Opinion
5:06-CV-0899 (NAM) (GJD).
March 26, 2009
Deborah L. Morales, Plaintiff Pro Se.
Steven H. Schwartz, Esq., Andrew M. Cuomo, Attorney General of the State of New York, Office of the Attorney General, The Capitol, Albany, New York, Attorney for Defendant NYS Department of Labor.
Patrick V. Melfi, Esq., Bond, Schoeneck, King, PLLC, One Lincoln Center, Syracuse, New York, Attorney for Defendant CNY Works, Inc.
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
The Court having reviewed defendant NYS Department Of Labor's ("DOL") motion for reconsideration of the Court's previous determination not to dismiss plaintiff's claims against DOL for lack of proper service pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(m), finds that defendant DOL's additional arguments do not warrant reversal of the Court's previous decision on this matter. Indeed, as the Court previously determined, the Second Circuit's holding in Ruddock v. Reno, 104 Fed. Appx. 204, 206-7 (2d Cir. 2004) clearly established that if a plaintiff provides to the U.S. Marshal "information necessary to identify the defendant," the Marshals' failure to effect timely service constitutes good cause for failing to comply with the time requirements of Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(m). Contrary to defendant DOL's arguments, the Court does not find that plaintiff's noninmate status, which differs from the plaintiff in Ruddock, is a distinguishing factor, particularly because defendant DOL is an agency of the State of New York, readily identified and located in spite of any error by plaintiff in providing an address for service of process.
Based on the foregoing, it is hereby
ORDERED that defendant DOL's motion for reconsideration is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.