Th e H ono rab le Geo rge B. Da nie ls, ofth e U nit ed Sta tes * Dis tri ct Cou rt forth e S out her n D ist ric t o f N ew Yor k, sit tin g b y d esi gna tio n. 09-0708-cv Burg v. Gosselin 1 UNI TEDSTATE S COURT OF APPEALS 2 3 FOR THE S ECOND CIRCUI T 4 5 Aug ustTe rm, 20 09 6 7 (Ar gue d: Nov emb er 10, 20 09 D eci ded : J anu ary7, 20 10) 8 9 Doc ketNo . 0 9-0 708 -cv 10 11 12 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x 13 JUD ITHA. BU RG, 14 15 Pla int iff -Ap pel lan t, 16 17 18 - v .- 19 COL LEE N G OSS ELI N, 20 21 Def end ant -Ap pel lee . 22 23 24 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x 25 Bef ore : JAC OBS , C hie f Judg e, LEVAL, Ci rcu it 26 27 Jud ge, an d DANI ELS , D ist ric t Judg e. * 28 29 App eal fr om a f ina l j udgmen t o f t he Uni tedSt ate s 30 Dis tri ct Cou rt forth e D ist ric t o f C onn ect icu t ( Hal l, J.) , 31 dis mis sin g o n s umm aryju dgmenta Sec tio n 1 983 co mpl ain t 32 aga ins t aca nin e c ont rol of fic er. W e a ffi rm on the gr oun d 33 tha t t he iss uan ce of a p re- arr aig nme nt, no n-f elo ny summon s2 1 requir inga lat er cou rt app ear anc e, wit hou t f urt her 2 res tra int , d oes no t c ons tit ute a Fou rthAmendmen t s eiz ure . 3 JOHN R . W ILL IAM S, Joh n R . 4 Wil liams andAs soc iat es, LL C, 5 NewHa ven , C T, for 6 App ell ant . 7 8 DAV ID C. YAL E, Nob le, Sp ect or & 9 O’C onn or, Ha rtf ord , C T, for App ell ee. 10 11 12 DENNIS JACOB S, Chi ef Jud ge: 13 14 Jud ithA. Bu rg, a dogow ner , a ppe als fr om a f ina l 15 jud gme nt of the Un ite d S tat es Dis tri ct Cou rt forth e 16 Dis tri ct of Con nec tic ut (Ha ll, J. ), dis mis sin g o n s umm ary 17 jud gme nt herSe cti on 198 3 c omp lai nt aga ins t aca nin e c ont rol 18 off ice r. Th e d ist ric t c our t h eldth at iss uan ce of a p re19 arr aig nme nt, no n-f elo ny summon s r equ iri ng a l ate r c our t 20 app ear anc e, wit hou t f urt herre str ain t, doe s n ot con sti tut e a 21 Fou rthAmendmen t s eiz ure . We agr ee, an d a ffi rm. 22 23 BACKGR OUND 24 Def end antCo lle en Gos sel in, a can ine co ntr ol off ice r i n 25 the Co nne cti cutto wn of Eas t H amp ton , r ece ive d aco mpl ain t 26 abo ut Bur g’s do g. Si x d ays la ter , o n O cto ber26 , 2 005 , 27 Gos sel in iss ueda summon s t o B urgathe r h ome , r equ iri ng 28 Bur g t o a ppe ar in cou rt at a l ate r d ate . It is notcl earTh e d og’ s a lle gedco ndu ct is notse t f ort h i n t he 1 rec ordorth e b rie fin g, andwa s n ot cla rif iedator al arg ume nt. T he summon s i ndi cat es a v iol ati on of Sec tio n 2 2- 363 ofth e C onn ect icu t G ene ral St atu tes : No per sonsh all ow n o r h arb or a d og or dog s whic h i s o r are a nui san ce by rea sonofvi cio us dis pos iti on or exc ess ive ba rki ng or oth er dis tur ban ce, or , b y s uch bar kin g o r o the r d ist urb anc e, is or are a sou rce of ann oya nce toan y s ickpe rso n r esi din g i n t he immedi ate vic ini ty. V iol ati on of anypr ovi sio n o f t his se cti on sha ll be an inf rac tio n f or the fi rstof fen se andsu ch per sonsh all be fi nedno t m ore th an one hu ndr ed dol lar s or imp ris one d n ot mor e t hanth irt y d ays orbo th for eac h s ubs equ entof fen se andth e c our t o r j udg e m ay mak e suc h o rde r c onc ern ingth e r est rai nt or dis pos al of suc h dogordo gs as maybe de eme d n ece ssa ry. Go sse linexpla ins th at the Co nne cti cutSu per iorCo urt 2 iss ueda ben ch war ran t b ase d o n B urg ’s fai lur e t o a ppe ar and tha t E astHampt on Pol ice De par tme nt off ice rs arr est ed Bur g pur sua nt to tha t w arr ant . 