Crenshaw v. Anderson — Entry #14: ORDER OF REFERENCE: Pursuant to 28 U.S.C
Case: Crenshaw v. Anderson txnd · 3:24-cv-00731
filed March 27, 2024
What this document is
Docket entry #14 · filed June 11, 2024
ORDER OF REFERENCE: Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), Defendants Leonard Anderson and Darrien Robertson's [12] Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint, and Brief in Support, is hereby referred to United States Magistrate Judge Rebecca Rutherford for hearing, if necessary, and for the United States Magistrate Judge to submit to the court proposed findings and recommendations for disposition of the Motion. (Ordered by Judge Sam A. Lindsay on 6/11/2024) (ykp)
Who is involved
- City of Dallas
- Darrien Robertson
- Leonard Anderson
- Tomyia Crenshaw
Why we have it
We follow this case because it names a company we track, although that company is not a party:
- Applied Digital: its name “Applied Digital Corporation” appears in a filing in this case.
…LLC 90 3:23-cv-01805-E McConnell v. Applied Digital Corporation et al 91 3:23-cv-01832-8 Doe v. Dallas…
A free copy from the RECAP archive of federal court filings (mirrored at the Internet Archive), retrieved October 04, 2026. Federal court filings are public records.
Document text
2 page(s), 2,898 characters, converted from the PDF's text layer · plain text.
Full text
Case 3:24-cv-00731-L Document 14 Filed 06/11/24 Page 1 of 2 PageID 131
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
DALLAS DIVISION
TOMYIA CRENSHAW, §
§
Plaintiff, §
§
v. § Civil Action No. 3:24-CV-731-L
§
LEONARD ANDERSON; DARRIEN §
ROBERTSON; and THE CITY OF §
DALLAS, §
§
Defendants. §
ORDER OF REFERENCE
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), Defendants Leonard Anderson and Darrien Robertson’s
Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint, and Brief in Support (“Motion”) (Doc. 12), filed June
3, 2024, is hereby referred to United States Magistrate Judge Rebecca Rutherford for hearing, if
necessary, and for the United States Magistrate Judge to submit to the court proposed findings and
recommendations for disposition of the Motion. This order of reference also prospectively refers
all procedural motions that are related to the referred Motion to the United States Magistrate Judge
for resolution. All future filings regarding the referred Motion shall be addressed “To the
Honorable United States Magistrate Judge”—not to the district judge or court—so that filings will
reach her without delay.
Local Civil Rules 72.1 and 72.2 provide that, unless otherwise directed by the presiding
district judge, a party who files objections under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 72(a) and (b)(2)
to magistrate judge orders regarding pretrial nondispositive matters, or findings and
recommendations on dispositive motions, may file a reply brief within 14 days from the date the
response to the objections or response brief is filed. The court does not allow parties to file a reply
Order of Reference – Page 1
Case 3:24-cv-00731-L Document 14 Filed 06/11/24 Page 2 of 2 PageID 132
brief with respect to magistrate judge orders or findings and recommendations, unless leave is
granted to file the reply brief. The court will strike or disregard any reply brief filed in violation
of this order.
It is so ordered this 11th day of June, 2024.
_________________________________
Sam A. Lindsay
United States District Judge
Order of Reference – Page 2