McFadden v. Burke

• Court: District Court, D. Massachusetts
• Decided: February 22, 2023
• Docket: 3:22-cv-30062
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

TEDKIEYA MCFADDEN ) ) Petitioner, ) ) Civil Action No. 22-30062-KAR ) v. ) ) ) CONNIE BURKE, ) ) Respondent. )

ORDER

ROBERTSON, U.S.M.J. Petitioner Tedkieya McFadden (“McFadden”), initiated this action on May 11, 2022, by filing a two-page, handwritten pleading titled “2241 Motion” while she was in custody at the Western Massachusetts Regional Correctional Center (“WCC”) in Chicopee, Massachusetts. (Dkt. No. 1). Since that time, McFadden was transferred and she is now in custody at the Federal Correction Institution in Aliceville, Alabama.1 (Dkt. No. 20). By Memorandum and Order dated May 17, 2022, McFadden was ordered to (1) either file an amended petition or a civil complaint, and (2) file the applicable filing fee or move for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. (Dkt. No. 4). On July 6, 2022, McFadden filed an amended petition. (Dkt. No. 5). The amended petition was served on August 1, 2022 and petitioner was again directed to resolve the filing fee for this action. (Dkt. No. 8). On August 15, 2022, the August 1, 2022 Order was returned to

1 McFadden is serving a 188-month sentence. See United States v. McFadden, C.R. No. 15-376-4, 2021 WL 5639753, at *1 (E.D. Pa. 2021) (denying § 2255 motion).

the court as undeliverable. (Dkt. No. 9). Four days later, on August 19, 2022, the respondent filed a motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction, or in the alternative, summary judgment. (Dkt. No. 11). McFadden failed to file an opposition and the Court twice ordered her to file a written report addressing the status of this case. (Dkt. Nos. 14, 17). The first order (Dkt. No. 14) was returned to the Court as undeliverable. (Dkt. No. 16). However, the second order was not returned as undeliverable.

(Docket). On January 18, 2023, McFadden paid the $5.00 filing fee. (Dkt. No. 19). Now before the Court is McFadden’s letter stating that she filed a notice of change of address and paid the filing fee. (Dkt. No. 20). She now seeks the status of the case. (Id.) McFadden has not filed an opposition to respondent’s motion nor has she sought an extension of time to do so. Because McFadden is pro se, this Court will extend the deadline for filing an opposition. Failure to file an opposition by that date may be grounds alone for dismissal of this case. Gozzo v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., No. CV 16-10499-LTS, 2016 WL 9488968, at *1 (D. Mass. May 4, 2016). Accordingly, it is hereby

ORDERED, on or before March 17, 2023, McFadden shall file a response to the respondent’s motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction, or, in the alternative, motion for summary judgment. Failure to comply with this directive may result in dismissal of this action; and it is further ORDERED, the Clerk shall provide McFadden with copies of respondent’s motion (Dkt. No. 11) and supporting memorandum (Dkt. No 12).

/s/ Katherine A. Robertson KATHERINE A. ROBERTSON United States Magistrate Judge DATED: February 22, 2023