3 1 whe the r t he dogwa s t res pas sin g o r b ark ing ; b ut Bur g’s 2 all ege d o ffe nse , i f afi rstof fen se, wa s a n i nfr act ion . 1 3 Bur g w as notha ndc uff ed, re mov ed fro m h er home, res tri cte d 4 fro m l eav inghe r p rop ert y, or res tri cte d f romtr ave l. 5 Someti me aft er Nov emb er 8, 200 5, Bur g w as arr est ed for 6 fai lur e t o a ppe ar, ha ndc uff ed, an d t ake n i ntoph ysi cal 7 cus tod y. G oss eli n w as notpr ese nt at the ti me of thi s 2 8 arr est . 9 Bur g a sse rts th at the un der lyi ng cha rge ag ain st her 10 eve ntu all y w as dis mis sed . On Aug ust21 , 2 007 , B urgsu edTh e d ist ric t c our t c onf irmed wit h B urg ’s cou nse l t hat 3 Bur g d id notas ser t ast ate la w c lai m f or fal se arr est , a sta te lawcl aimfo r m ali cio us pro sec uti on, ora fed era l l aw cla im forma lic iou s p ros ecu tio n. Ac cor din gly , t he dis tri ct cou rt cha rac ter ize d B urg ’s sol e c lai m a s a n “ unr eas ona ble sei zur e.” A t o ral ar gument , B urg ’s cou nse l r eco nfi rme d t hat Bur g’s so le cla im is foranun rea son abl e s eiz ure un derth e Fou rthAmendmen t p rem ise d o n t he summon s’s re qui rementth at Bur g l ate r a ppe ar in cou rt at a s pec ifi ed dat e a nd time. Bur g t hus do es notco nte nd tha t s he was de tai nedorse ize d whi le Gos sel in wro te outth e s umm ons onOc tob er 26, 20 05. See Va squ ez v. Pampen a, No. 08 -CV -41 84( JG) , 2 009 WL13 735 91, at *2 (E. D.N .Y. Ma y 1 8, 200 9) (de termin ingth at a p lai nti ff ple ads a sei zur e whenhe al leg es tha t apo lic e o ffi cer“h eld on to” hi s i den tif ica tio n a nd ord ere d h im to “st ay put ” whi le the po lic e o ffi cerwr ote ou t asummo ns) . 4 1 Gos sel in in herin div idu al cap aci ty pur sua nt to 42 U.S .C. § 2 198 3, on the gr oun d t hatGo sse lin ’s iss uan ce of the summo ns 3 on Oct obe r 2 6, 200 5 c ons tit ute d a n u nre aso nab le sei zur e i n 4 vio lat ionofth e F our th Ame ndment . Gos sel in mov ed for 5 summar y j udgmen t. Ina tel eph one co nfe ren ce on Feb rua ry 12, 6 200 9, the di str ictco urtor all y g ran tedsumma ry jud gme nt on 7 the gr oun d t hat , a s ama tte r o f l aw, a pre -ar rai gnment , n on8 fel onysummo ns doe s n ot con sti tut e aFo urt h Amen dme nt 9 sei zur e. O n F ebr uar y 1 3, 200 9, the di str ictco urtgr ant ed 3 10 fin al jud gme nt forGo sse lin . Bur g t ime ly app eal ed. 11 12 DIS CUS SION 13 “Wh eth er a mere pre - arr aig nme nt summon s c ons tit ute s a5 1 Fou rthAmendmen t ‘ sei zur e’ is . . . a d iff icu lt iss ue and 2 one th at has no t y et bee n r eso lve d i n t his Ci rcu it. ” Dorman 3 v. Cas tro , 3 47 F.3 d 4 09, 41 1 ( 2d Cir . 2 003 ) ( emp has is in 4 ori gin al) (p er cur iam ). 