Hayes v. Ibarra et al

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO
MICHAEL O. HAYES,
Plaintiff,
v. 	No. 1:26-cv-00182-WJ-GBW
KIMBERLY IBARRA,
JAN TRUJILLO,
TROY GRAY,
HAROLD MEDINA,
MARIA BAKER and
C. GANDARA, et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL
This case arises from Children, Youth and Families Department’s (”CYFD”) removal of
Plaintiff’s minor son from Plaintiff’s care, another later removal of the son from his treatment
facility and transfer of the son to a juvenile detention center. See Civil Rights Complaint Pursuant
to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 AT 8, 14, Doc. 1, filed January 27, 2026 (“Complaint”).
Chief United States Magistrate Judge Gregory B. Wormuth notified Plaintiff of the
following deficiencies in the Complaint:
(i) 	Plaintiff states he is “bringing this suit on behalf of [his minor son] and family.”
Complaint at 13. Plaintiff cannot bring claims on behalf of his minor son and his
family because Plaintiff is not an attorney authorized to practice in this Court.
(ii) 	Plaintiff alleges his son “was transferred to juvenile detention” and seeks an order
for the “release or transfer of [his son] to proper guardianship or treatment.”
Complaint at 14-15. 	It appears some of Plaintiff’s claims may be barred by the
Younger abstention doctrine which "dictates that federal courts not interfere with
Case 1:26-cv-00182-WJ-GBW Document 6 Filed 03/04/26 Page 1 of 3

2
state court proceedings ... when such relief could adequately be sought before the
state court." “Younger abstention is jurisdictional.”
(iii) 	It appears Plaintiff’s claims against Defendant Troy Gray, a district attorney “for
the criminal proceedings involving” Plaintiff’s son, and Defendant Maria E. Baker,
“Prosecutor,” may be barred by prosecutorial immunity.
(iv) 	It appears that the Court lacks jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s claims for monetary
damages against CYFD and CYFD employees in their official capacities due to
Eleventh Amendment sovereign immunity.
(v) 	It appears that some claims against some Defendants in their supervisory capacity,
for example Albuquerque Chief of Police Harold Medina and Supervising District
Attorney Sam Bregman, should be dismissed because Section 1983 does not
authorize respondeat superior liability for a supervisor based solely on the actions
of his subordinates.
(vi) 	It 	appears 	that 	Plaintiff’s 	claims 	against 	the 	City 	of Albuquerque 	Police
Department, the Criminal Investigations Division and the Bernalillo County
District Attorney’s Office should be dismissed because, generally, governmental
sub-units are not separate suable entities that may be sued under § 1983.
Order to Show Cause, Doc. 5, filed February 4, 2026. Judge Wormuth ordered Plaintiff to show
cause why the Court should not dismiss this case and to file an amended complaint and notified
Plaintiff that failure to timely file an amended complaint may result in dismissal of this case.
Plaintiff, who is proceeding pro se, did not show cause or file an amended complaint by the
February 25, 2026, deadline.
Case 1:26-cv-00182-WJ-GBW Document 6 Filed 03/04/26 Page 2 of 3

3
The Court dismisses this case without prejudice because Plaintiff has not complied with
Judge Wormuth’s Order to show cause and file an amended complaint. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b)
(“If the plaintiff fails to prosecute or to comply with these rules or a court order, a defendant may
move to dismiss the action”); Gustafson v. Luke, 696 Fed.Appx. 352, 354 (10th Cir. 2017)
(“Although the language of Rule 41(b) requires that the defendant file a motion to dismiss, the
Rule has long been interpreted to permit courts to dismiss actions sua sponte for a plaintiff's failure
to prosecute or comply with the rules of civil procedure or court's orders.”) (quoting Olsen v.
Mapes, 333 F.3d 1199, 1204 n.3 (10th Cir. 2003)).
IT IS ORDERED that this case is DISMISSED without prejudice.
/s/______________________________________
WILLIAM P. JOHNSON
SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Case 1:26-cv-00182-WJ-GBW Document 6 Filed 03/04/26 Page 3 of 3