holding that it is the plaintiff’s responsibility to request an extension of time for service
How later courts described this case
- holding that it is the plaintiff’s responsibility to request an extension of time for service
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
CARL BROWN,
Plaintiff,
-against-
ORDER OF SERVICE
SGT. LAINO; SGT GUNSETT; C.O. ROGERS;
C.O. KWARTLER; C.O. MCNEIL; C.O. 24-CV-6677 (PMH)
LEWIS; LT. ANSPACH; ASHLEY BARTLETT;
GREEN HAVEN SUPT. MILLER; HEARING
OFFICER GUTWEIN; DIRECTOR OF
SPECIAL HOUSING ANTHONY
RODRIGUEZ,
Defendants.
PHILIP M. HALPERN, United States District Judge:
Plaintiff, who currently is incarcerated at Shawangunk Correctional Facility, brings this
action, pro se, under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that Defendants violated his constitutional rights
during his incarceration at Green Haven Correctional Facility (“Green Haven”). By order dated
September 11, 2024, the Court granted Plaintiff’s request to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”),
that is, without prepayment of fees.1
A. 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.2 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
1 Prisoners are not exempt from paying the full filing fee even when they have been granted permission to
proceed in forma pauperis. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1).
2Although 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 effected
service until the Court reviewed the complaint and ordered that any summonses be issued. The Court
therefore extends the time to serve until 90 days after the date any summonses issue.
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)).
To allow Plaintiff to effect service on the following employees of the New York State
Department of Corrections and Community Supervision (“DOCCS”): (1) Sgt. Laino; (2) Sgt.
Gunsett; (3) C.O. Rogers; (4) C.O. Kwartler; (5) C.O. McNeil; (6) C.O. Lewis; (7) Lt. Anspach;
(8) Ashley Bartlett; (9) Green Haven Superintendent Miller; (10) Hearing Officer Gutwein; and
(11) Director of Special Housing Anthony Rodriguez 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 those 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 Defendants.
If the complaint is not served within 90 days after the date summonses are 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.
B. Local Rule 33.2
Local Civil Rule 33.2, which requires defendants in certain types of prisoner cases to
respond to specific, court-ordered discovery requests, applies to this action. Those discovery
requests are available on the Court’s website under “Forms” and are titled “Plaintiff’s Local Civil
Rule 33.2 Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents.” Within 120 days of service
of the complaint, Defendants must serve responses to these standard discovery requests. In their
responses, Defendants must quote each request verbatim.°
CONCLUSION
The Clerk of Court is instructed to issue a summons for each Defendant, complete the
USM-285 form with the address for each Defendant, and deliver all documents necessary to effect
service to the U.S. Marshals Service.
The Clerk of Court if further instructed to mail a copy of this Order and an information
package to Plaintiff.
Local Rule 33.2 applies to this case.
SO ORDERED.
Dated: September 18, 2024
White Plains, New York (Kup/
PHILIPM.HALPERN = =————<“—i—
United States District Judge
3 Tf Plaintiff would like copies of these discovery requests before receiving the responses and does not have
access to the website, Plaintiff may request them from the Pro Se Intake Unit.
SERVICE ADDRESS FOR EACH DEFENDANT
Sgt. Laino
Green Haven Correctional Facility
594 Route 216
Stormville, New York 12582
Sgt. Gunsett
Green Haven Correctional Facility
594 Route 216
Stormville, New York 12582
C.O. Rogers
Green Haven Correctional Facility
594 Route 216
Stormville, New York 12582
C.O. Kwartler
Green Haven Correctional Facility
594 Route 216
Stormville, New York 12582
C.O. McNeil
Green Haven Correctional Facility
594 Route 216
Stormville, New York 12582
C.O. Lewis
Green Haven Correctional Facility
594 Route 216
Stormville, New York 12582
Lt. Anspach
Green Haven Correctional Facility
594 Route 216
Stormville, New York 12582
Ashley Bartlett
DOCCS Central Office
1220 Washington Ave, Building 2,
Albany, N.Y. 12226
Supt. Miller
Green Haven Correctional Facility
594 Route 216
Stormville, New York 12582
Hearing Officer Gutwein
DOCCS Central Office
1220 Washington Ave, Building 2,
Albany, N.Y. 12226
Director of Special Housing Anthony Rodriguez
DOCCS Central Office
1220 Washington Ave, Building 2,
Albany, N.Y. 12226
5