5 6 I 7 “We re vie w adi str ictco urt ’s dec isi on to gra nt summar y 8 jud gme nt de nov o, res olv ingal l ambi gui tie s a nd dra win g a ll 9 permis sib le fac tua l i nfe ren ces infa vorofth e p art y a gai nst 10 who m s umm aryju dgmentis so ugh t.” W rig ht v. Goo rd, 55 4 F .3d 11 255 , 2 66 (2dCi r. 200 9) (in ter nal qu ota tio n m ark s, cit ati on, 12 andbr ack ets om itt ed) ; s ee als o F ed. R. Ci v. P. 56( c) . 13 A S ect ion19 83 cla im requir es a s how ingth at the 14 pla int iffwa s d epr ive d o f “ rig hts , p riv ile ges , o r i mmu nit ies 15 sec ure d b y t he Con sti tut ionan d l aws .” 42 U. S.C . §19 83. 16 Sec tio n 1 983 cl aim s o f d epr iva tio ns of lib ert y r ela tedto 17 cri min al pro sec uti ons impli cat e t he Fou rthAmendmen t r igh t 18 to be fre e o f u nre aso nab le sei zur e o f t he per son . See 19 Alb rig ht v. Oli ver , 5 10 U.S . 2 66, 27 1, 274 (1 994 ); Sin gerv. 20 Ful tonCo unt y S her iff , 6 3 F .3d11 0, 115 (2 d C ir. 19 95) 21 (“[ T]h e F our th Ame ndmentis th e p rop er sou rce of 22 con sti tut ion al pro tec tio n f or cla ims , s uchas ma lic iou s6 1 pro sec uti on, th at imp lic ate a per son ’s lib ert y i nte res t i n 2 res pec t o f c rim ina l p ros ecu tio ns (an d, in par tic ula r, one ’s 3 pre tri al lib ert y). ”). A cco rdi ngl y, a p lai nti ff ass ert ing 4 suc h acl aimmu st “sh ow some d epr iva tio n o f l ibe rty 5 con sis ten t w ithth e c onc eptof‘s eiz ure .’” S ing er, 63 F. 3d 6 at 116 . 7 8 II 9 In a o ne- Jus tic e c onc urr enc e i n A lbr igh t, Jus tic e 10 Gin sbu rg opi nedth at res tri cti ve con dit ion s o f p ret ria l 11 rel eas e o n afe lon y c har ge con sti tut e aFo urt h Amen dme nt 12 sei zur e: 13 A p ers on fac ingse rio us cri min al cha rge s i s h ard ly 14 fre ed fro m t he sta te’ s c ont rol up on his re lea se 15 fro m apo lic e o ffi cer ’s phy sic al gri p. He is 16 requir ed to app earinco urtatth e s tat e’s 17 comman d. He is of tensu bje ct, as inth is cas e, to 18 the co ndi tio n t hathe se ek formal pe rmi ssi on fro m 19 the co urt(a t s ign ifi can t e xpe nse ) b efo re 20 exe rci sin g whatwo uldot her wis e b e h is 21 unques tio nedri ghttotr ave l o uts ide th e 22 jur isd ict ion . Pen din g p ros ecu tio n, his emplo yme nt 23 pro spe cts ma y b e d imi nis hedse ver ely , h e m ay 24 suf ferre put ati ona l h arm , a nd he wil l e xpe rie nce 25 the fi nan cia l a nd emo tio nal st rai n o f p rep ari ng a 26 def ens e. 27 28 A d efe nda nt inc arc era tedun til tr ial nodo ubt 29 suf fer s g rea terbu rde ns. T hatdi ffe ren ce, 30 how eve r, sho uldno t l eadtoth e c onc lus ionth at a 31 def end antre lea sedpr etr ial is no t s til l “ sei zed ” 32 in the co nst itu tio nal ly rel eva nt sen se. S uchaAtor al arg ume nt, Bu rg’ s c oun sel re lie d h eav ilyon 4 Rohmanv. Ne w Y orkCi ty Tra nsi t Auth ori ty, 21 5 F .3d20 8 ( 2d Cir . 2 000 ), in whi ch the co ndi tio ns of pos t-a rra ignmen t rel eas e r equ ire d t he pla int ifftore mai n i n N ew Yor k a nd to “re tur n t o c our t o n a t l eas t f ive oc cas ion s b efo re the cha rge s a gai nsthi m w ere ul tim ate ly dro ppe d.” R ohm an, 21 5 F.3 d a t 2 16. S uchre str ict ion s w ere sa id to “su ffi cie ntl y dem ons tra te[ ] t he requis ite po st- arr aig nme nt res tra intof 7 1 def end antis sc arc elyatli ber ty; he re mai ns 2 app reh end ed, ar res tedinhi s m ove men ts, in dee d 3 “se ize d” fortr ial , s o l ongas he is bo undto 4 app earinco urtan d a nsw er the st ate ’s cha rge s. 5 He is equ all y b oun d t o a ppe ar, an d i s h enc e 6 “se ize d” fortr ial , whenth e s tat e e mpl oys th e 7 les s s tro ng- armme ans ofa summon s i n l ieuof 8 arr esttose cur e h is pre sen ce in cou rt. 9 10 Alb rig ht, 51 0 U .S. at27 8-7 9 ( Gin sbu rg, J. , c onc urr ing ). 