Rodriguez v. Duran

CourtDistrict Court, S.D. New York
DecidedJanuary 17, 2024
Docket1:23-cv-10975
StatusUnknown

This text of Rodriguez v. Duran (Rodriguez v. Duran) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Rodriguez v. Duran, (S.D.N.Y. 2024).

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK JOSE A, RODRIGUEZ, “Plaintiff, -against- 23-CV-10975 (IGK) ELVIS SARITA DURAN; CEANNA TODISCO; ORDER OF SERVICE ANAICA ALLEN, Defendants.

JOHN G. KOELTL, United States District Judge: Plaintiff brings this pro se action under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (SADEA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 621-634, the New York State Human Rights Law, N.Y. Exec, Law §§ 290 to 297, and the New York City Human Rights Law, N.Y.C. Admin. Code §§ 8-101 to 131, alleging that his employer discriminated against him based on his age. By order dated December 21, 2023, the Court granted Plaintiff’s request to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”). As discussed in this order, the Court directs the Clerk of Court to (1) add as a defendant, under Rule 21 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Plaintiff’s employer, Samaritan Daytop Village; and (2) prepare the appropriate materials and deliver them to the United States Marshal for service on the named Defendants. DISCUSSION A. Samaritan Daytop Village Under the ADEA, Plaintiff may assert claims against his employer. See Cherry v. Toussaint, 50 F. App’x 476, 477 (2d Cir. 2022) (summary order). in light of Plaintiff's pro se status, and clear intention to bring claims against his employer, the Court construes this employment discrimination complaint as asserting claims against Samaritan Daytop Village and directs the Clerk of Court to add Plaintiff’s employer as a defendant. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 21.

B. 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 (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 Samaritan Daytop Village, Elvis Sarita Duran, Ceanna Todisco, Anaica Allen 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 these defendants. Ifthe complaint is not served within 90 days after the date 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.

! 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 □□□□ 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,

CONCLUSION The Court directs the Clerk of Court to add Samaritan Daytop Village as a defendant. See Fed, R. Civ. P. 21. The Clerk of Court is further instructed to (1) issue summonses for Samaritan Daytop Village, Elvis Sarita Duran, Ceanna Todisco, Anaica Allen, (2) complete the USM-285 forms with the addresses for these defendants, (3) deliver all documents necessary to effect service to the U.S. Marshals Service, and (4) mail Plaintiff an information package. Plaintiff may receive court documents by email by completing the attached form, Consent to Electronic Service.’ SO ORDERED. Dated: New York, New York me cob Sf bolotd ce bo bbl “JOHN G. KOELTL United States District Judge

2 If Plaintiff consents to receive documents by email, Plaintiff will no longer receive court documents by regular mail.

DEFENDANTS AND SERVICE ADDRESSES

1. Samaritan Daytop Village 138-02 Queens Boulevard Briarwood, NY 11435-2647 2. Elvis Sarita Duran 138-02 Queens Boulevard Briarwood, NY 11435-2647 3. Ceanna Todisco 138-02 Queens Boulevard Briarwood, NY 11435-2647 4, Anaica Allen 138-02 Queens Boulevard Briarwood, NY 11435-2647

Bey OY KES NS Oya. %\ United States District Court anes Southern District of New York tliat OS Pro Se Office stmt Pro Se (Nonprisoner) Consent & Registration Form to Receive Documents Electronically Parties who are not represented by an attorney and are not currently incarcerated may choose to receive documents in their cases electronically (by e-mail) instead of by regular mail. Receiving documents by regular mail is still an option, but if you would rather receive them only electronically, you must do the following: 1. Sign up for a PACER login and password by contacting PACER? at Wwww.pacer.uscourts.gov or 1-800-676-6856; 2. Complete and sign this form. If you consent to receive documents electronically, you will receive a Notice of Electronic Filing by e-mail each time a document is filed in your case, After receiving the notice, you are permitted one “free look” at the document by clicking on the hyperlinked document number in the e-mail. Once you click the hyperlink and access the document, you may not be able to access the document for free again. After 15 days, the hyperlink will no longer provide free access. Any time that the hyperlink is accessed after the first “free look” or the 15 days, you will be asked for a PACER login and may be charged to view the document. For this reason, you should print or save the document during the “free look” to avoid future charges. IMPORTANT NOTICE Under Rule 5 of the Federal! Rules of Civil Procedure, Local Civil Rule 5.2, and the Court’s Electronic Case Filing Rules & Instructions, documents may be served by electronic means. If you register for electronic service: 1. You will no longer receive documents in the mail; 2. Ifyou do not view and download your documents during your “free look” and within 15 days of when the court sends the e-mail notice, you will be charged for looking at the documents; 3, This service does not allow you to electronically file your documents; 4. It will be your duty to regularly review the docket sheet of the case.?

1 Public Access to Court Electronic Records (PACER) (www,pacer.uscourts.gov) is an electronic public access service that allows users to obtain case and docket information from federal appellate, district, and bankruptcy courts, and the PACER Case Locator over the internet. 2 The docket sheet is the official record of all filings in a case. You can view the docket sheet, including images of electronically filed documents, using PACER or you can use one of the public access computers available in the Clerk's Office at the Court.

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

Related

Meilleur v. Strong
682 F.3d 56 (Second Circuit, 2012)
Walker v. Schult
717 F.3d 119 (Second Circuit, 2013)
Cherry v. Toussaint
50 F. App'x 476 (Second Circuit, 2002)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Rodriguez v. Duran, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rodriguez-v-duran-nysd-2024.