Gary August Fenner
How Judge Fenner rules, drawn from 8 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Judge Fenner no longer sits on this court. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled here.
About Judge Fenner
Gary A. Fenner is an inactive senior judge of the United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri. Appointed by President William J. Clinton, Judge Fenner received a commission on July 25, 1996. Judge Fenner assumed senior status on September 8, 2015.
How Judge Fenner decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In Morse v. County of Ozark, the court granted motions to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because the plaintiffs' claims sought federal review of a state court judgment. It dismissed the remaining claims without reaching their merits.
“Plaintiffs are attempting to appeal the decision of the Circuit Court of Ozark County, Missouri, to this Court in contravention of the Rooker-Feldman doctrine.”
Procedural preferences
In Lewis v. U.S. Farathane, Fenner denied remand after the defendant corrected a removal notice filed in the wrong state-court case. He found that the delay did not prejudice the plaintiff or undermine diversity jurisdiction.
“The Court finds that Defendant’s delay in filing a corrected copy of the notice of removal with the state court in the correct case number does not warrant remand in this case.”
In the Prime Tanning putative class action, Judge Fenner denied summary judgment on NBL’s post-acquisition liability because the named plaintiff’s distance from one disposal site did not dispose of other potential class members’ claims and factual disputes remained about exposure; he granted judgment on pre-acquisition liability.
“Genuine factual issues remain regarding whether NBL caused or significantly contributed to injuries sustained by potential class members after March 9, 2009.”
In Carrillo’s Section 2255 case, Judge Fenner enforced the plea agreement’s collateral-attack waiver because Carrillo did not claim an illegal sentence or manifest injustice. The order also rejected his two sentencing arguments on their merits and denied relief without a hearing.
“Since Carrillo has not made a claim of an illegal sentence or manifest injustice, he has waived his right to bring these claims in accordance with his plea agreement terms.”
Cautions
In Community of Christ Copyright Corp. v. Devon Park Restoration Branch, the court rejected an unsupported assertion that consumers' care in choosing a religious community reduced confusion between nearly identical marks. It granted the plaintiffs' summary judgment motion on the trademark claims.
“This lone, unsupported statement represents Defendants’ only argument that this factor weighs in their favor.”
In Carrillo’s Section 2255 case, Fenner required the pro se movant to identify facts supporting his claims of sentencing error.
“Even a pro se movant must identify facts that support his claims of error.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“For these reasons, and those set forth above, HP’s Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED.”
“Mr. and Ms. Heidi’s and Ms. Rooney-McBride’s Motions to dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction are GRANTED.”
“Plaintiff’s Motion to Remand is DENIED and Motion for Sanctions is DENIED.”
“For the reasons set forth below, Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED.”
“the Defendants’ Motion to Strike is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.”
“Carrillo’s motion seeking § 2255 relief is denied without an evidentiary hearing and without issuance of a certificate of appealability.”
“NBL’s Motion is accordingly DENIED in part and GRANTED in part.”
“ECC’s Motion to Amend Scheduling Order is GRANTED in part;”
Pending matters in the official report
Reported by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts under the Civil Justice Reform Act, as of March 31, 2026.
| Motions pending more than six months | 0 |
| Bench trials submitted more than six months | 0 |
| Bankruptcy appeals pending more than six months | 0 |
| Social Security appeals pending more than six months | 0 |
| Civil cases pending more than three years | 0 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2025 | 0 | 2 |
| Mar 2025 | 0 | 1 |
| Sep 2024 | 0 | 1 |
| Mar 2024 | 1 | 0 |
| Sep 2023 | 3 | 1 |
| Mar 2023 | 0 | 1 |
| Sep 2022 | 0 | 2 |
| Mar 2022 | 0 | 1 |
| Sep 2021 | 0 | 3 |
| Mar 2021 | 0 | 17 |
| Sep 2020 | 5 | 15 |
A snapshot on that date: matters listed may since have been decided or reassigned. A motion referred to a magistrate judge is counted for both judges. Motions in multidistrict litigation, section 2255 cases and Social Security appeals are not counted, and a very large three-year count is generally a multidistrict docket. Source: Appendix A of the report (PDF); about the report.
A historical record
Judge Fenner no longer sits on this court. This profile stays available as a record of how they ruled here. If you're preparing for a matter, start from the court's current bench.