11 In Mur phyv. Ly nn, 11 8 F .3d93 8 ( 2d Cir . 1 997 ), a 12 def end antac cus ed of off ens es tha t i ncl ude d t wo fel oni es was 13 rel eas ed pos t-a rra ignmen t, butwa s o rde red“n ot [to ] l eav e 14 the St ate ofNe w Y orkpe ndi ng res olu tio n o f t he cha rge s 15 aga ins t h im, ” t her ebyre str ict inghi s “ con sti tut ion al rig ht 16 to tra vel ou tsi de of the st ate ,” andwa s “ obl iga tedto 17 app earinco urtinco nne cti on wit h t hos e c har ges wh ene ver 18 his at ten dan ce was re qui red ” ( cul min ati ng in “so me eig ht 19 [ap pea ran ces ] duri ng the ye ar in whi ch his cr imi nal 20 pro cee din g w as pen din g”) . Mur phy , 1 18 F.3 d a t 9 46. W e 21 rul ed tha t t hes e “ res tri cti ons impos ed on Mur phyco nst itu ted 22 a s eiz ure wi thi n t he mea nin g o f t he Fou rthAmendmen t.” I d. 4lib ert y.” I d. Ho wev er, th is obs erv ati on was ar gua blydi cta

bec aus e t he Cou rt ult ima tel y d ete rmi nedth at the de fen dan t was en tit ledtosumma ry jud gme nt on qua lif iedimmun ity gro und s. Id . Co mpa re Bis sin gerv. Ci ty of NewYo rk, No s. 06 Civ . 5 232 5(W HP) , 0 6 C iv. 23 26( WHP ), 200 7 W L 2 826 756 , a t * 7-8 (S. D.N .Y. Se pt. 24 , 2 007 ) ( “[A ] p re- arr aig nme nt summon s a nd cou rt app ear anc e d o n ot qua lif y a s ase izu re forpu rpo ses of a m ali cio us pro sec uti on cla im. ”), Na dea u v . Anth ony , N o. 3:0 3C0 083 4(AWT) , 2 007 WL20 124 6, at *5 (D. Co nn. Ja n. 24, 200 7) (de termin ingth at a s umm ons se nt by mai l w as nota dep riv ati on of lib ert y b eca use th e p lai nti ff “wa s n eve r tak en int o c ust odyorde tai nedpr iortoth e a rra ignmen t”) , andZa k v . R obe rts on, 24 9 F . S upp . 2 d 2 03, 20 7 ( D. Con n. 200 3) (“A lth oug h t he Sec ondCi rcu it has no t d ire ctl y add res sedwh eth er or notth e i ssu anc e o f asummo ns and compla int , c oup ledwi th the re qui rementth at an ind ivi dua l app earinco urt , c ons tit ute s ase izu re, th e w eig ht of aut hor ityho lds th at it is not .”) , w ithDo rma n v . C ast ro, 214 F. Su pp. 2d29 9, 308 (E .D. N.Y . 2 002 ) ( “[T ]he me re iss uan ce of an app ear anc e t ick et, wi tho ut anyre str ain t o n tra vel , i s asu ffi cie nt res tra intofli ber ty to con sti tut e a ‘se izu re’ un derth e F our th Ame ndment .”) , a ff’ d o n o the r gro und s, 347 F. 3d 409 , 4 11 (2dCi r. 200 3) (pe r c uri am) , K irk v. Met ro. Tr ans p. Aut h., No . 9 9 C IV 378 7(RWS) , 2 001 WL 258 605 , a t * 15 (S. D.N .Y. Ma r. 14, 20 01) (c onc lud ingth at alt hou gh the pl ain tif f’s po st- arr aig nme nt “ab ili ty to tra vel outofth e j uri sdi cti on was no t r est ric tedwh en he was rel eas ed on his ow n r eco gni zan ce, th e f actth at he was requir ed to app earinco urtonatle astth ree oc cas ion s o r fac e t he iss uan ce of a b enc h w arr antre nde redhi m eff ect ive ly sei zed ”), an d K irt on v. Has sel , N o. 96 CV 8 1 2 In the wa ke of Mur phy , t he dis tri ct cou rts inth is 3 Cir cui t h ave di vid ed on whe the r asummo ns requir inga lat er 4 cou rt app ear anc e-- wit hou t f urt herre str ain t-- amo unt s t o a 5 Fou rthAmendmen t s eiz ure . 5137 1(S J), 19 98 WL 146 701 , a t * 6 ( E.D .N. Y. Mar . 2 5, 199 8)

