Jennifer M. Rozzoni
How Judge Rozzoni rules, drawn from 27 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Rozzoni
Jennifer M. Rozzoni was appointed a United States Magistrate Judge for the District of New Mexico in 2023, based in Albuquerque. She issues final decisions in civil cases with the parties’ consent and recommendations on matters referred by district judges.
Judge Rozzoni's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Rozzoni, as published on the court's website (checked October 9, 2026). Judges revise these often, so confirm the current version on the court's site before you file.
Key rules
Filing
After an unopposed motion, email the proposed order to Judge Rozzoni in Word format.
“Proposed orders must be sent to [email protected] after the filing of any unopposed motion. They should be submitted in Microsoft Word format (as .docx files)”
Discovery
Try to resolve a discovery dispute by telephone or in person before requesting an informal conference; email or letters alone do not suffice.
“Counsel must have attempted to resolve the dispute themselves by discussing the matter either by telephone or in person.”
Discovery
All parties must agree to an informal discovery conference before counsel contacts chambers.
“All parties must agree to an informal discovery conference before any one counsel contacts chambers for an appointment.”
Trial
Exchange exhibits and proposed lists, provide hard copies to the court, and file proposed lists 21 calendar days before the pretrial conference.
“TWENTY-ONE (21) calendar days before the pretrial conference, counsel for each party will exchange exhibits and proposed exhibit lists, provide hard copies of exhibits to the Court pursuant to these instructions, and file the proposed exhibit lists with the Court.”
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 9, 2026).
How Judge Rozzoni decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In a consent Social Security appeal, Rozzoni ordered remand after finding that the administrative law judge had not explained why a consultative examiner’s opinion conflicted with the record.
“The Court therefore concludes that the ALJ did not adequately articulate her analysis of the consistency factor in evaluating the persuasiveness of FNP Giron’s opinion.”
Procedural preferences
In Nidiffer, Rozzoni recommended granting officers’ qualified-immunity summary-judgment motion and denying the plaintiffs’ cross-motion.
“Because defendants have qualified immunity, I recommend the Court GRANT the Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 40) and DENY the Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 45).”
In Carrillo-Castaneda, Rozzoni recommended dismissing a Federal Tort Claims Act case without prejudice because the plaintiff had not given the required agency notice.
“Because Plaintiff failed to provide the statutorily required notice, I recommend the Court grant Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 10) and dismiss the case without prejudice.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“I find that the three defendants are entitled to qualified immunity as to both counts. Because defendants have qualified immunity, I recommend the Court GRANT the Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 40) ... Finally, I recommend that the Court dismiss the case with prejudice.”
“I recommend the Court ... DENY the Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 45).”
“The PFRD recommends the Court grant the parties' Joint Motion to Approve Settlement Involving Minors and to Set a Fairness Hearing. Doc. 104. ... The Magistrate Judge's Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition, Doc. 118, is adopted. ... The Joint Motion to Approve Settlement Involving Minors and to Set a Fairness Hearing, Doc. 104, is granted.”
“I recommend that the Court GRANT IN PART and DENY IN PART defendants' Motion to Dismiss. I recommend the Court grant in part defendants' motion by finding that: (1) Plaintiff fails to state a § 1983 claim against defendants in their official capacity. ... I recommend the Court deny in part defendants' motion by finding that: (1) Plaintiff sufficiently states a failure to protect claim against each defendant in their individual capacities under § 1983. ... (2) Defendant Hatch is not entitled to qualified immunity at the pleading stage.”
“Mr. Manuelito fails to show that he is entitled to relief for any of these three grounds. I therefore recommend that the Court deny Mr. Manuelito's Motion to Correct an Illegal Sentence Under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Doc. 3) with prejudice.”
“Having reviewed the parties' submissions and the relevant law, I recommend that the Court GRANT plaintiffs' Motion to Remand (Doc. 6) because removal was untimely.”
“The Motion for Discovery (Doc. 10) is denied. ... By local rule, I am assigned to decide the Motion for Discovery. See D.N.M.LR-Civ. 73.1(a) ... see also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A).”
“IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File a Surreply to the Reply in Support of Defendant Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham's Motion for Protective Order (Doc. 93) is DENIED.”
“I recommend that the Court: 1. Dismiss this case without prejudice for impermissible claim splitting, and 2. Deny Ms. Saul's Request for Leave of Court to File Motion to Amend Complaint (Doc. 29) as futile.”
Acting on its own, the court struck both sides' briefing on a pending discovery motion for failing to follow its order, and warned plaintiff's counsel that fabricated and misrepresented case citations could lead to sanctions: "the Court hereby STRIKES defendant Albuquerque Public Schools' supplement response (Doc. 105) and plaintiff's reply (Doc. 107) to plaintiff's pending discovery motion (Doc. 88)."
“I therefore recommend that the Court deny Mr. Griego's Motion to Vacate Sentence Under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Doc. 1) and dismiss the case with prejudice.”
“For that reason, I recommend that the Court dismiss Mr. Way's case without prejudice for failure to prosecute.”
“APS’s Motion for Sanctions (Doc. 218) is GRANTED.”
“Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to File Surreply and Motion to Disregard Improper New Matter and Collateral Attacks in APS’s Reply (Doc. 243) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. The Court will disregard the requested information. Plaintiff may not file a sur-reply.”
“grant Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 58) because Plaintiff failed to exhaust his administrative remedies and (2) dismiss this lawsuit without prejudice.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 293.0 days (N = 8).
By party consent, Judge Rozzoni enters final decisions in Social Security disability appeals. She also writes recommendations in civil-rights, prisoner, and post-conviction cases. This describes the composition of her work, not a grant rate.
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 months | 0 |
| Bench trials submitted more than six months | 0 |
| Bankruptcy appeals pending more than six months | 0 |
| Social Security appeals pending more than six months | 0 |
| Civil cases pending more than three years | 0 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2025 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2025 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2024 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2024 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2023 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2023 | 0 | 0 |
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 District of New Mexico, not for Judge Rozzoni: 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.
| Cases | Median time | |
|---|---|---|
| All civil cases closed | 908 | 8.2 months |
| Closed with no court action | 150 | 4.1 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 511 | 7 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 242 | 13.8 months |
| Closed during trial | 5 | not reported |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 908 | 8.2 months |
| Sep 2024 | 918 | 8 months |
| Sep 2023 | 835 | 10.6 months |
| Sep 2022 | 973 | 11.7 months |
| Sep 2021 | 909 | 9.6 months |
| Sep 2020 | 957 | 9 months |
| Sep 2019 | 965 | 9.6 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 Rozzoni with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Rozzoni, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Rozzoni's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace