Opinion

Piccolo v. New York City Board of Elections

Court
District Court, S.D. New York
Filed
Apr 15, 2025
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 34.8%

holding that it is the plaintiffs responsibility to request an extension of time for service

How later courts described this case

  • holding that it is the plaintiffs responsibility to request an extension of time for service

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT D ELO EC CU TM RE ON NT IC ALLY FILED

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK DOC #:

DATE FILED: 4/15/ 2025

ARTHUR PICCOLO,

Plaintiff,

25-CV-2617 (GHW)

-against-

ORDER OF SERVICE

NEW YORK CITY BOARD OF ELECTIONS,

Defendant.

GREGORY H. WOODS, United States District Judge:

Plaintiff, who is appearing pro se, brings this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, seeking to

enjoin Defendant from violating his federal constitutional rights. By order dated March 31, 2025,

the Court granted Plaintiff’s request to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”), that is, without

prepayment of fees.

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.1 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).

To allow Plaintiff to effect service on Defendant New York City Board of Elections

through the U.S. Marshals Service, the Clerk of Court is instructed to fill out a U.S. Marshals

1Although 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.

Service Process Receipt and Return form (“USM-285 form”) for 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 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 plaintiffs 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, complete the

USM-285 form with the address for Defendant, and deliver all documents necessary to effect

service to the U.S. Marshals Service.

The Clerk of Court is directed to mail an information package to Plaintiff.

SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 15, 2025

New York, New York

United States District Judge

SERVICE ADDRESS FOR DEFENDANT

New York City Board of Elections

32-42 Broadway, 7th Floor

New York, NY 10004

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.