Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Aug. 8, 2025

Jaime v. Atkins

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
7:25-cv-04878
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
11
Civil RightsSection 1983Pro SeDiscovery
In one sentence

In Jaime v. Atkins, Judge Roman ordered service and identification steps for Luis Jaime’s constitutional claims against prison officers.

Who this affects

Luis Jaime, Sergeant A. Atkins, the unidentified Green Haven correctional officers, the United States Marshals Service, the Clerk of Court, and the New York Attorney General.

What happened

Jaime v. Atkins concerns Luis Jaime’s lawsuit claiming federal constitutional violations and seeking damages from Sergeant A. Atkins and unidentified Green Haven correctional officers. Jaime is incarcerated and is representing himself. The court treated the complaint as raising claims under a federal civil-rights law.

The court directed the Clerk to issue a summons for Atkins and send the necessary papers to the U.S. Marshals Service for service. It also ordered Atkins to answer specified discovery requests within 120 days after service. The New York Attorney General must identify the John Doe officers, after which Jaime must file an amended complaint naming them. The order did not decide whether Jaime’s claims are valid.

Judge Nelson S. Roman issued the order on August 8, 2025. The order grants no merits judgment; it directs service, discovery, and steps to identify the unnamed defendants.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Jaime v. Atkins · No. 7:25-cv-04878
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
Aug. 8, 2025

Background

Luis Jaime, who is incarcerated at Green Haven Correctional Facility, filed the action without a lawyer. He seeks damages for alleged federal constitutional violations. The complaint names Green Haven Correctional Sergeant A. Atkins and what appear to be six unidentified Green Haven correctional officers. The court construed the complaint as asserting claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal law that allows claims for constitutional violations by people acting under state authority.

The court had previously allowed Jaime to proceed without prepaying filing fees. That permission does not eliminate a prisoner’s obligation to pay the full filing fee over time, as required by federal law.

Service on Atkins

Because Jaime was allowed to proceed without prepaying fees, the court ordered assistance from the United States Marshals Service in serving Atkins. The Clerk of Court must issue a summons, complete a USM-285 service form, and provide the Marshals Service with the documents needed to serve Atkins with the summons and complaint.

The court stated that service must occur within 90 days after the summons for Atkins is issued. If service does not occur by then, Jaime should request more time. Jaime must also notify the court in writing if his address changes; the court stated that failure to do so may result in dismissal of the action.

Discovery required from Atkins

The court determined that Local Civil Rule 33.2 applies. That rule requires certain defendants in prisoner cases to respond to specified court-ordered discovery requests. Atkins must serve responses to the standard interrogatories and document requests within 120 days after service of the summons and complaint, quoting each request verbatim in the responses.

Identifying the John Doe defendants

The court found that the information in Jaime’s complaint was sufficient for the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision to identify the unnamed officers. The unidentified defendants are described as uniformed Green Haven correctional personnel who, on May 10, 2025, responded to a command or direction from Sergeant Atkins to use force on Jaime.

The New York Attorney General, identified in the order as the attorney and agent for the Department of Corrections and Community Supervision, must provide the names, badge numbers, and service addresses of those officers to Jaime and the court within 60 days of the order. Within 30 days after receiving that information, Jaime must file an amended complaint naming the newly identified individuals and providing their badge numbers and service addresses. The amended complaint will replace, rather than supplement, the original complaint. The court stated that it will screen the amended complaint and, if necessary, issue further service and discovery directions.

Disposition

Judge Nelson S. Roman ordered the Clerk to mail Jaime an information package, issue the summons for Atkins, complete the service form, and deliver the required documents to the Marshals Service. The court also ordered Atkins to comply with Local Civil Rule 33.2 and directed that the order and complaint be sent to the New York Attorney General. This order addresses service, discovery, and identification of defendants; it does not resolve the merits of Jaime’s constitutional claims.

The authoritative version

Read the full 11-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.