Egbufor v. Boyd
- Subramanian
- 1:24-cv-09779
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Egbufor v. Boyd, Judge Subramanian ordered summonses and Marshals Service for the pro se plaintiff.
D.Dumebi Egbufor, the six named defendants, the Clerk of Court, and the U.S. Marshals Service.
What happened
D.Dumebi Egbufor sued Carolyn Boyd, Rick Criswell, Jonathan Hochwald, Arthur Karpati, Emursive Productions, LLC, and PDNYC, LLC, under several employment-discrimination and leave laws. Egbufor is representing herself and had already received permission to proceed without paying court fees in advance.
The court directed the Clerk of Court to issue summonses, prepare service forms, and send the necessary papers to the U.S. Marshals Service so the defendants can be served. Service must be completed within 90 days after the summonses are issued, and Egbufor must ask for more time if service is not completed. She must also notify the court in writing of any address change.
Judge Arun Subramanian issued the order on January 10, 2025. The order concerns service of the lawsuit and does not decide whether Egbufor’s claims have merit.
The detailed version
- Egbufor v. Boyd · No. 1:24-cv-09779
- Subramanian
- Jan. 10, 2025
Background
D.Dumebi Egbufor, who is proceeding without a lawyer, brought claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 1981, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, the New York State Human Rights Law, the New York City Human Rights Law, and the Family and Medical Leave Act. The defendants are Carolyn Boyd, Rick Criswell, Jonathan Hochwald, Arthur Karpati, Emursive Productions, LLC, and PDNYC, LLC.
The court had previously granted Egbufor permission to proceed without paying court fees in advance. In such cases, federal law allows the plaintiff to rely on the court and the U.S. Marshals Service to serve the defendants with the lawsuit papers.
Order
The court instructed the Clerk of Court to issue summonses for all six defendants, complete the required U.S. Marshals Service forms with the listed addresses, and deliver the necessary documents to the Marshals Service for service.
The court extended the service deadline so that the 90-day period begins when the summonses are issued. If the complaint is not served within those 90 days, Egbufor must request an extension of time. The court also directed the Clerk to send Egbufor an information package and warned that the action may be dismissed if she does not notify the court in writing of an address change.
Disposition and Significance
This is an order about serving the defendants. It does not rule on the validity or merits of Egbufor’s employment-related claims, and the opinion does not state that any defendant has been served yet.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.