(“I t h as bee n h eldth at requir inga Pla int ifftoma ke [po starr aig nme nt] co urtap pea ran ces is a ‘se izu re’ wi thi n t he mea nin g o f t he Fou rthAmendmen t.” ). 9 1 We hol d t hatth e i ssu anc e o f apr e-a rra ignmen t, non 2 fel onysummo ns requir inga lat er cou rt app ear anc e, wit hou t 3 fur the r r est ric tio ns, do es notco nst itu te a F our th Ame ndment 4 sei zur e. Th is summon s d oes nomo re tha n r equ ire Bu rg to 5 app earinco urtona sin gle oc cas ion , a nd ope rat es to 6 eff ect uat e due pro ces s. Th ere is nore str ict ionontr ave l, 7 whi ch mat ter ed in Mur phy . Mor eov er, inMu rph y, the re wer e 8 eig ht cou rt app ear anc es, no t t he sin gle ap pea ran ce requir ed 9 by the summo ns iss uedbyGo sse lin . The numbe r o f 10 app ear anc es maybe ar upo n whet herth ere wa s ase izu re- - 11 tho ughitis ha rd to see ho w mult ipl e a ppe ara nce s r equ ire d 12 by a c our t, or forth e c onv eni enc e o f t he per sonan swe rin g 13 the summo ns, ca n b e a ttr ibu tedtoth e c onductofth e o ffi cer 14 whois sue s i t. Cf . W ill iam s v . S mit h, 781 F. 2d 319 , 3 23- 24 15 (2dCi r. 198 6) (re qui rin g t he per son al inv olv eme nt of the 16 def end antina Sec tio n 1 983 ac tio n a nd det erm ini ng tha t 17 “[t ]he fi lin g o f afa lse [m isb eha vio r] rep ortdo es not , o f 18 its elf , i mpl ica te the [p ris on] gu ardwh o f ile d i t i n 19 con sti tut ion al vio lat ion s whic h o ccu r a t asu bse que nt10 1 dis cip lin aryhe ari ng” ). Fi nal ly, Bu rg’ s a lle gedof fen se was 2 an inf rac tio n, andth e s umm ons th us doe s n ot imp ose th e 3 bur den s, ide nti fie d b y Just ice Gi nsb urg , t hatar e i mpo sed 4 whe n “ [a] pe rso n f ac[ es] se rio us cri min al cha rge s.” 5 Alb rig ht, 51 0 U .S. at27 8 ( Gin sbu rg, J. , c onc urr ing ). 6 7 III 8 Oth er Cir cui ts tha t h ave co nsi der ed thi s i ssu e h ave 9 uni formlyde termin ed tha t s ucha summon s ( at lea st one th at 10 requir es no mor e t hana sin gle co urtap pea ran ce) do es not 11 con sti tut e aFo urt h Amen dme nt sei zur e. 12 The Fi rstCi rcu it hel d t hat“[ a]b sen t a ny evi den ce tha t 13 [th e p lai nti ff] wa s a rre ste d, det ain ed, re str ict ed in his 14 tra vel , o r o the rwi se sub jec t t o ade pri vat ionofhi s l ibe rty 15 bef ore th e c har ges ag ain st himwe re dis mis sed , t he fac t t hat 16 he was gi vena dat e t o a ppe ar in cou rt is ins uff ici entto 17 est abl isha sei zur e w ith in the me ani ng of the Fo urt h 18 Ame ndment .” Br itt on v. Mal one y, 196 F. 3d 24, 30 (1 st Cir . 