. To state a claim pursuant to Section 1983, Plaintiff must plausibly allege: (1) challenged conduct “committed by a person acting under color of state law”; and (2) said challenged conduct “must have deprived a person of rights, privileges or immunities secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States.” Lansbury v. Massey, No. 22-CV-6447, 2023 WL 266513, at *2 (E.D.N.Y. Jan. 18, 2023) (quoting Cornejo v. Bell, 592 F.3d 121, 127 (2d Cir. 2010)). Once a plaintiff establishes the “color of law” requirement, and it is undisputed that “a state employee acting in his official capacity is acting ‘under color of state law
To state a claim pursuant to Section 1983, Plaintiff must plausibly allege: (1) challenged conduct “committed by a person acting under color of state law”; and (2) that the challenged conduct “must have deprived a person of rights, privileges or immunities secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States.” Lansbury v. Massey, No. 22-CV-6447, 2023 WL 266513, at *2 (E.D.N.Y. Jan. 18, 2023) (quoting Cornejo v. Bell, 592 F.3d 121, 127 (2d Cir. 2010)). “[T]he under-color-of-state-law element of § 1983 excludes from its reach ‘merely private conduct, no matter how discriminatory or wrongful.'”