Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Lori Argo v. Adw Gaskins

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK


November 29, 2011

LORI ARGO,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
ADW GASKINS, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Gold, Steven M., U.S.M.J.:

ORDER

Plaintiff brings this pro se action pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as codified, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e to 2000e-17, alleging that her employer, the New York City Department of Corrections ("NYDOC") and individual Corrections Officers within its employ unlawfully discriminated against her on the basis of her religion. On August 1, 2011, plaintiff filed the instant complaint. On September 2, 2011, the Clerk of the Court filed unexecuted summonses for all of the individual defendants. By letter dated November 28, 2011, NYDOC seeks an extension of time to answer to December 19, 2011. Docket Entry 14. NYDOC's application for an extension of time is granted. In the future, applications seeking relief from the court should be filed as motions but may remain in letter form. Pursuant to Valentin v. Dinkins, 121 F.3d 72 (2d Cir. 1997) (per curiam), the Court requests that Corporation Counsel ascertain the full names and service addresses of the Corrections Officers named in plaintiff's complaint. Corporation Counsel need not undertake to defend or indemnify these individuals at this juncture. This Order merely provides a means by which plaintiff may name, and the marshals may serve, the defendants as instructed by the Second Circuit in Valentin. See also Murray v. Pataki, 378 Fed. Appx. 50, 52 (2d Cir. 2010) (citing Valentin and noting that "[d]istrict courts have a responsibility to assist pro se plaintiffs in their efforts to serve process on defendants").

Corporation Counsel is hereby requested to produce the information specified above regarding the identities and service addresses of the Corrections Officers by December 19, 2011.

Once this information is provided, summonses shall be issued, and the Court shall direct the marshals to attempt service on the individual defendants for a second time. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m), plaintiff is hereby granted an extension of time until January 20, 2012 to effect service upon the individual defendants.

SO ORDERED.

Steven M. Gold United States Magistrate Judge

A copy of this Order will be mailed on this day to plaintiff at the address listed on the docket sheet.

U:\eoc 2011\argo valentin order.docx

20111129

© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.