Jackson v. Annucci

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK LAVOGIA JACKSON, Plaintiff, -against- ANTHONY J. ANNUCCI, ACTING COMMISSIONER OF DOCCS; DONALD VENETOZZI, DIRECTOR OF SPECIAL HOUSING UNIT, DOCCS; MICHAEL ROYCE, SUPERINTENDENT, GREEN HAVEN 20-CV-2008 (PMH) CORRECTIONAL FACILITY; ERIC GUTWEIN, HEARING OFFICER, GREEN HAVEN ORDER OF SERVICE CORRECTIONAL FACILITY; D. DEEGAN, LIEUTENANT, GREEN HAVEN CORRECTIONAL FACILITY; R. ROSSI, SERGEANT, GREEN HAVEN CORRECTIONAL FACILITY; WILLIAM RIVERA, CORRECTION OFFICER, GREEN HAVEN CORRECTIONAL FACILITY; R. DAHL, CORRECTION OFFICER, GREEN HAVEN CORRECTIONAL FACILITY, Defendants. PHILIP M. HALPERN, United States District Judge: Plaintiff, currently incarcerated in Green Haven Correctional Facility, brings this pro se action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that Defendants were deliberately indifferent to his serious medical needs, retaliated against him for filing a grievance, and violated his rights in a disciplinary proceeding. By order dated April 13, 2020, the Court granted Plaintiff’s request to proceed without prepayment of fees, that is, in forma pauperis (IFP).1

1 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). DISCUSSION A. Service on 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 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 the summonses and complaint be served within 90 days of the date the complaint is filed, Plaintiff is proceeding IFP and could not have served the summonses and 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 the summonses are issued. If the complaint is not served within that time, 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); see also Murray v. Pataki, 378 F. App’x 50, 52 (2d Cir. 2010) (“As long as the [plaintiff proceeding IFP] provides the information necessary to identify the defendant, the Marshals’ failure to effect service

automatically constitutes ‘good cause’ for an extension of time within the meaning of Rule 4(m).”). To allow Plaintiff to effect service on Defendants Anthony J. Annucci, Donald Venetozzi, Michael Royce, Eric Gutwein, D. Deegan, R. Rossi, William Rivera, and R. Dahl 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 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 these defendants. 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 Civil 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 directed to mail a copy of this order to Plaintiff, together with an information package. The Clerk of Court is further instructed to complete the USM-285 forms with the addresses for Anthony J. Annucci, Donald Venetozzi, Michael Royce, Eric Gutwein, D. Deegan, R. Rossi, William Rivera, and R. Dahl, and deliver to the U.S. Marshal’s Service all documents necessary to effect service.

Local Civil Rule 33.2 applies to this action. 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. SO ORDERED. Dated: April 16, 2020 New York, New York

PHILIP M. HALPERN United States District Judge DEFENDANTS AND SERVICE ADDRESSES

Anthony J. Annucci, Acting Commissioner New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision Harriman State Campus 1220 Washington Avenue Albany, New York 12226-2050 Donald Venetozzi, Director of Special Housing Unit New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision Harriman State Campus 1220 Washington Avenue Albany, NY 12226-2050 Michael Royce, Superintendent Green Haven Correctional Facility 594 Route 216 Stormville, NY 12582-0010 Eric Gutwein, Hearing Officer Green Haven Correctional Facility 594 Route 216 Stormville, NY 12582-0010 Lieutenant D. Deegan Green Haven Correctional Facility 594 Route 216 Stormville, NY 12582-0010 Sergeant R. Rossi Green Haven Correctional Facility 594 Route 216 Stormville, NY 12582-0010 Correction Officer William Rivera Green Haven Correctional Facility 594 Route 216 Stormville, NY 12582-0010 Correction Officer R. Dahl Green Haven Correctional Facility 594 Route 216 Stormville, NY 12582-0010