Gregory J. Fouratt
How Judge Fouratt decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Procedural preferences
On prisoner pro se sec.1983 dockets, screens under 1915(e) before allowing discovery or substantive relief, and on a Rule 12(b)(6) cut dismisses incurable claims (criminal statutes with no private right of action; non-suable entities) WITH prejudice while giving individual-capacity claims one chance to replead with the required 'who did what to whom' specificity.
“it is particularly important in a sec.1983 action that the plaintiff 'make clear exactly who is alleged to have done what to whom, to provide each individual with fair notice as to the basis of the claim against him or her.'”
On Social Security appeals, applies Tenth Circuit step-five doctrine rigorously: the claimant bears the burden to identify an APPARENT vocational-expert / DOT conflict before Haddock v. Apfel requires the ALJ to investigate it, and ALJ scrivener's/citation errors are reviewed for harmlessness.
“Because Plaintiff did not identify an apparent conflict between the vocational expert's testimony and the DOT, the PFRD concluded that the ALJ was not required under Haddock to elicit further testimony”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Magistrate Judge Gregory J. Fouratt filed his Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition ... in which he recommended that the decision of the Administrative Law Judge be affirmed. ... Plaintiff's Motion to Remand [ECF 24] is DENIED; and ... DISMISSING THIS CASE WITH PREJUDICE.”
“United States Magistrate Judge Gregory J. Fouratt's Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition ... recommended that the Commissioner's final decision be affirmed. ... Plaintiff's Objections (Doc. 36) are OVERRULED and ... the PFRD (Doc. 35) is ADOPTED in its entirety. ... Plaintiff's Motion to Remand or Reverse Agency Decision (Doc. 27) is DENIED, and ... this case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“Judge Fouratt examined Defendants' Partial Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 57) and recommends granting it in part ... Defendants' Partial Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 57) is GRANTED IN PART as follows: (1) ... DISMISSES WITH PREJUDICE Claim II brought under 18 U.S.C. 242 ... (2) ... DISMISSES WITHOUT PREJUDICE all claims against Defendants Romero, Ramirez, Chacon, Verrett, Garcia, Bourne, and Gallegos ... (3) ... DISMISSES WITH PREJUDICE all claims against CNMCF or NMCD”
“Plaintiff's Motion for Medical Examination and X-Ray Transport [ECF 9] is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. ... Before ordering discovery or substantive relief, the Court must screen the Amended Complaint ... pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915(e).”
“IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the PFRD is ADOPTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Salas's Motion to Vacate under 28 U.S.C. Section 2255 (Doc. 1) is DENIED and this case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“On reference from the undersigned (Doc. 10), United States Magistrate Judge Gregory J. Fouratt issued his PFRD recommending that this Court deny the instant ‘Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus Under 28 U.S.C. § 2254’ with prejudice. Doc. 13. Judge Fouratt recommended that this Court conclude that the Petition is barred by the limitations period set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1) and further conclude that Petitioner has not met his burden to show his entitlement to equitable tolling of the limitations period. ... Having conducted a de novo review of the Objections, the Court overrules them, adopts the PFRD in its entirety, and denies the Petition.”
“On August 7, 2019, Judge Fouratt filed his Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition (‘PFRD’). ... The PFRD recommended that this Court deny Defendant's Motion and decline to issue a certificate of appealability. ... Having reviewed de novo the portions of the PFRD to which Defendant objects, the Court now overrules the objections and adopts the PFRD. Accordingly, the Court will deny Defendant's Motion, dismiss this action with prejudice, and deny Defendant a certificate of appealability.”
“After conducting this de novo review, the Court will adopt the PFRD that the Honorable Gregory J. Fouratt, United States Magistrate Judge for the United States District Court for the District of New Mexico, proposed, overrule the Plaintiff Bernadette S.' Objections, affirm the Defendant's decision, deny Plaintiff's Motion to Reverse and Remand to Agency, filed November 12, 2024 (Doc. 23)(‘Motion to Reverse and Remand’), and dismiss this case with prejudice.”
“the Motion to Strike [ECF 37] is GRANTED, and the portion of ECF 36 identified as R&M's ‘Counterclaim in Reply’ is STRICKEN.”
“Defendant's Motion to Dismiss is [ECF 101] is GRANTED.”
“Defendants' Motion for Partial Summary Judgment No. 1 [ECF 48] and Defendants' Motion for Partial Summary Judgment No. VII [ECF 55] are GRANTED.”
“IT IS THEREFORE RECOMMENDED that the Commissioner's decision be AFFIRMED, Plaintiff's Motion to Reverse and Remand to Agency [ECF 16] be DENIED, and this case be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 442.5 days (N = 10).
By party consent, Judge Fouratt enters final decisions in a steady stream of Social Security disability appeals under Titles II and XVI. He also writes recommendations in prisoner civil-rights and Social Security cases and handles criminal duty in Las Cruces, including initial appearances, detention matters, and border-zone misdemeanors. This describes the composition of his work, not a grant rate.
Put Judge Fouratt's record to work
Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Fouratt actually rules, not a generic AI guess.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Fouratt's own signed orders and cites them.