United States District Court, S.D. New York
BYRON K. BROWN, Plaintiff,
ANTHONY ANNUCCI, Commissioner; MICHAEL CAPRA, Superintendent; F. CARABALLO, Correctional Sergeant; J. AYALA, Correctional Officer; S. AMARO, Correctional Officer; V. YOUNG, Registered Nurse; K. GREEN, Correctional Officer; T. BOWEN, Correctional Officer; M. BARNES, Correctional Captain; "RODRIGUEZ" JOHN DOE, Correctional Officer; JOHN DOE, Correctional Officer; M. ROYCE, Deputy Superintendent of Security; D. VENNETTOZZI, Director of Special Housing; and L. MALIN, Deputy Superintendent of Programs, Defendants.
SECOND AMENDED ORDER OF SERVICE
VINCENT L. BRICCETTI UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE:
who is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis,
commenced this action by filing a complaint dated September
25, 2019, alleging defendants violated his constitutional
rights. (Doc. #2).
October 29, 2019, the Court issued an Order of Service
directing service of the complaint on twelve identified
defendants. (Doc. #5). The Order of Service further directed
the New York State Attorney General, by December 30, 2019, to
ascertain and identify the two John Doe defendants named in
the complaint-Correction Officers John Doe and
"Rodriguez" John Doe-so that they may be served.
filed an amended complaint dated November 13, 2019. (Doc.
#7). The amended complaint named and identified an additional
defendant, but also contained the same allegations against
John Doe and "Rodriguez" John Doe as stated in the
original complaint. (Id.). On November 8, 2019, the
Court issued an Amended Order of Service to effectuate
service on the newly named defendant. (Doc. #8). This Order
noted the New York Attorney General's obligation to
ascertain and identify John Doe and "Rodriguez" Doe
Joe remained in effect. (Id. at 1-2).
Defendant "Rodriguez" John Doe
letter dated December 27, 2019, pursuant to Valentin v.
Dinkins, 121 F.3d 72 (2d Cir. 1997), the New York State
Attorney General identified defendant "Rodriguez"
John Doe as Sing Sing Correction Officer David O. Rodriguez.
defendants can infer the claims plaintiff seeks to bring
against David O. Rodriguez from the face of the complaint,
the Court will direct the Clerk to add David O. Rodriguez to
the docket as a defendant rather than require plaintiff to
file an amended complaint.
addition, to allow plaintiff to effect service defendant
Rodriguez 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 this defendant. The Clerk of Court is further instructed
to issue a summons listing this defendant and deliver to the
Marshals Service all of the paperwork necessary for the
Marshals Service to effect service upon this defendant. The
service address for this defendant is appended to this Order.
plaintiffs responsibility to ensure that service is made
within 90 days of the date the summons is issued and, if
necessary, to request an extension of time for service. See
Meilleur v. Strong, 682 F.3d 56, 63 (2d Cir. 2012).
Defendant John Doe
December 27 letter, the New York State Attorney General
states, based on the allegations in the amended complaint,
the remaining John Doe defendant could be one of twenty-five
correction officers. (Doc. #21). As such, the identity of
this defendant cannot be determined without further
information from plaintiff.
by January 27, 2020, plaintiff is ORDERED to submit a letter
to the Court providing a more detailed description of the
John Doe defendant, so that this defendant can be identified
and served. Helpful information concerning this defendant
includes, but is not limited to, approximate height, weight,
race or ethnicity, hair color, and any other distinguishing
also must notify the Court in writing if plaintiff s address
changes, and the Court may dismiss ...