Valles v. Attorney General of the United States
- Subramanian
- 1:25-cv-02215
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Valles v. Attorney General of the United States, Judge Subramanian ordered service on two defendants and stayed claims against Utah and California.
Andrew Valles; the United States Attorney General; the Attorneys General of New York, Utah, and California; the Clerk of Court; and the U.S. Marshals Service.
What happened
Andrew Valles, representing himself, challenges various aspects of the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act and seeks court orders stopping its enforcement. The court had already allowed him to proceed without paying filing fees.
The court directed the Clerk to issue summonses and arrange service by the U.S. Marshals Service on the United States Attorney General and the Attorney General of New York. It did not direct service on the Utah and California Attorneys General at this stage and stayed the claims against them pending further order.
Judge Arun Subramanian also extended the service deadline to 90 days after summonses issue and explained that Valles must request more time if service is not completed. The order did not decide whether Valles’s constitutional claims are valid.
The detailed version
- Valles v. Attorney General of the United States · No. 1:25-cv-02215
- Subramanian
- Apr. 17, 2025
Background
Andrew Valles is proceeding without a lawyer and was previously granted permission to proceed without prepaying filing fees. He challenges various aspects of the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act and seeks injunctive relief, including requests for preliminary relief.
Service of Process
Because Valles was allowed to proceed without prepaying fees, the court determined that he was entitled to assistance from the court and the U.S. Marshals Service in serving the defendants. The Clerk of Court was directed to prepare service forms, issue summonses, and provide the Marshals Service with the documents needed to serve the United States Attorney General and the Attorney General of the State of New York. The Clerk was also directed to identify the required procedure for serving the United States government.
The court explained that Valles’s deadline to serve the complaint would be 90 days after the summonses are issued. If service is not completed within that period, Valles should request an extension. The court also stated that he must notify the court in writing if his address changes and that the action may be dismissed if he fails to do so.
Utah and California Defendants
The court did not direct service on the Attorneys General of Utah and California at this stage. The claims against those defendants were stayed pending further order of the court.
Disposition
This order addresses service and the temporary stay of claims against two defendants. It does not decide the merits of Valles’s constitutional challenges to the registration law or his requests for injunctive relief.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.