Lefebvre v. Federal Bureau of Prisons, Director

• Court: District Court, D. New Hampshire
• Decided: July 11, 2025
• Docket: 1:25-cv-00258
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

UDNIISTTERDI SCTTA OTFE NS EDWIS THRAIMCTP SCHOIURRE T

ROBERT LEFEBVRE

V. Case No. 25-cv-258-LM-TSM

DIRECTOR, HAMPSHIRE HOUSE RESIDENTIAL REENTRY CENTER1

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Petitioner, Robert Lefebvre, filed a Petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Mr. Lefebvre is presently in a prerelease custody placement at Hampshire House, a Residential Reentry Center in Manchester, New Hampshire. Petitioner asserts that the Federal Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”) is holding him past his release date, which he asserts should have been June 12, 2025. The Petition (Doc. No. 1) is before this court for preliminary review. See 28 U.S.C. § 2243; Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases (“§ 2254 Rules”); § 2254 Rule 1(b) (§ 2254 Rules may apply to § 2241 petitions); LR 4.3(d)(4)(A). The Service Order issued on this date requires the Respondent to respond to the Petition, to the extent Petitioner seeks immediate release from custody. Mr. Lefebvre also seeks damages as relief on his claims in his § 2241 Petition. Damages, however, are “unavailable in habeas.” Muhammad v. Close, 540 U.S. 749, 751 (2004). Accordingly, the claim for damages asserted in the Petition should be dismissed, without prejudice to Petitioner’s ability to proceed on his claims for release in this case, and to file a separate federal civil rights action for damages, if he chooses to seek such relief.

1 Mr. Lefebvre also identified the Director of the Federal Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”) and the Regional Manager of the BOP Residential Reentry Management northeast region field office as respondents to this action. The proper respondent is Petitioner’s immediate custodian. See Rule 2(a), Rules Governing § 2254 Petitions. Accordingly, the court construes the Petition (Doc. No. 1) to name the Director of Petitioner’s current placement as the respondent here. CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, the district judge should dismiss the claim for damages asserted in the Petition, without prejudice to Petitioner’s ability to proceed on his claims for release in this case and to file a separate federal civil rights action if he intends to seek damages. Any objections to this Report and Recommendation must be filed within fourteen days of receipt of this notice. The objection period may be extended upon motion. Failure to file any objection within the specified time waives the right to appeal the district court’s Order. See Santos-Santos v. Torres-Centeno, 842 F.3d 163, 168 (1st Cir. 2016). Only those issues raised in the written objections “‘are subject to review in the district court,’” and any issues ““not preserved by such objection are precluded on appeal.’” Id. (citations omitted). (NHwLS Talesha L. Saint-Marc United States Magistrate Judge July 11, 2025 ce: Robert Lefebvre, pro se