Raymond S. Kent

United States District Court for the Western District of Michigan 14 signed orders read

How Judge Kent decides

Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

What persuades

Grants a dispositive motion once a clean documentary record forecloses the claim -- for example, personnel records showing a defendant was not even employed at the relevant facility when the alleged wrongdoing occurred.

“plaintiff cannot show that defendant Huss was deliberately indifferent for failing to protect him from the attack at MBP on December 14, 2014, because Huss did not work at that correctional facility.”

On prisoner exhaustion disputes, checks the timeline of the grievance record closely -- a grievance filed before the incident it purports to complain of cannot exhaust the claim, regardless of whether the plaintiff opposed the motion.

“The only grievance which plaintiff pursued through Step III, Grievance ICF-22-12-1419-28B, was received by the MDOC on December 13, 2022, two days before the alleged series of incidents began on December 15, 2022.”

Procedural preferences

Expects strict compliance with the local rule requiring a responsive brief to any nondispositive motion, and will resolve a dispute procedurally (striking an unsupported filing) rather than reach its merits when that rule is not followed.

“the magistrate judge found that Hardy failed to follow Local Rule 7.3(c) which requires parties opposing a nondispositive motion to 'file a responsive brief and supporting materials.'”

On habeas timeliness, applies AEDPA's one-year limitations period strictly and looks specifically at whether the petition itself raises any argument for equitable tolling before considering one.

“Magistrate Judge Kent found that Plaintiff had one year from March 30, 2014 in which to file his habeas application... Magistrate Judge Kent further noted that Plaintiff failed to argue any basis for equitable tolling in his habeas petition.”

Cautions

Dismisses pro se prisoner cases for lack of prosecution within a few months of a missed deadline once a deficiency order has already put the plaintiff on notice.

“IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff's action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for lack of prosecution and failure to comply with the Court's order.”

On a mixed habeas petition (some claims exhausted, some not), will dismiss for failure to exhaust rather than stay the case if the petitioner still has ample time left on the one-year limitations clock to return to state court.

“Petitioner has more than sixty days remaining in his limitations period... a stay of these proceedings is not warranted and the Court will dismiss the petition for failure to exhaust available state-court remedies.”

Signed rulings

A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.

Watkins v. City of Kalamazoo
1:15-cv-997 · 2016-04-19
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“I respectfully recommend that defendant's motion to dismiss (docket no. 5) be GRANTED and that this matter be DISMISSED.”

Motion to quash service (defendant) Moot / procedural

“the service of process issue is moot if the Court adopts the recommendation to dismiss this action as set forth in Section II, supra.”

Wise v. 17th Circuit Court and Kent County Friend of the Court
1:23-cv-20 · 2023-04-24
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“I respectfully recommend that defendants' motion to dismiss (ECF No. 9) be GRANTED and that this case be TERMINATED.”

Rayos v. Smith, et al.
1:15-cv-1153 · 2020-02-27
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“I respectfully recommend that defendant Huss' second motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 243) be GRANTED and that this action be TERMINATED.”

Sloan v. Earnest and Wyoming Public Schools
1:23-cv-723 · 2024-05-20
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“I respectfully recommend that defendant's motion to dismiss (ECF No. 19) be GRANTED ... and that this action be terminated.”

Motion to amend complaint (plaintiff) Denied

“plaintiff's motion for leave to file an amended complaint (ECF No. 24) be DENIED”

Strong v. Unknown Sandborn
1:24-cv-507 · 2025-07-09
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“I respectfully recommend that defendant Sanborn's motion for summary judgment on the basis of exhaustion (ECF No. 23) be GRANTED and that this case be terminated.”

Slates v. Corrigan
2:26-cv-124 · 2026-06-26
Habeas petition (petitioner) Moot / procedural

“the Court will dismiss the petition for failure to exhaust available state-court remedies.”

Motions to stay (petitioner) Denied

“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner's motion to stay these proceedings and hold them in abeyance (ECF No. 3) is DENIED.”

Fedorova v. Foley, et al. (PennyMac Loan Services)
1:22-cv-991 · 2023-08-31
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“the Court will overrule Plaintiff's objections (ECF No. 222) and adopt the R&R (ECF No. 216) as the opinion of the Court. The Court will grant PennyMac's motion to dismiss (ECF No. 82) for the reasons stated in the R&R as well as in this Opinion.”

Fedorova v. Foley, et al. (Bank of New York Mellon)
1:22-cv-991 · 2023-09-05
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant Bank of New York Mellon's motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, for summary judgment (ECF No. 75) is GRANTED.”

Motions to strike (plaintiff) Moot / procedural

“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion to strike the affidavit of Kathryn Corbett (ECF No. 124) is DENIED AS MOOT.”

Reid v. Rewerts
1:18-cv-636 · 2021-01-25
Habeas petition (petitioner) Denied

“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Reid's habeas corpus petition (ECF No. 1) is DENIED.”

Jarrett v. Snyder, et al.
1:13-cv-139 · 2016-02-29
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted in part

“Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 107) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Plaintiff's due process claims are DISMISSED without prejudice. Plaintiff's First Amendment claims may proceed.”

Summary judgment (plaintiff) Denied

“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 103) is DENIED.”

Hardy v. Lansing Police Department, et al.
1:20-cv-1224 · 2023-11-01
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants' motion for summary judgment as to all Defendants (ECF No. 157) is GRANTED.”

Hehrer v. Clinton County, et al.
1:20-cv-1079 · 2024-10-21
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clinton County's Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 118) is GRANTED, and the claims against the Clinton County Defendant's are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

Kent's directly-assigned caseload spans consent Social Security disability appeals (28 U.S.C. 636(c)), prisoner civil-rights and habeas corpus cases, and general civil matters including employment, ADA, and contract disputes. Several of his older Social Security appeals carry a Fair Labor Standards Act, ADA, or contract case alongside them in the same filing window, reflecting a general civil docket in addition to his prisoner and Social Security referral lanes.

Put Judge Kent's record to work

Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Kent actually rules, not a generic AI guess.

Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Kent's own signed orders and cites them.