on different reasoning.
“the Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Kathleen Tafoya (Doc. # 240) is ACCEPTED IN PART AND REJECTED IN PART”
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.
| Motions to dismiss N = 5 |
Granted: 2Granted in part: 1Denied: 2 | 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.
“FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Complaint (Doc. # 54) is DENIED.”
“Defendants Cullyford's, Massenburg's, and Blatnick's Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 24) is DENIED”
“Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya recommends that Defendant Steven Reams and Duane Duran's Motion to Dismiss ... be granted and this case be dismissed without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. ... the Court ... AFFIRMED and ADOPTED ... this action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.”
“Defendants' Motions to Dismiss (Doc. ## 127, 130, 131, and 136) are GRANTED IN PART (with respect to Plaintiffs' claim under the Utah Minimum Wage Act and Plaintiffs' claim for breach of contract), denied without prejudice with respect to the Colorado wage claim, and denied as to the remainder.”
“The Magistrate Judge's July 20, 2018 Recommendation (ECF NO. 50) is ADOPTED as modified herein; ... Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 14) is GRANTED; Plaintiff's Amended Complaint (ECF No. 5) is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE as to his Section 1983 cause of action and otherwise DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for lack of subject matter jurisdiction”