Kenfield v. Fender et al, No. 4:2016cv00119 - Document 12 (D. Mont. 2017)
Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 10 in full. A certificate of appealability is DENIED. Signed by Judge Dana L. Christensen on 12/4/2017. Mailed to Kenfield (TAG)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Kenfield v. Fender et al Doc. 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA GREAT FALLS DIVISION KAL CLAYTON KENFIELD, CV 16-119-GF-DLC-JTJ Petitioner, ORDER vs. DOUGLAS FENDER; ATTORNEY GENDERAL OF THE STATE OF MONTANA, Respondents. On October 10, 2017, United States Magistrate Judge John T. Johnston entered his Findings and Recommendations, recommending that PlaintiffKal C. Kenfield's ("Kenfield") Petition be denied on the merits. (Doc. 10 at 18.) Kenfield timely filed an objection to the findings and recommendations, and so is entitled to de novo review of those findings and recommendations to which he specifically objects. 28 U.S.C. ยง 636(b )(1 )(C). This Court reviews for clear error those findings and recommendations to which no party objects. See McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Commodore Bus. Mach., Inc., 656 F.2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir. 1981); Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). Clear error exists ifthe Court is left with a "definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed." -1- Dockets.Justia.com United States v. Syrax, 235 F .3d 422, 427 (9th Cir. 2000) (citations omitted). Judge Johnston concluded, and this Court agrees, that all claims brought in Kenfield's Petition be dismissed. Having reviewed Kenfield's objection, the Court finds that he fails to present any new evidence and reiterates the same facts and arguments already made and properly rejected by Judge Johnston. Instead, Kenfield's objections are merely rehashed arguments of the same allegations made in his initial Petition. (Doc. 1.) Accordingly, the Court reviews Judge Johnston's Findings and Recommendations for clear error. Finding none, IT IS ORDERED that Judge Johnston's Findings and Recommendations (Doc. 10) are ADOPTED IN FULL. 1. The Petition (Docs. 1, 4, 8) are DENIED on the merits. 2. The Clerk of Court shall enter by separate document a judgment in favor of Respondents and against Petitioner. 3. A certificate of appealability is DENIED. DATED this 4 of December, Dana L. Christensen, Chief Judge United States District Court -2-
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
