Poulson v. Attorney General of the State of Montana et al

Filing 71

ORDER ADOPTING 70 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS in full; granting 64 Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by Judge Dana L. Christensen on 8/22/2016. Mailed to Poulson. (TAG, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA
MISSOULA DIVISION

CV 14-185-M-DLC-JCL

KERMIT POULSON,
Plaintiff,

ORDER
vs.
SGT. RICHTER,
Defendant.

United States Magistrate Judge Jeremiah C. Lynch entered his Findings and
a Recommendation on July 27, 2016, recommending granting Defendant Reese
Richter's ("Richter") motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff Kermit Poulson
("Poulson") failed to timely object to the Findings and Recommendation, and so
waived his right to de novo review of the record. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l)(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 if the Court is left with a "definite and firm conviction that a mistake
has been committed." United States v. Syrax, 235 F.3d 422, 427 (9th Cir. 2000)

-1-

(citations omitted).
Having reviewed the Findings and Recommendation, the Court finds no
clear error in Judge Lynch's conclusion that: (1) Richter is not liable for the
alleged constitutional violations because he was not personally involved with the
conditions of Poulson's confinement or his medical treatment; (2) Richter is not
liable for the claims of retaliation because he was not personally involved with the
alleged retaliatory conduct; and (3) Richter is entitled summary judgment on the
due process claims because Poulson was afforded due process on the first two
disciplinary charges and was not deprived of a recognized liberty interest on the
third disciplinary write-up.
There being no clear error in Judge Lynch's Findings and Recommendation,
IT IS ORDERED that:
(1) Judge Lynch's Findings and Recommendation (Doc. 9) are ADOPTED
IN FULL.

(2) Defendant Richter's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 64) is
GRANTED. This action is DISMISSED.
(3) The Clerk of Court is directed to enter by separate document a
judgment in favor of Defendant and against Plaintiff.

-2-

Dated this

Z2~y of August, 201
Dana L. Christensen, Chief Jud e
United States District Court

-3-