Haar v. Marshall et al

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
JEREMY MARTIN HAAR,
Plaintiff,
v.
WILLIAM K. MARSHALL, III, et al.,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Civil Action No. 25-13426-MJJ
ORDER
December 31, 2025
JOUN, D.J.
Plaintiff Jeremy Martin Haar (“Mr. Haar”), who is representing himself, brings this
action under Bivens v. Six Unknown Fed. Narcotics Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), concerning
medical treatment at FMC Devens, where he is confined. Mr. Haar filed with his complaint a
motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction [Doc. No. 2], a
memorandum in support thereof [Doc. No. 3], and a motion for leave to proceed in forma
pauperis, [Doc. No. 4].
Upon review of Mr. Haar’s filings, the Court hereby orders,
1. 	The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis [Doc. No. 4] is GRANTED.
The $55 administrative fee for commencing a non-habeas civil action is waived. The $350
statutory filing fee, see 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a), shall be collected over time. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(b)(1), the Court assesses an initial partial filing fee of $47.23. The remainder of the fee
shall be collected pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2). The Clerk shall issue a notice for payment
of prisoner filing fee and provide it to the treasurer of the institution having custody of Mr. Haar.
Case 1:25-cv-13426-MJJ Document 7 Filed 12/31/25 Page 1 of 3

2
2. 	Defendants Willliam K. Marshall, III and Collette Peters shall be DISMISSED as
parties to this action because Mr. Haar has failed to state a claim upon which relief may be
granted against these defendants.1 Mr. Haar identifies these parties as the current and former
directors of the Federal Bureau of Prisons, respectively. Nothing in the complaint suggests that
these defendants played any direct role in the alleged deprivation of adequate medical care, and
“Bivens is not designed to hold officers responsible for the acts of their subordinates.” Ziglar v.
Abbasi, 582 U.S. 120, 141 (2017); see also id. 140 (“[A] Bivens claim is brought against the
individual official for his or her own acts, not the acts of others.”).
3. 	The motion for a temporary restraining order [Doc. No. 2] is DENIED insofar as
Mr. Haar seeks a temporary restraining order. Due to the nature of the relief Mr. Haar requests,
the Court will not grant any relief without first giving the defendants an opportunity to respond
to the motion. The motion shall remain pending on the docket as one for a preliminary
injunction.
4. 	The Clerk shall issue summonses for all remaining defendants except the Jane and
John Doe defendants. Although the use of fictitious names to identify defendants is not favored,
situations may arise where the identity of an alleged defendant cannot be known prior to the
filing of a complaint. See Martínez-Rivera v. Ramos, 498 F.3d 3, 8 (1st Cir. 2007). If, through
discovery, the Mr. Haar discovers the true names of the Jane and John defendants, he “should act
promptly to amend the complaint to substitute the correct parties and to dismiss any baseless
claims.” Id. at 8 n.5. Mr. Haar may then also file a motion for issuance of summonses for these
defendants.
1The Court must conduct a preliminary review of a complaint filed by a prisoner against a government
entity or employee and dismiss any claim that is malicious or frivolous, fails to state a claim upon which
relief may be granted, or seeks monetary damages from a party who is immune from such relief. See 28
U.S.C. § 1915A.
Case 1:25-cv-13426-MJJ Document 7 Filed 12/31/25 Page 2 of 3

3
5. 	Mr. Haar must ensure that each defendant is served with the summons, complaint,
the motion for a preliminary injunctive relief and supporting memorandum, and this order in
accordance with Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Procedure. Because the defendants are federal
employees, Mr. Haar must also serve a copy of the summons for each defendant, the complaint,
the motion for a preliminary injunctive relief and supporting memorandum, and this order on the
United States Attorney General and the United States Attorney for the District of Massachusetts.
Service must be completed within 90 days of the date the summonses issue. Failure to complete
service within 90 days may result in dismissal of the action without prior notice from the Court.
See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m); L.R. 4.1 (D. Mass.).
6. 	Because Mr. Haar is proceeding in forma pauperis, he may elect to have the
United States Marshals Service (“USMS”) complete service with all costs of service to be
advanced by the United States. If so requested by Mr. Haar, the USMS shall serve the
defendants, the United States Attorney General, and the United States Attorney for the District of
Massachusetts with all expenses to be advanced by the United States. Mr. Haar is responsible for
providing the USMS with a copy of this order (for the agency’s records) and all papers to be
served (summons, complaint, motion for a preliminary injunctive relief and supporting
memorandum, and this order). Mr. Haar is also response for completing a USM-285 form for
each defendant, the United States Attorney General, and the United States Attorney for the
District of Massachusetts. The Clerk shall provide Mr. Haar with forms and instructions for
service by the USMS.
SO ORDERED.
/s/ Myong J. Joun
Myong J. Joun
United States District Judge
Case 1:25-cv-13426-MJJ Document 7 Filed 12/31/25 Page 3 of 3