Opinion
22-CV-7609 (MKV)
09-16-2022
ELAIACHI ELBOUTE, Plaintiff, v. HIGHGATE HOTELS, L.P./OYO HOTEL TIMES SQ., Defendant.
ORDER OF SERVICE
MARY KAY VYSKOCIL, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE:
Plaintiff brings this pro se action under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, 29 U.S.C. §§ 621-634; the New York State Human Rights Law, N.Y. Exec. Law §§ 290 to 297; and the New York City Human Rights Law, N.Y.C. Admin. Code §§ 8-101 to 131. By order dated September 8, 2022, the Court granted Plaintiff's request to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP), that is, without prepayment of fees.
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 a summons be served within 90 days of the date the complaint is filed, Plaintiff is proceeding IFP and could not have served the summons and the complaint until the Court reviewed the complaint and ordered that the summons be issued. The Court therefore extends the time to serve until 90 days after the date the summons is issued.
To allow Plaintiff to effect service on Defendant Highgate Hotels, L.P./OYO Hotel, 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 the defendant. The Clerk of Court is further instructed to issue a summons and deliver to the Marshals Service all the paperwork necessary for the Marshals Service to effect service upon the defendant.
If the complaint is not served within 90 days after the date the summons is issued, 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).
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 instructed to issue a summons for Defendant Highgate Hotels, L.P./OYO Hotel, complete the USM-285 form with the address for this defendant, and deliver all documents necessary to effect service to the U.S. Marshals Service. The Clerk of Court is further instructed to mail an information package to Plaintiff.
SO ORDERED.