Reed v. USDC of Maryland ( 2024 )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND JULIA TERYAEVA REED, Plaintiff, * v. * Civ. No. JKB-23-3225 USDC OF MARYLAND, et al., * * Defendants. . MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Plaintiff Julia Teryaeva Reed has filed a Complaint against “USDC of Maryland D/B/A: Judson T. Mihok” and “Matthew Maddox.” (ECF No. 1.) Her claims are not clear, but she appears to take issue with a criminal case before Judge George Russell wherein Mihok and then-Assistant U.S. Attorney Maddox were prosecutors. (See generally id.) The Court has reviewed the Complaint and concludes that dismissal is likely appropriate, given that the case appear to be frivolous and barred by prosecutorial immunity. As the Fourth Circuit has explained, “frivolous complaints are subject to dismissal pursuant to the inherent authority of the court, even when the filing fee has been paid.” Chong Su Yi v. Soc. Sec. Admin., 554 F. App’x 247, 248 (4th Cir. 2014). Further, “district courts may only exercise their authority to sua sponte dismiss inadequate complaints if the procedure employed is fair to the parties. Namely, the party whose complaint stands to be dismissed must be afforded notice and an opportunity to amend the complaint or otherwise respond.” Robertson vy. Anderson Mill Elementary Sch., 989 F.3d 282, 291 (4th Cir. 2021). Accordingly, it is ORDERED that: 1. Reed is DIRECTED to SHOW CAUSE why her Complaint should not be dismissed by April 17, 2024. 2. Reed is FOREWARNED that a failure to show cause will result in the dismissal of her Complaint. 3. The Clerk is DIRECTED to mail a copy of this Order to Reed. DATED this 4 day of April, 2024. BY THE COURT: James K. Bredar Chief Judge