John F. Robbenhaar
How Judge Robbenhaar rules, drawn from 12 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
How Judge Robbenhaar decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Procedural preferences
In Hicks, Judge Robbenhaar recommended dismissal with prejudice because the complaint did not allege a custom or policy supporting entity liability, and he recommended denying further amendment as futile after repeated failures to cure the pleading.
“Judge Robbenhaar recommended that the Court grant the Motion, deny Plaintiff leave to amend his Operative Complaint, and dismiss Plaintiff's claim against SWCMG with prejudice.”
In the same case, repeated failures to follow the federal and local procedural rules weighed against allowing another amendment.
“Judge Robbenhaar also lamented Plaintiff's routine failures to follow the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and this District's Local Rules.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“the Honorable John F. Robbenhaar, United States Magistrate Judge, recommended that the Court grant the Motion to Dismiss and dismiss with prejudice the Complaint. ... the Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's 'Civil Rights Complaint Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983' and for Qualified Immunity ... is granted; ... the Civil Rights Complaint ... is dismissed with prejudice.”
“Judge Robbenhaar recommended that the Court grant the Motion, deny Plaintiff leave to amend his Operative Complaint, and dismiss Plaintiff's claim against SWCMG with prejudice. ... the Court OVERRULES Plaintiff's objections; ADOPTS the PFRD; GRANTS SWCMG's Motion; and DISMISSES Plaintiff's claim against it WITH PREJUDICE.”
“The PFRD recommends that the Court grant the Defendants' Motion to Consolidate ... (ii) Defendants' Motion to Consolidate, filed May 1, 2024 (Doc. 30), is granted; (iii) that this matter is consolidated with Martinez Jr. v. Sandoval, et al., No. CIV 24-0346 KG/JMR”
“recommends that Defendants' Motion to Dismiss be GRANTED and Plaintiff's Complaint be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE”
“the Court finds that Plaintiff's Motion is not well taken and recommends that it be DENIED”
“the Court finds that Plaintiff's Motion is not well taken and recommends that it be DENIED”
“the Court finds that Plaintiff's Motion is well-taken and recommends that it be GRANTED”
“the Court finds that Plaintiff's Motion to Enforce is well taken and recommends that the Motion be GRANTED”
“Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 48) be GRANTED”
“Plaintiff's ‘Motion For Default Judgment unter [sic] Rule 56’ (Doc. 46) be DENIED AS MOOT”
“1. Defendant BCBC's Motion for Summary Judgment on the Martinez Report (Doc. 43) be GRANTED; and 2. Defendant City of Albuquerque's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 46) be GRANTED”
“Judge Robbenhaar entered his PFRD recommending that Defendants' motion to dismiss be granted and Counts 1 and 10-14 be dismissed”
“the undersigned recommends that Petitioners' Amended Motion for Temporary Restraining Order (Doc. 5) be GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 376.5 days (N = 10).
By party consent, Judge Robbenhaar enters final decisions in a steady stream of Social Security disability appeals under Titles II and XVI. He also writes recommendations in civil-rights and prisoner-conditions cases and has handled additional civil-rights referrals, including McMurry v. Bloomfield Municipal School Board. This describes the composition of his work, not a grant rate.
Draft for Judge Robbenhaar with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Robbenhaar, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Robbenhaar's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace