Ison v. Kachappilly

District Court, S.D. New York·Decided August 2, 2023·No. 7:23-cv-03402·Unknown

Opinion

DOCUMENT ELECTRONICALLY FILED UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DOC #: SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK DATE FILED: 8/2/2023 JERRY ISON, Plaintiff, -against- PA KACHAPPILLY; JANE DOE, Nurse Administrator; L. JACKSON, Dept. of Health 23-CV-3402 (NSR) Services; L. MALIN, Dept. Sup. Programs; J. MANUEL, Program Committee Chairperson; ORDER OF SERVICE SUPERINTENDENT OF SING SING CORRECTIONAL FACILITY; RACHAEL SEQUIN, Acting Director, Grievance Program; ANTHONY J. ANNUCCTI, Acting Commissioner, Defendants. NELSON S. ROMAN, United States District Judge: Plaintiff, who is currently incarcerated at Orleans Correctional Facility, brings this pro se action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the Americans With Disabilities Act (“ADA”), and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. By order dated May 9, 2023, the Court granted Plaintiff’s request to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP), that is, without prepayment of fees.! 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.? Walker v. Schult, 717 F.3d. 119, 123 n.6

' Prisoners are not exempt from paying the full filing fee even when they have been granted permission to proceed IFP. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1). ? Although Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure generally requires that summonses be served within 90 days of the date the complaint is filed, Plaintiff is proceeding IFP and could not have served summonses and the complaint 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.

(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 Defendants “PA Kachapilly Doctor”; (2) Jane Doe,

Nurse Administrator; (3) L. Jackson, Dept. of Health Services; (4) L. Malin, “Dep. Sup. Programs”; (5) J. Manuel, Program Committee Chairperson; (6) Sing Sing Correctional Facility Superintendent Capra; (7) Rachael Seguin, Acting Director, Grievance Program; and (8) Anthony Annucci, Acting Commissioner, 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. Valentin Order Under Valentin v. Dinkins, a pro se litigant is entitled to assistance from the district court in identifying a defendant and obtaining service addresses. 121 F.3d 72, 76 (2d Cir. 1997). In the complaint, Plaintiff supplies sufficient information to permit the New York State Attorney General’s Office to identify Jane Doe, Nurse Administrator. It is therefore ordered that the New York State Attorney General’s Office, which is the attorney for and agent of the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision, must ascertain the identity of the Jane Doe whom Plaintiff seeks to sue here and the address where the defendant may be served. The New York State Attorney General’s Office must provide this information to Plaintiff and the Court within sixty days of the date of this order.

Within thirty days of receiving this information, Plaintiff must file an amended complaint naming the Jane Doe defendant. 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 Jane Doe Defendant and deliver all documents necessary to effect service to the U.S. Marshals Service. C. Referral to NYLAG Plaintiff may consult the legal clinic in this District that assists 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. Once the paperwork is received, it may take up to two weeks for the Clinic to contact the litigant. Copies of the Clinic’s flyer, retainer, and intake form are attached to this order. CONCLUSION The Clerk of Court is directed to: (1) complete the USM-285 forms with the addresses for: “PA Kachapilly Doctor”; L. Jackson, Dept. of Health Services; L. Malin, “Dep. Sup. Programs”; J. Manuel, Program Committee Chairperson; Sing Sing Correctional Facility Superintendent Capra; Rachael Seguin, Acting Director, Grievance Program; and Anthony Annucci, Acting Commissioner, and deliver all documents necessary to effect service to the U.S. Marshals Service; (2) mail a copy of this order to the New York State Attorney General’s Office at 28 Liberty Street, 16th Fl., New York, New York, 10005; and (3) mail an information package to Plaintiff. An “Amended Complaint” form is 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 IFP 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). The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to mail a copy of this Order to pro se Plaintiff at Plaintiff’s address listed on ECF and to show service on the docket. SO ORDERED. Dated: August 2, 2023 White Plains, New York NELSON S.ROMAN United States District Judge

DEFENDANTS AND SERVICE ADDRESSES PA Kachappilly, Doctor Sing Sing Correctional Facility 354 Hunter Street Ossining, New York 10562 L. Jackson, Department of Health Services Sing Sing Correctional Facility 354 Hunter Street Ossining, New York 10562 L.

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

Ison v. Kachappilly, (S.D.N.Y. 2023).

Ison v. Kachappilly (Ison v. Kachappilly) — 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)