ORDER

KENT J. DAWSON, District Judge.

Presently before the Court is Defendant/Cross-claimant Ben Hakim's Objection to Hearing Conducted by Magistrate Judge (#65). Presumably, based upon Hakim's sparse motion, he objects to the well-qualified and diligent Magistrate Judge hearing any aspect of this case, including the pretrial motions and filings of Hakim, based on his lay misreading of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 73 and 28 U.S.C. § 636. However, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A) clearly grants the Court authority to designate magistrate judges to hear and determine any pretrial matter. The Court has done so. See Local Rule IB 1-1, et. seq. Therefore, the Court denies Hakim's objection.

Hakim can rest assured that a "Federal Judge" has been assigned to his case and has been so assigned since Plaintiffs originally filed it. The magistrate judge will consider and hear pre-trial motions. The Court will conduct the trial and resolve dispositive motions.

Cases are decided upon the merits and not by the technicality of rules and procedure. However, even pro se litigants are required to know and follow the United States Code, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and the Local Rules of Practice for the United States District Court for the District of Nevada. The Court recommends that before Defendant cites part of a case, statute or rule that he read the entire case, statute or rule, not just the part that supports the end he hopes to achieve. Pro se litigants are subject to sanction, the same as parties represented by counsel, for failure to abide by the rules and orders of the Court. Further, Hakim is cautioned that failure to abide by the rules will result in sanction up to and including striking his answer, entry of default judgment or dismissal of cross-claims if necessary.

IT IS SO ORDERED.