From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Umer v. Entech Eng'g PC

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Mar 5, 2020
20-CV-1152 (VEC) (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 5, 2020)

Opinion

20-CV-1152 (VEC)

03-05-2020

MOHAMMED UMER, Plaintiff, v. ENTECH ENGINEERING PC, et al., Defendants.


ORDER OF SERVICE :

Because Plaintiff has been granted permission to proceed IFP, he is entitled to rely on the Court and the U.S. Marshals Service to effect service. Walker v. Schult, 717 F.3d. 119, 123 n.6 (2d Cir. 2013); see also 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d) ("The officers of the court shall issue and serve all process . . . in [IFP] cases."); Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(3) (the court must order the Marshals Service to serve if the plaintiff is authorized to proceed IFP)). Although Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure generally requires that the summons and complaint be served within 90 days of the date the complaint is filed, Plaintiff is proceeding IFP and could not have served the summons and complaint until the Court reviewed the complaint and ordered that a summons be issued. The Court therefore extends the time to serve until 90 days after the date the summons is issued. If the complaint is not served within that time, Plaintiff should request an extension of time for service. See Meilleur v. Strong, 682 F.3d 56, 63 (2d Cir. 2012) (holding that it is the plaintiff's responsibility to request an extension of time for service); see also Murray v. Pataki, 378 F. App'x 50, 52 (2d Cir. 2010) ("As long as the [plaintiff proceeding IFP] provides the information necessary to identify the defendant, the Marshals' failure to effect service automatically constitutes 'good cause' for an extension of time within the meaning of Rule 4(m).").

To allow Plaintiff to effect service on Defendant EnTech Engineering PC and Jasmine Javaheri through the U.S. Marshals Service, the Clerk of Court is instructed to fill out a U.S. Marshals Service Process Receipt and Return form ("USM-285 form") for each of these defendants. The Clerk of Court is further instructed to issue summonses and deliver to the Marshals Service all the paperwork necessary for the Marshals Service to effect service upon these defendants.

Plaintiff must notify the Court in writing if his address changes, and the Court may dismiss the action if Plaintiff fails to do so.

CONCLUSION

The Clerk of Court is directed to mail a copy of this order to Plaintiff, together with an information package.

The Clerk of Court is further instructed to complete the USM-285 forms with the addresses for EnTech Engineering PC and Jasmine Javaheri and deliver all documents necessary to effect service to the U.S. Marshals Service. SO ORDERED. Dated: March 5, 2020

New York, New York

/s/_________

VALERIE CAPRONI

United States District Judge

DEFENDANTS AND SERVICE ADDRESSES

1. EnTech Engineering PC

17 State Street, 36th Floor

New York, NY 10004

2. Jasmine Javaheri

EnTech Engineering PC

17 State Street, 36th Floor

New York, NY 10004


Summaries of

Umer v. Entech Eng'g PC

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Mar 5, 2020
20-CV-1152 (VEC) (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 5, 2020)
Case details for

Umer v. Entech Eng'g PC

Case Details

Full title:MOHAMMED UMER, Plaintiff, v. ENTECH ENGINEERING PC, et al., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

Date published: Mar 5, 2020

Citations

20-CV-1152 (VEC) (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 5, 2020)