Opinion
22 Civ. 10298 (JPC)
12-12-2022
RICHARD ROE, Plaintiff, v. NEW YORK STATE BOARD OF LAW EXAMINERS, Defendant.
ORDER OF SERVICE
JOHN P. CRONAN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Plaintiff “Richard Roe,” who is proceeding pro se and under a pseudonym, brings this action under the Americans with Disabilities Act and the New York State and City Human Rights Laws. He sues Defendant New York State Board of Law Examiners, seeking declaratory relief, injunctive relief, and damages.
By order dated December 7, 2022, the court granted Plaintiff's request to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”), that is, without prepayment of fees. The Court now directs service on Defendant.
DISCUSSION
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 a summons be issued. The Court therefore extends the time to serve until 90 days after the date that the summons is issued.
To allow Plaintiff to effect service on Defendant 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 Defendant. The Clerk of Court is further instructed to issue a summons for Defendant and deliver to the Marshals Service all the paperwork necessary for the Marshals Service to effect service upon 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 this action if Plaintiff fails to do so.
CONCLUSION
The Court directs the Clerk of Court to mail a copy of this order to Plaintiff, together with an information package.
The Court also directs the Clerk of Court to issue a summons for Defendant New York State Board of Law Examiners; complete a USM-285 form with the address for Defendant New York State Board of Law Examiners; and deliver all documents necessary to effect service on Defendant New York State Board of Law Examiners to the U.S. Marshals Service.
SO ORDERED.