19 199 9). T he cou rt exp lai ned : 20 [Th e p lai nti ff] me rel y r ece ive d asummo ns in the 21 mai l. He wa s n eve r a rre ste d o n t he cha rge s a t 22 iss ue. N oth inginth e r eco rd ind ica tes th at he 23 hadtopo st a b ondortoli mithi s t rav el bef ore 24 the ul tim ate he ari ng in whi ch tho se cha rge s w ere 25 dis mis sedfo r w antofpr ose cut ion . Alt hou gh [th e11 1 pla int iff ] c ont end [ed ] t hatth e s umm ons al one 2 con sti tut ed a s eiz ure be cau se it thr eat ene d h im 3 wit h a rre st if he fai ledtoap pea r . . . [ i]nou r 4 vie w, the Su pre me Cou rt’ s F our th Ame ndment 5 jur isp rud enc e b eli es [th e p lai nti ff’ s] cla im tha t 6 he was se ize d. Th e u se of for ce is cer tai nlyno t 7 requir ed to eff ecta sei zur e. A mer e “ sho w o f 8 aut hor ity ” c an suf fic e. Te rryv. Oh io, 39 2 U .S. 9 1, 19 n.1 6, 88 S. Ct. 18 68, 20 L. Ed. 2d 889 10 (19 68) . ButTe rryca nno t b e r eadtome an tha t 11 the is sua nce ofa summon s ( anymo re tha n a 12 tes tim oni al sub poe na or a c all toju ry dut y) 13 wou ld con sti tut e ase izu re simplybe cau se it 14 thr eat ens a cit ize n w ithth e pos sib ili ty of 15 con fin eme nt if he fai ls to app earinco urt . 16 17 Id. at29 -30 . 18 19 The Th irdCi rcu it, inDi Bel la v. Bor oug h o f 20 Bea chw ood , 4 07 F.3 d 5 99, 60 2-0 3 ( 3d Cir . 2 005 ), arr ive d a t 21 the same con clu sio n. Insodo ing , D iBe lladi sti ngu ish ed 22 an ear lie r c ase , G all o v . C ityofPh ila del phi a, 161 F. 3d 23 217 , 2 24 (3dCi r. 199 8), inwh ichth e p lai nti ff was 24 arr est ed, po ste d b ond , a nd the n w as pro hib ite d f rom 25 tra vel ingou tsi de Pen nsy lva niaan d N ew Jer sey , r equ ire d t o 26 con tac t P ret ria l S erv ice s o n awe ekl y b asi s, andre qui red 27 to att endal l c our t h ear ing s. Di Bel la exp lai nedth at a 28 summon s a nd “at ten dan ce at tri al didno t qual ifyas a 29 Fou rthAmendmen t s eiz ure ”: 30 If Gal lo was a clo se que sti on; he re the re 31 cou ld be no sei zur e s ign ifi can t e nou gh to 32 con sti tut e aFo urt h Amen dme nt vio lat ioninsu ppo rt 33 of a S ect ion19 83 mal ici ous pr ose cut ionac tio n.Ina percu riam, non -pr ece den tia l d eci sio n, the Fi fth 6 Cir cui t s aidth at a “ cri min al summon s . . . d id not suf fic ien tlyre str ain[t he pla int iff ’s] li ber ty to ren der herse ize d w ith in the me ani ng of the Fo urt h Amen dme nt. ” Mat her ne v. Lar pen ter , 2 16 F.3 d 1 079 (T abl e), 20 00 WL 729 066 , a t * 2 ( 5thCi r. May8, 20 00) . Mat her ne dis tin gui she d a n e arl ierca se in whi ch the pl ain tif f w as dee medse ize d whenhe re cei veda summon s, “wa s fin ger pri nte d, pho tog rap hed , f orc ed to sig n ape rso nal rec ogn iza nce bo nd, re qui redtore por t r egu lar ly to pre tri al ser vic es, re qui redtopr ovi de fed era l o ffi cer s w ith fin anc ial an d i den tif yin g i nfo rma tio n a nd requir ed to obt ain permis sio n b efo re lea vin g t he sta te. ” Id. (d esc rib ingEv ans v. Bal l, 168 F. 3d 856 , 8 60- 61 (5t h C ir. 19 99) ). 12 1 Gal lo was ar res tedan d s ubj ect ed to sig nif ica nt 2 pre tri al res tri cti ons . [Th e p lai nti ffs ] w ere on ly 3 iss ueda summon s; the y w ere ne verar res ted ; t hey 4 nev er pos tedba il; th ey wer e f ree totr ave l; and 5 the y d id notha ve to rep orttoPr etr ial Se rvi ces . 6 The ir lib ert y w as res tri cte d o nlydu rin g t he 7 Mun ici pal Co urttr ial s a nd the Fo urt h Amen dme nt 8 doe s n ot ext endbe yon d t he per iodofpr etr ial 9 res tri cti ons . 