Smith v. City of New York

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK MYRA S. SMITH, Plaintiff, 1:23-cv-08229 (JLR) -against- ORDER OF SERVICE CITY OF NEW YORK, Defendant.

JENNIFER L. ROCHON, United States District Judge: Plaintiff brings this pro se action asserting, among other claims, violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e to 2000e-17; 42 U.S.C. § 1981; the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, 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. She alleges that her employer discriminated and retaliated against her based on her race, color, and age. By order dated September 27, 2023, the Court granted Plaintiff’s request to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”), that is, without prepayment of fees. See ECF No. 3. DISCUSSION Because Plaintiff has been granted permission to proceed IFP, she is entitled to rely on the Court and the U.S. Marshals Service to effect service.1 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

1 Although Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure generally requires that a summons be served within 90 days of the date that the Complaint is filed, Plaintiff is proceeding IFP and could not have served the summons and the Complaint 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 that the summons is issued. 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 Defendant City of New York 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. The Clerk of Court is further instructed to issue a summons and deliver to the Marshals Service all the paperwork necessary for the Marshals Service to effect service upon Defendant. If the Complaint is not served within 90 days after the date that the summons is 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 her address changes, and the Court may dismiss the action if Plaintiff fails to do so. CONCLUSION The Clerk of Court is instructed to issue a summons as to Defendant City of New York, complete the USM-285 forms with the address for this Defendant, and deliver all documents necessary to effect service to the U.S. Marshals Service. The Clerk of Court is further instructed to mail an information package to Plaintiff at the address listed on the docket.

SO ORDERED. Dated: September 29, 2023 New York, New York Shaasfer Kickows NNIRER L. ROCHON United States District Judge

DEFENDANT AND SERVICE ADDRESS City of New York 100 Church Street New York, NY 10007