As-Sidiq v. Melton
- Katherine Menendez
- 0:25-cv-01978
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 2
In As-Sidiq v. Melton, Judge Blackwell dismissed the civil-rights complaint with prejudice because prosecutors had absolute immunity and denied the fee waiver as moot.
La’Quedrick As-Sidiq’s complaint was dismissed with prejudice, and his application to proceed without prepaying fees or costs was denied as moot. Brian Melton and Caitlin Hurlock were the named defendants covered by the court’s stated absolute-immunity ground.
What happened
In As-Sidiq v. Melton, La’Quedrick As-Sidiq, who represented himself, sued Brian Melton and Caitlin Hurlock for alleged civil-rights violations. The magistrate judge recommended dismissal, and no objections were filed.
The district court reviewed the recommendation for clear error and found none. It accepted the recommendation and dismissed the complaint with prejudice because the only named defendants were prosecutors entitled to absolute immunity from damages under the civil-rights statute for actions taken in their prosecutorial roles. The court also denied As-Sidiq’s application to proceed without prepaying fees or costs as moot.
Judge Jerry W. Blackwell entered the order. The order said the dismissal did not prevent As-Sidiq from bringing claims against other individuals in a separate action if other allegations, such as denial of medical care, supported claims against properly named defendants.
The detailed version
- As-Sidiq v. Melton · No. 0:25-cv-01978
- Katherine Menendez
- June 12, 2025
Background
La’Quedrick As-Sidiq filed a self-represented complaint alleging civil-rights violations against Brian Melton and Caitlin Hurlock. United States Magistrate Judge Shannon G. Elkins issued a Report and Recommendation on May 14, 2025, recommending action on the complaint. No party filed timely objections.
Court’s analysis
Because no timely objections were filed, the district court reviewed the Report and Recommendation for clear error under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b). The court found no clear error. The order states that the dismissal rested solely on the ground that the only named defendants were prosecutors entitled to absolute immunity from damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for actions taken in their prosecutorial roles.
The order also states that the dismissal did not prevent As-Sidiq from asserting claims against other individuals in a separate action, to the extent allegations such as denial of medical care supported a claim against properly named defendants.
Disposition
The court accepted the May 14, 2025 Report and Recommendation, dismissed As-Sidiq’s complaint with prejudice, and denied his application to proceed in district court without prepaying fees or costs as moot. Judge Jerry W. Blackwell directed that judgment be entered.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.