10 11 Pre tri al cus tod y a nd some o ner ous types of 12 pre tri al, no n-c ust odi al res tri cti ons co nst itu te a 13 Fou rthAmendmen t s eiz ure . [Th e p lai nti ffs ] f ail ed 14 to sta te a c aus e o f a cti on forma lic iou s 15 pro sec uti on bec aus e t hei r a tte nda nce attr ial di d 16 notqu ali fy as a F our th Ame ndmentse izu re. 17 18 Id. at60 3 ( int ern al quo tat ionma rks an d c ita tio ns 19 20 omi tte d). 6 21 22 The Si xthCi rcu it hel d t hatth e i ssu anc e o f apa rki ng 23 tic ketwa s n ot a s eiz ure . The co urtdi sti ngu ish ed Jus tic e 24 Gin sbu rg’ s A lbr igh t c onc urr enc e a nd an ear lie r S ixt h C irc uit 25 cas e, Bac on v. Pat era , 7 72 F.2 d 2 59, 26 5 ( 6thCi r. 198 5):13 1 Pla int iffca nno t c lai m i ssu anc e o f t he tra ffi c 2 tic ketef fec teda “se izu re” be cau se upo n a ppe ari ng 3 to ans werth e c har ges inth e t ick et, he wo uldha ve 4 bee n a ffo rde d atr ial . On the da te he was is sue d 5 the pa rki ng tic ket , h e w as “fr ee to lea ve. ” As a 6 res ult , p lai nti ff has no§ 198 3 c lai m a gai nst[t he 7 pol ice of fic er] fo r i ssu anc e o f t he tic ket . It 8 was no t u nti l h e f ail ed to app earfo r t he hea rin g 9 on the tr aff ic cit ati on tha t a n a rre st war ran t o r 10 summon s s uff ici enttoco nst itu te a “ sei zur e” 11 pur sua nt to Bac on v. Pat eraorJu sti ce Gin sbu rg’ s 12 con cur ren ce in Alb rig ht v. Oli verwo uldha ve bee n, 13 andwa s i n f act , i ssu ed. 14 15 DiP ier o v . C ityofMa ced oni a, 180 F. 3d 770 , 7 89 (6t h C ir. 16 199 9). 17 18 The Se ven th Cir cui t d ete rmi nedth at the is sua nce ofa 19 summon s b y t he pro sec uto r, an ord er nottole ave Il lin ois 20 wit hou t t he permis sio n o f t he cou rt, an d are qui red 21 int erv iewwi th a p rob ati on off ice r d id notri se to the le vel 22 of a F our th Ame ndmentse izu re: “N o c our t h as hel d t hata 23 summon s a lon e c ons tit ute s ase izu re, an d w e c onc lud e t hata 24 summon s a lon e d oes no t e qua l ase izu re forFo urt h Amen dme nt 25 pur pos es. T o h oldot her wis e w oul d t ran sfo rm eve ry tra ffi c 26 tic ketan d j urysummo ns int o apo ten tia l S ect ion19 83 27 cla im. ” Bie lan ski v. Co unt y o f K ane , 5 50 F.3 d 6 32, 64 2 ( 7th 28 Cir . 2 008 ). 29 The Ei ght h C irc uit , i n d ete rmi nin g t hatth e p re30 Alb rig ht con duc t o f aSp eci al Age nt of the Bu rea u o f14 1 Alc oho l, Tob acc o, andFi rea rms co uldno t h ave vi ola teda 2 cle arl y e sta bli she d c ons tit uti ona l r igh t ( in the co nte xt of 3 a qual ifi ed immuni ty ana lys is) , o bse rve d t hat“[ t]h is 4 cir cui t h as nev er hel d t hatpr etr ial re str ict ion s s uchas [a 5 summon s a nd pos tin g b ond ] c ons tit ute a Fou rthAmendmen t 6 sei zur e.” T ech nic al Ordnan ce, In c. v. Uni tedSt ate s, 244 7 F.3 d 6 41, 65 1 ( 8thCi r. 200 1). 