From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Kipp v. Rardin

United States District Court, District of Arizona
Oct 26, 2022
No. CV-20-00167-TUC-RM (D. Ariz. Oct. 26, 2022)

Summary

applying Ninth Circuit standard

Summary of this case from Crawley v. FCI Berlin

Opinion

CV-20-00167-TUC-RM

10-26-2022

Ronald G Kipp, Jr., Petitioner, v. Jared Rardin, Respondent.


ORDER

Honorable Rosemary Marquez United States District Judge

On September 28, 2022, Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Rateau issued a Report and Recommendation (Doc. 25) recommending that this Court grant Petitioner's Amended Petition as it relates to Petitioner's claim that he is entitled a resentencing without a career offender classification and deny the Amended Petition as it relates to Petitioner's claim that he is entitled relief from his enhanced term of supervised release. No objections to the Report and Recommendation were filed.

A district judge must “make a de novo determination of those portions” of a magistrate judge's “report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The advisory committee's notes to Rule 72(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure state that, “[w]hen no timely objection is filed, the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation” of a magistrate judge. Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b) advisory committee's note to 1983 addition. See also Johnson v. Zema Sys. Corp., 170 F.3d 734, 739 (7th Cir. 1999) (“If no objection or only partial objection is made, the district court judge reviews those unobjected portions for clear error.”); Prior v. Ryan, CV 10-225-TUC-RCC, 2012 WL 1344286, at *1 (D. Ariz. Apr. 18, 2012) (reviewing for clear error unobjected-to portions of Report and Recommendation).

The Court has reviewed Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Rateau's Report and Recommendation, the parties' briefs, and the record. The Court finds no error in Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Rateau's Report and Recommendation.

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 25) is accepted and adopted in full.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Amended Petition (Doc. 9) is granted in part and denied in part as set forth in the Report and Recommendation. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment accordingly and close this case.


Summaries of

Kipp v. Rardin

United States District Court, District of Arizona
Oct 26, 2022
No. CV-20-00167-TUC-RM (D. Ariz. Oct. 26, 2022)

applying Ninth Circuit standard

Summary of this case from Crawley v. FCI Berlin
Case details for

Kipp v. Rardin

Case Details

Full title:Ronald G Kipp, Jr., Petitioner, v. Jared Rardin, Respondent.

Court:United States District Court, District of Arizona

Date published: Oct 26, 2022

Citations

No. CV-20-00167-TUC-RM (D. Ariz. Oct. 26, 2022)

Citing Cases

Crawley v. FCI Berlin

at *4 (N.D. Ill.Dec. 15, 2022) (applying Seventh and Eleventh Circuit standards); Kipp v. Rardin, No.…