FEELEY v. HOKAMSON

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MAINE

STEVEN FEELEY ) ) Plaintiff,1 ) ) v. ) No. 2:23-cv-00322-JDL ) BRADLEY HOKAMSON et al., ) ) ) Defendants. )

ORDER ACCEPTING THE RECOMMENDED DISMISSAL OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE On August 18, 2023, Plaintiff Steven Feeley, proceeding pro se, filed a complaint (ECF No. 1) asserting claims for kidnapping, unlawful detention, and abuse of power against two police officers arising from an incident that occurred in Naples, Maine. Attached to the complaint is a largely illegible criminal summons related to the Naples incident (ECF No. 1-1 at 3). Feeley moved to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 2), which motion I referred to Magistrate Judge Karen Frink Wolf, pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. § 636(b)(1)(A) (West 2023) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a). Judge Wolf granted Feeley’s motion (ECF No. 4) and proceeded to preliminarily review the complaint in accordance with 28 U.S.C.A. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (West 2023). On August 29, 2023, Judge Wolf entered an order (ECF No. 5) directing Feeley to file a fully legible copy of the summons attached to his complaint by September 12,

1 Feeley attempts to, but cannot, bring this action on behalf of his child. See Ethan H. v. New Hampshire, No. 92-1098, 1992 WL 167299, at *1 (1st Cir. July 21, 1992) (per curiam) (holding that a parent proceeding pro se cannot represent his or her child in district court proceedings). 2023, “[b]ecause the summons appears to be critical to understanding” his claims. ECF No. 5. The order noted that Feeley’s “case may be subject to dismissal” should he fail to comply. ECF No. 5. The September 12, 2023, deadline passed without

Feeley filing the summons, seeking leave for an extension to do so, or otherwise explaining his noncompliance. On September 19, 2023, Judge Wolf recommended dismissing the complaint without prejudice (ECF No. 6) based on Feeley’s failure to comply with the order directing him to file a legible summons. The Recommended Dismissal concluded with a notice to the parties that failure to object would waive their right to further review

and appeal. Neither party has filed an objection to the Recommend Dismissal, the deadline for which was October 3, 2023. Notwithstanding this waiver, I have reviewed the Recommended Dismissal together with the entire record. I concur with the Judge Wolf’s recommendation and determine that no further proceeding is necessary. It is therefore ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge’s Recommended Dismissal (ECF No. 6) is hereby ACCEPTED and Feeley’s complaint (ECF No. 1) is

DISMISSED without prejudice.

SO ORDRED. Dated this 20th day of October, 2023.

/s/ Jon D. Levy CHIEF U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE