Opinion
Civil Action 4:22-CV-1917
06-07-2023
GRACE M. DERR, et al., Plaintiffs v. JOSEPH HOUSER, SR., et al., Defendants
(ARBUCKLE, M.J.)
REPORT & RECOMMENDATION
(BRANN, C.J.)
I. INTRODUCTION
On December 2, 2022, Plaintiffs (a grandmother, mother, and two children) lodged a complaint against the children's father and several employees of Northumberland County Children and Youth Services. The most recent iteration of the complaint (Plaintiffs first amended complaint) alleges that the children's father falsely accused the adult Plaintiffs of child abuse and several Northumberland County Children and Youth Services employees violated all Plaintiffs' rights during the course the investigation that ensued. The adult Plaintiffs have sought, and been granted, leave to proceed in forma pauperis.
The original and first amended complaints were reviewed, and failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. (Docs. 7, 13, 19, 20). On May 11, 2023, Chief United States District Judge Matthew W. Brann dismissed the amended complaint in its entirety. (Docs. 19, 20). Plaintiffs were given the opportunity to file a second amended complaint on or before May 25, 2023. No second amended complaint has been received. Accordingly, in the absence of any remaining claims, it is RECOMMENDED that:
(1) The Clerk of Court be DIRECTED to CLOSE this case.
II. ANALYSIS
On December 2, 2022, Plaintiffs lodged their original complaint. In the original complaint, Plaintiffs alleged that the children's father hacked into their Facebook pages and provided allegedly false information to the CYS Defendants. Plaintiffs allege the CYS Defendants acted on that information in a manner that violated their rights. After granting Plaintiff Grace Derr leave to proceed in forma pauperis, the undersigned reviewed the original complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915, found it deficient, explained why, and gave Plaintiffs an opportunity to file an amended complaint on or before January 17, 2023. (Doc. 7).
On January 17, 2023, Plaintiffs filed their first amended complaint. (Doc. 11). Along with this complaint, Plaintiff Shelby Derr filed her first application to proceed in forma pauperis, Plaintiff Grace Derr filed a second application to proceed in forma pauperis, and Plaintiff Grace Derr filed a motion for preliminary injunctive relief. (Docs. 8, 9, 10). Plaintiffs Grace and Shelby Derr were granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis. (Doc. 12).
On February 2, 2023, the undersigned issued a Report and Recommendation suggesting that all claims except the adult Plaintiffs' Fourth Amendment claim against two of the CYS employees be dismissed. (Doc. 13). Despite not being served with or waiving service of the first amended complaint, counsel for the CYS Defendants entered an appearance and filed an objection to the Report and Recommendation. (Doc. 16). On May 11, 2023, Chief Judge Brann filed a Memorandum Opinion sustaining the CYS Defendants' objections as to the Fourth Amendment claim. (Doc. 19). Chief Judge Brann issued an order dismissing Plaintiffs' first amended complaint in its entirety without prejudice, and granting Plaintiffs the opportunity to file a second amended complaint on or before May 25, 2023. (Doc. 20).
Every claim in this case has been dismissed. The deadline for submission of a second amended complaint has passed. Plaintiffs have not requested additional time, and have not filed a second amended complaint.
III. RECOMMENDATION
Accordingly, it is RECOMMENDED that:
(1) The Clerk of Court be DIRECTED to CLOSE this case.
NOTICE OF LOCAL RULE 72.3
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that any party may obtain a review of the
Report and Recommendation pursuant to Local Rule 72.3, which provides:
Any party may object to a magistrate judge's proposed findings, recommendations or report addressing a motion or matter described in 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(B) or making a recommendation for the disposition of a prisoner case or a habeas corpus petition within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy thereof. Such party shall file with the clerk of court, and serve on the magistrate judge and all parties, written objections which shall specifically identify the portions of the proposed findings, recommendations or report to which objection is made and the basis for such objections. The briefing requirements set forth in Local Rule 72.2 shall apply. A judge shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made and may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge. The judge, however, need conduct a new hearing only in his or her discretion or where required by law, and may consider the record developed before the magistrate judge, making his or her own determination on the basis of that record. The judge may also receive further evidence, recall witnesses, or recommit the matter to the magistrate judge with instructions.
Failure to file timely objections may constitute a waiver of any appellate rights.