Ruggiero v. Jones

District Court, S.D. New York·Decided September 8, 2023·No. 7:23-cv-07157·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ANTHONY RUGGIERO, Plaintiff, 23-CV-7157 (PMH) -against- ORDER OF SERVICE STEPHANIE E. JONES, Correction Officer, Fishkill C.F., et al., Defendants. PHILIP M. HALPERN, United States District Judge: Plaintiff, who is appearing pro se, brings this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that Defendants violated his federal constitutional rights and his rights under state law when he was incarcerated at Fishkill Correctional Facility.1 By order dated August 15, 2023, the Court granted Plaintiff’s request to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”), that is, without prepayment of fees. DISCUSSION A. Service on named 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.2 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). 1 Plaintiff was no longer incarcerated at the time he filed this action. 2 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. To allow Plaintiff to effect service on Defendants Stephanie E. Jones, Kevin C. Eschmann, Paul E. Julien, Kaylah V. Pryear, Alexandra Ayana Gibbons, Ana M. Figueroa, David J. Valentino, John P. Broas, Chris J. Churns, Edward R. Burnett, Anthony J. Annucci, Shawn T. Sawyer, Investigator Vasquez, and Darion Torres3 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. 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. 121 F.3d 72, 76 (2d Cir. 1997). In the complaint, Plaintiff supplies sufficient information to permit the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision (“DOCCS”) to identify: (1) Jane Doe Correction Officer (also known as “Ms. A.”); (2)John Doe Correction Officer who was on duty on October 12, 2022; (3) incarcerated individual John Doe #1, whom Plaintiff believes to be from Gambia; (4) John Doe Incarcerated

3 Although Plaintiff identifies this Defendant as “Dario Torres,” public records maintained by the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision (“DOCCS”) show that his first name is “Darion.” Individuals #2 through #6, whom Plaintiff alleges assaulted him on October 12, 2022; and (5) the real name of the Defendant Plaintiff refers to as “Scott Durant.”4 It is therefore ordered that the New York State Attorney General, who is the attorney for and agent of DOCCS, must ascertain the identity and, where applicable, the badge number of each John and Jane Doe whom Plaintiff

seeks to sue here and the address where the defendant may be served. The Attorney General 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 John and Jane Doe defendants. 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 John and Jane Doe Defendants and deliver all documents necessary to effect service to the U.S. Marshals Service. C. 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.5

4 Although Plaintiff identifies this Defendant as Durant, records maintained by DOCCS do not show an individual with that name in DOCCS custody. 5 If Plaintiff would like copies of these discovery requests before receiving the responses and does not have access to the website, Plaintiff may request them from the Pro Se Intake Unit. D. NYLAG Clinic Plaintiff may consider contacting the New York Legal Assistance Group’s (“NYLAG”) Clinic for Pro Se Litigants in the Southern District of New York, which is a free legal clinic staffed by attorneys and paralegals to assist those who are representing themselves in civil lawsuits in this court. The clinic is run by a private organization; it is not part of, or run by, the

court. It cannot accept filings on behalf of the court, which must still be made by any pro se party through the Pro Se Intake Unit. A copy of the flyer with details of the clinic is attached to this order. CONCLUSION The Clerk of Court is directed to issue summonses, complete the USM-285 forms with the addresses for Stephanie E. Jones, Kevin C. Eschmann, Paul E. Julien, Kaylah V. Pryear, Alexandra Ayana Gibbons, Ana M. Figueroa, David J. Valentino, John P. Broas, Chris J. Churns, Edward R. Burnett, Anthony J. Annucci, Shawn T. Sawyer, Investigator Vasquez, and Darion Torres, and deliver all documents necessary to effect service to the U.S. Marshals Service. The Clerk of Court is further directed to mail a copy of this order and the complaint to the

New York State Attorney General at 28 Liberty Street, 16th Floor, New York, New York 10005. An “Amended Complaint” form is attached to this order. A copy of the NYLAG flyer with details of the clinic is attached to this order. Local Civil Rule 33.2 applies to this action. The Clerk of Court is also directed to mail an information package to Plaintiff. SO ORDERED. Dated: White Plains, New York ( Pm | / | September 8, 2023 PHILIP M. HALPERN United States District Judge

DEFENDANTS AND SERVICE ADDRESSES

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

Ruggiero v. Jones, (S.D.N.Y. 2023).

Ruggiero v. Jones (Ruggiero v. Jones) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Meilleur v. Strong
682 F.3d 56 (Second Circuit, 2012)
Walker v. Schult
717 F.3d 119 (Second Circuit, 2013)