Mansaray v. Krous Security Service

S.D. New York

Mansaray v. Krous Security Service

District Court, S.D. New York·Decided February 21, 2020·No. 1:20-cv-01415·Unknown

Opinion

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK MOHAMED K. MANSARAY, Oa ONICALLY FILED Plaintiff DATE FILED: } /2! {70

KROUS SECURITY SERVICE AND Defendants, ORDER OF SERVICE

RONNIE ABRAMS, United States District Judge: To allow Plaintiff, who is proceeding in forma pauperis, to effect service on Defendants through the U.S. Marshals Service, the Clerk of Court is instructed to send Plaintiff a U.S. Marshals Service Process Receipt and Return form (““USM-285 form”) for each Defendant. Within thirty days of the date of this order, Plaintiff must complete the USM-285 forms for the Defendants and return those forms to the Court. If Plaintiff does not wish to use the Marshals Service to effect service, he must notify the Court in writing within thirty days of the date of this order and request that a summons be issued directly to him. If within thirty days, Plaintiff has not returned the USM-285 forms or requested a summons, under Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Court may dismiss this action for failure to prosecute. Upon receipt of the completed USM-285 forms, the Clerk of Court shall issue a summons and deliver to the Marshals Service all of the paperwork necessary for the Marshals Service to effect service upon Defendant. No matter what method of service Plaintiff chooses, he must effect service within 120 days of the date the summons is issued. It is Plaintiffs responsibility to inquire of the Marshals Service as to whether service has been made and if necessary, to request an extension of time for service. See Meilleur v. Strong, 682 F.3d 56, 63 (2d Cir. 2012). If within 120 days of

issuance of the summons, Plaintiff has not made service or requested an extension of time in which to do so, under Rules 4(m) and 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Court may dismiss this action for failure to prosecute. Finally, it is Plaintiff’s obligation to promptly submit a written notification to the Court if Plaintiff’s address changes, and the Court may dismiss the action if Plaintiff fails to do so. The Clerk of Court is directed to mail a copy of this order to Plaintiff. SO ORDERED. Dated: February 21, 2020 . New York, New York ty United States District Judge

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

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK MOHAMED K. MANSARAY, Oa ONICALLY FILED Plaintiff DATE FILED: } /2! {70

KROUS SECURITY SERVICE AND Defendants, ORDER OF SERVICE

RONNIE ABRAMS, United States District Judge: To allow Plaintiff, who is proceeding in forma pauperis, to effect service on Defendants through the U.S. Marshals Service, the Clerk of Court is instructed to send Plaintiff a U.S. Marshals Service Process Receipt and Return form (““USM-285 form”) for each Defendant. Within thirty days of the date of this order, Plaintiff must complete the USM-285 forms for the Defendants and return those forms to the Court. If Plaintiff does not wish to use the Marshals Service to effect service, he must notify the Court in writing within thirty days of the date of this order and request that a summons be issued directly to him. If within thirty days, Plaintiff has not returned the USM-285 forms or requested a summons, under Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Court may dismiss this action for failure to prosecute. Upon receipt of the completed USM-285 forms, the Clerk of Court shall issue a summons and deliver to the Marshals Service all of the paperwork necessary for the Marshals Service to effect service upon Defendant. No matter what method of service Plaintiff chooses, he must effect service within 120 days of the date the summons is issued. It is Plaintiffs responsibility to inquire of the Marshals Service as to whether service has been made and if necessary, to request an extension of time for service. See Meilleur v. Strong, 682 F.3d 56, 63 (2d Cir. 2012). If within 120 days of

issuance of the summons, Plaintiff has not made service or requested an extension of time in which to do so, under Rules 4(m) and 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Court may dismiss this action for failure to prosecute. Finally, it is Plaintiff’s obligation to promptly submit a written notification to the Court if Plaintiff’s address changes, and the Court may dismiss the action if Plaintiff fails to do so. The Clerk of Court is directed to mail a copy of this order to Plaintiff. SO ORDERED. Dated: February 21, 2020 . New York, New York ty United States District Judge

Mansaray v. Krous Security Service, (S.D.N.Y. 2020).

Pincite

Mansaray v. Krous Security Service (Mansaray v. Krous Security Service) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related