8 In a N int h C irc uitca se, th e p lai nti ff ele cte d t o 9 app earatth e B urb ankMu nic ipa l C our t ( rat herth an be 10 arr est ed) , a nd bec ame su bje ct to an “Ow n-Reco gni zan ce 11 Rel eas e Agre eme nt” --whic h r equ ire d h er “toob tai n p erm iss ion 12 fro m t he cou rt bef ore le avi ng the st ate ofCa lif orn ia” an d 13 “toap pea r i n c our t t hre e w eek s h enc e ( pre sum abl y f or 14 arr aig nme nt or tri al) an d a t a ll oth er times andpl ace s 15 ord ere d b y t he cou rt. ” Kar am v. Cit y o f B urb ank , 3 52 F.3 d 16 118 8, 119 1 ( 9thCi r. 200 3) (in ter nal qu ota tio n m ark s 17 omi tte d). T he Nin th Cir cui t o bse rve d t hat“[ c]a ses de cid ed 18 by oursi ste r c irc uit s i n whic h t heyha ve con clu dedth ere 19 was a sei zur e i nci den t t o apr e-t ria l r ele ase ha ve inv olv ed 20 con dit ion s s ign ifi can tlymo re res tri cti ve tha n t hos e i n t he 21 pre sen t c ase .” Id . a t 1 193 . The Ni nthCi rcu it 22 dis tin gui she d c ase s f romot herci rcu its , i ncl udi ng our15 1 opi nio n i n Murp hy: 2 Kar am was no t c har gedwi th a f elo ny. S he was no t 3 requir ed to rep orttoan yon e. Al l s he hadtodo 4 was sh ow up forco urtap pea ran ces an d o bta in 5 permis sio n f romth e c our t i f s he wan tedtole ave 6 the st ate . Obt ain ingsu ch permis sio n, whi le not 7 bur den -fr ee, po sedmu ch les s o f abu rde n t o h er 8 tha n i t w oul d t o ape rso n c har gedwi th a f elo ny. 9 And , w ithre gar d t o t he requir eme nt to app earin 10 cou rt, th at was nomo re bur den some t hanth e 11 pro mis e amo tor istma kes wh en iss ueda tra ffi c 12 cit ati on. I n s um, [t he pla int iff ’s] re lea se 13 res tri cti ons we re de min imi s. NoFo urt h Amen dme nt 14 sei zur e o ccu rre d. 15 16 Id. at11 94 (in ter nal ci tat ionom itt ed) . 17 The Te nthCi rcu it hel d t hat“t he mer e i ssu anc e o f a 18 cit ati on requir ingpr ese nce atfu tur e l ega l p roc eed ing s d oes 19 notqu ali fy as a c ons tit uti ona l ‘ sei zur e.’ ” Mar tin ez v. 20 Car r, 479 F. 3d 129 2, 129 9 ( 10t h C ir. 20 07) . A c ont rar y 21 rul ing“w oul d s ure ly dis inc ent ivi ze the us e o f c ita tio ns, at 22 lea st to a c ert ainde gre e, a r esu lt inc ons ist entwi th the 23 des ire tomi tig ate in tru siv ene ss on pri vat e c iti zen s a nd 24 rec entef for ts to enc our age th e u se of cit ati on in lie u o f 25 arr estpr oce dur e.” I d. at 129 7. 26 Fin all y, the El eve nthCi rcu it rul ed tha t c ond iti ons of 27 pre tri al rel eas e d id notam oun t t o ase izu re. S ee Kin gsl and 28 v. Cit y o f M iam i, 382 F. 3d 122 0, 123 6 ( 11t h C ir. 20 04) . 29 Aft er herau tom obi le acc ide nt wit h a n o ff- dut y p oli ce16 1 off ice r, the pl ain tif f w as “ha ndc uff ed, tr ans por tedtoth e 2 Dad e C oun ty jai l, andch arg ed wit h D UI. H er fat herpo ste d a 3 $1, 000 .00 bo nd the fo llo win g d ay, an d s he was su bse que ntl y 4 arr aig nedonch arg es of car ele ss dri vin g, rec kle ss dri vin g, 5 andDU I. [T he pla int iff ] m ade tw o t rip s f romNe w J ers ey to 6 Flo rid a t o a ppe ar in cou rt on the se cha rge s.” I d. at 122 3- 7 25. 8 We the ref ore ar e j oin inga con sen sus ofap pel lat e 9 cou rts inho ldi ng tha t apr e-a rra ignmen t, non -fe lon y s umm ons 10 requir ingnomo re tha n ala terco urtap pea ran ce doe s n ot 11 con sti tut e aFo urt h Amen dme nt sei zur e. 12 13 CONCLUSION 14 Forth e f ore goi ng rea son s, we aff irmth e j udgmen t o f 15 the di str ictco urt . 16