Isaiah QN Butler v. Po Marshall McCamish et al.

D. Maine

Isaiah QN Butler v. Po Marshall McCamish et al.

District Court, D. Maine·Decided October 21, 2025·No. 1:25-cv-00239·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF MAINE

ISAIAH QN BUTLER, ) ) Plaintiff ) ) V. ) 1:25-CV-00239-LEW ) PO MARSHALL McCAMISH et al., ) ) Defendants )

ORDER AFFIRMING RECOMMENDED DECISION AND IMPOSING COK WARNING

On June 27, 2025, United States Magistrate Judge John C. Nivison filed with the court, with a copy to the Plaintiff, his Recommended Decision (ECF No. 8) on Plaintiff’s Complaint concerning the circumstances of Plaintiff’s arrest in January 2025, and recommended that the case be dismissed. Plaintiff filed a Motion for Leave to file an Amended Complaint (ECF No. 9), which the court granted (ECF No. 10). Plaintiff filed his Amended Complaint on July 18, 2025 (ECF No. 14). Magistrate Judge Nivison filed his Supplemental Report and Recommended Decision on September 29, 2025 (ECF No. 21) and again recommends that the Court dismiss this matter. On October 6, 2025, the Plaintiff filed his Objection (ECF No. 22). I have reviewed and considered the original Recommended Decision, the Supplemental Recommended Decision, and the Objection, together with the entire record; I have made a de novo determination of all matters adjudicated by the Recommended Decisions; and I concur with the recommendations of the United States Magistrate Judge for the reasons set forth in the Recommended Decisions and determine that no further proceeding is necessary. In addition to the well-established abstention doctrine identified in the Supplemental Report and Recommended Decision, the Magistrate Judge correctly

observed in the original Recommended Decision that Plaintiff’s allegations concerning the non-observation of state statutes, policies, and procedures do not state a claim for relief that falls within this Court’s federal question jurisdiction. Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, has filed six cases since April 30, 2025. See Butler v. Bryant, et al., No. 1:25-cv-213-LEW; Butler v. Simmons, et al., No. 1:25-cv-233-LEW; Butler v. McCamish, et al., No. 1:25-cv-239-LEW; Butler v. Gagnon, et al., No. 1:25-cv-

245-LEW; Butler v. Kennebec County, et al., No. 1:25-cv-274-LEW; Butler v. Goodchild, et al., No. 1:25-cv-346-JAW. Per Cok v. Family Court of Rhode Island, 985 F.2d 32 (1st Cir. 1993), the Court warns Mr. Butler that if he again files pleadings that are determined to be groundless and/or frivolous, the Court will impose filing restrictions. The Recommended Decision (ECF No. 8) and the Supplemental Recommended

Decision (ECF No. 21) of the Magistrate Judge are hereby ADOPTED. The case is DISMISSED. SO ORDERED.

Dated this 21st day of October, 2025.

/s/ Lance E. Walker CHIEF U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF MAINE

ISAIAH QN BUTLER, ) ) Plaintiff ) ) V. ) 1:25-CV-00239-LEW ) PO MARSHALL McCAMISH et al., ) ) Defendants )

ORDER AFFIRMING RECOMMENDED DECISION AND IMPOSING COK WARNING

On June 27, 2025, United States Magistrate Judge John C. Nivison filed with the court, with a copy to the Plaintiff, his Recommended Decision (ECF No. 8) on Plaintiff’s Complaint concerning the circumstances of Plaintiff’s arrest in January 2025, and recommended that the case be dismissed. Plaintiff filed a Motion for Leave to file an Amended Complaint (ECF No. 9), which the court granted (ECF No. 10). Plaintiff filed his Amended Complaint on July 18, 2025 (ECF No. 14). Magistrate Judge Nivison filed his Supplemental Report and Recommended Decision on September 29, 2025 (ECF No. 21) and again recommends that the Court dismiss this matter. On October 6, 2025, the Plaintiff filed his Objection (ECF No. 22). I have reviewed and considered the original Recommended Decision, the Supplemental Recommended Decision, and the Objection, together with the entire record; I have made a de novo determination of all matters adjudicated by the Recommended Decisions; and I concur with the recommendations of the United States Magistrate Judge for the reasons set forth in the Recommended Decisions and determine that no further proceeding is necessary. In addition to the well-established abstention doctrine identified in the Supplemental Report and Recommended Decision, the Magistrate Judge correctly

observed in the original Recommended Decision that Plaintiff’s allegations concerning the non-observation of state statutes, policies, and procedures do not state a claim for relief that falls within this Court’s federal question jurisdiction. Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, has filed six cases since April 30, 2025. See Butler v. Bryant, et al., No. 1:25-cv-213-LEW; Butler v. Simmons, et al., No. 1:25-cv-233-LEW; Butler v. McCamish, et al., No. 1:25-cv-239-LEW; Butler v. Gagnon, et al., No. 1:25-cv-

245-LEW; Butler v. Kennebec County, et al., No. 1:25-cv-274-LEW; Butler v. Goodchild, et al., No. 1:25-cv-346-JAW. Per Cok v. Family Court of Rhode Island, 985 F.2d 32 (1st Cir. 1993), the Court warns Mr. Butler that if he again files pleadings that are determined to be groundless and/or frivolous, the Court will impose filing restrictions. The Recommended Decision (ECF No. 8) and the Supplemental Recommended

Decision (ECF No. 21) of the Magistrate Judge are hereby ADOPTED. The case is DISMISSED. SO ORDERED.

Dated this 21st day of October, 2025.

/s/ Lance E. Walker CHIEF U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE

Isaiah QN Butler v. Po Marshall McCamish et al., (D. Me. 2025).

Pincite

Isaiah QN Butler v. Po Marshall McCamish et al. (Isaiah QN Butler v. Po Marshall McCamish et al.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related