United States District Court, D. New Hampshire
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
K. Johnstone, United States Magistrate Judge.
Changgang Li filed a complaint (Doc. No. 1) in this matter
against the Warren, New Hampshire Police Department
(“WPD”), and two defendants located in
Massachusetts, the Belmont Police Department
(“BPD”) and the Cambridge District Court
(“CDC”). This court previously severed the claims
against the BPD and the CDC from the claims against the WPD,
opened a new case containing the claims against the
Massachusetts defendants, and transferred the newly opened
case to the District of Massachusetts. See Jan. 9,
2019 Order (Doc. No. 9). The court now undertakes a further
preliminarily review of the complaint (Doc. No. 1),
construing the factual assertions in Li's motions (Doc.
Nos. 3, 5, 7, 8), and in his objection (Doc. No. 6) to the
November 20, 2018 Report and Recommendation
(“R&R”) as part of the complaint.
See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2); LR 4.3(d)(2).
court may dismiss claims asserted in a complaint filed in
forma pauperis if the court lacks jurisdiction, a defendant
is immune from the relief sought, the complaint fails to
state a claim, or the action is frivolous or malicious.
See Id. In determining whether a pro se complaint
states a claim, the court must construe the complaint
liberally. See Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94
(2007) (per curiam). To survive preliminary review, the
complaint must contain “sufficient factual matter,
accepted as true, to ‘state a claim to
relief.'” See Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S.
662, 678 (2009) (citation omitted). The court treats as true
all well-pleaded factual allegations, and construes
reasonable inferences in plaintiff's favor. See
Ocasio-Hernández v. Fortuño-Burset, 640
F.3d 1, 12 (1st Cir. 2011).
Li's filings are convoluted and lack a clear narrative,
the court understands Li to have asserted the following facts
in this matter. Li came to the United States from China in
June 2017 with his now-estranged wife, Zhang Weiping, and
their two children. Li purchased a home in Warren, New
Hampshire where he lived with his children after arriving in
the United States. It is not clear whether Zhang Weiping ever
lived in Warren with Li and the children. Zhang Weiping now
lives in Massachusetts with the children, and Li lives in
Warren, and has visitation with the children pursuant to
proceedings in the CDC.
asserts that WPD officers entered his home and arrested him,
and then jailed him subsequent to arrest. It appears that
Li's arrest may have been, at least in part, due to a BPD
warrant. After the WPD arrested Li, the BPD picked him up and
brought him to Massachusetts, apparently for a criminal
domestic violence case involving Zhang Weipeng. Li does not
state whether the WPD independently charged him with any
offense. Li further asserts that someone at the WPD seized
his wallet at the time of his arrest, and would not give him
access to it while he was jailed, which prevented Li from
contacting anyone to tell them he had been arrested and
January 7, 2019 Order (Doc. No. 9), the court found that Li
had attempted to assert the following two claims against the
1. The WPD violated Li's Fourth Amendment rights by:
a. illegally arresting him in his home, and
b. illegally searching and seizing his wallet.
2. The WPD, by illegally arresting and incarcerating Li,
interfered with Li's First and Fourteenth Amendment
rights to familial association and to parent his children.
objection (Doc. No. 6) to the November 2018 R&R, Li
stated facts which, liberally construed, assert a third ...