Arriaga v. Annucci

District Court, S.D. New York·Decided April 4, 2023·No. 7:23-cv-01941·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT fhe . □ SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK pS REE aa ANTHONY ARRIAGA, L232. Plaintiff, “against: 23-CV-1941 (VB) ANTHONY ANNUCCI; MICHAEL CAPRA; QUANDERA T. QUICK; ELAINE VELEZ; ORDER OF SERVICE JOHN/JANE DOE #1; JOHN/JANE DOE #2; JOHN/JANE DOE #3, Defendants. VINCENT L. BRICCETTI, United States District Judge: Plaintiff, who is currently incarcerated at Sullivan Correctional Facility, brings this pro se action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that Defendants violated his rights at Sing Sing Correctional Facility. By order dated March 31, 2023, the Court granted Plaintiffs request to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP), that is, without prepayment of fees.! DISCUSSION A. Service on Named Defendants 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

' 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). * 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 effected service until the Court reviewed the complaint and ordered that summonses be issued. The Court therefore extends the time to serve until 90 days after the date summonses are issued.

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 Defendants Michael Capra, Quandera T. Quick, Anthony Annucci, and Elaine Velez 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 these 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 the 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. John/Jane Doe Defendants Under Valentin v. Dinkins, a pro se litigant is entitled to assistance from the district court in identifying a defendant. 121 F.3d 72, 76 (2d Cir. 1997). In the complaint, Plaintiff supplies sufficient information to permit the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Service (DOCCS) to identify the John or Jane Doe defendants described in the complaint who were involved in initiating Plaintiff’s transfer from Sing Sing Correctional Facility on July 17, 2022. It is therefore ordered that the New York State Attorney General, who is the attorney for and agent of DOCCS, must ascertain the identity and shield number of each John or Jane Doe whom Plaintiff seeks to sue here and the addresses where the defendants may be served. The

New York State Attorney General must provide this information to Plaintiff and the Court within 60 days of the date of this order. Within 30 days of receiving this information, Plaintiff must file an amended complaint naming the Doe defendant(s). The amended complaint will replace, not supplement, the original complaint. An amended complaint form that Plaintiff should complete is attached to this order. Once Plaintiff has filed an amended complaint, the Court will screen the amended complaint and, if necessary, issue an order directing the Clerk of Court to complete the USM-285 forms with the addresses for the named Doe Defendants and deliver to the U.S. Marshals Service all documents necessary to effect service. C. Referral to New York Legal Assistance Group Plaintiff may consult the legal clinic opened in this District to assist people who are parties in civil cases and do not have lawyers. The Clinic is run by a private organization called the New York Legal Assistance Group (NYLAG); it is not part of, or run by, the court (and, among other things, therefore cannot accept filings on behalf of the court, which must still be made by any pro se party through the Pro Se Intake Unit). To receive limited-scope assistance from the Clinic, Plaintiff may mail a signed retainer and intake form to the NYLAG Pro Se Clinic at 40 Foley Square, LL22, NY, NY 10007. Once the paperwork is received, the Clinic will coordinate contact with the litigant, which may take up to two weeks. Copies of the Clinic’s flyer, retainer, and intake form are attached to this order. CONCLUSION The Clerk of Court is instructed to complete the USM-285 forms with the addresses for Defendants Michael Capra, Quandera T. Quick, Anthony Annucci, and Elaine Velez, and deliver to the U.S. Marshals Service all documents necessary to effect service.

The Clerk of Court is further directed to mail: (1) a copy of this order and the complaint to the New York State Attorney General at 28 Liberty Street, 16th Floor, New York, New York 10005; and (2) an information package to Plaintiff. An “Amended Prisoner Civil Rights Complaint” form, and the NYLAG Clinic’s flyer, retainer, and intake form are attached to this order. The Court certifies under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith, and therefore in forma pauperis status is denied for the purpose of an appeal. Cf Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962) (holding that an appellant demonstrates good faith when he seeks review of a nonfrivolous issue). SO ORDERED. Dated: April 4, 2023 \ LL uu White Plains, New York (\ □□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□ United States District Judge

DEFENDANTS AND SERVICE ADDRESSES l. Anthony Annucci DOCCS Bldg 2., State Campus 1220 Washington Avenue Albany, New York 12226-2050 2. Michael Capra, Superintendent Sing Sing Correctional Facility 354 Hunter Street Ossining, NY 10562-5442 3, Quandera T. Quick Inmate Grievance Program Supervisor Sing Sing Correctional Facility 354 Hunter Street Ossining, NY 10562-5442 4, Elaine Velez Deputy Superintendent for Programs Sing Sing Correctional Facility 354 Hunter Street Ossining, NY 10562-5442

New York HE Legal Assistance Group LEGAL CLINIC FOR PRO SE LITIGANTS IN THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK LIMITED SCOPE LEGAL ASSISTANCE RETAINER AGREEMENT retain the New York Legal Assistance Group (NYLAG) to provide you with limited scope legal assistance its Legal Clinic for Pro Se Litigants in the Southern District of New York (Clinic) under the terms set below. I, LIMITS OF ASSISTANCE Clinic agrees to provide only limited scope legal assistance in connection with your matter.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Arriaga v. Annucci, (S.D.N.Y. 2023).

Arriaga v. Annucci (Arriaga v. Annucci) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Coppedge v. United States
369 U.S. 438 (Supreme Court, 1962)
Meilleur v. Strong
682 F.3d 56 (Second Circuit, 2012)
Walker v. Schult
717 F.3d 119 (Second Circuit, 2013)