Jaron K. Cook v. Transportation Security Administration (TSA)
Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK JARON K. COOK, Plaintiff, 26-CV-2199 (JPO) -against- ORDER OF SERVICE TRANSPORTATION SECURITY ADMINISTRATION (TSA), Defendant. J. PAUL OETKEN, United States District Judge: Plaintiff resides in Manhattan and is appearing pro se. He brings this action against Defendant Transportation Security Administration (TSA), a federal agency, asserting claims arising from damage to his luggage at LaGuardia Airport. The Court liberally construes Plaintiff’s allegations as asserting a claim under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA). By order dated March 25, 2026, the Court granted Plaintiff’s request to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP), that is, without prepayment of fees. For the reasons discussed below, the Court substitutes the United States of America for Defendant TSA and directs service on the United States of America. DISCUSSION A. Substitution of the United States of America for the TSA The FTCA waives sovereign immunity for injuries arising from the tortious conduct of federal officers or agents acting within the scope of their office or employment. 28 U.S.C. § 1346(b)(1). Plaintiff’s claims for property damage by employees of the TSA are liberally construed as arising under the FTCA , 28 U.S.C. §§ 1346(b), 2671-80. The only proper defendant for an FTCA claim is the United States of America. See Mignogna v. Sair Aviation, Inc., 937 F.2d 37, 40 (2d Cir. 1991) (holding that an FTCA claim “must be brought against the United States rather than an agency thereof. See 28 U.S.C. § 2679(a)”). The Court therefore substitutes the United States of America (“U.S.A.”) as a defendant in place of Defendant TSA. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 21. B. Service on the U.S.A. To allow Plaintiff, who is proceeding IFP, to effect service on Defendant U.S.A. 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 Defendant U.S.A. The Clerk of Court is further instructed to: (1) mark the box on the USM-285 form labeled “Check for service on U.S.A.”; and (2) issue a summons for Defendant U.S.A. and deliver to the Marshals Service a copy of this order and all other paperwork necessary for the Marshals Service to effect service on Defendant U.S.A. It is Plaintiff’s responsibility to ensure that service is made within 90 days of the date the summons is issued and, if necessary, to request an extension of time for service.1 See Meilleur v. Strong, 682 F.3d 56, 63 (2d Cir. 2012). Plaintiff also must notify the Court in writing if his address changes, and the Court may dismiss the action if he fails to do so.
CONCLUSION The Court construes this action as arising under the FTCA and directs the Clerk of Court to substitute the United States of America on the docket for Defendant TSA and to terminate Defendant TSA. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 21.
1 Although Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure generally requires that service be effected 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 the summons be issued. The Court therefore extends the time to serve until 90 days after the date the summons is issued. The Clerk of Court is further instructed to issue a summons for Defendant United States of America, complete the USM-285 form with the address for Defendant United States of America (marking the box on the USM-285 form labeled “Check for service on U.S.A.”), and deliver to the U.S. Marshals Service all documents necessary to effect service on Defendant United States of America. Dated: March 27, 2026 New York, New York
United States District Judge
SERVICE ADDRESSESFOR DEFENDANT
United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York Civil Division 86 Chambers Street 3rd Floor New York, New York 10007 Attorney General of the United States United States Department of Justice 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, D.C. 20530-0001
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Jaron K. Cook v. Transportation Security Administration (TSA) (Jaron K. Cook v. Transportation Security Administration (TSA)) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.