Paulo Ramos Da Silva Filho v. Mayorkas
- James Oetken
- 1:25-cv-08864
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Paulo Ramos Da Silva Filho v. Alejandro Mayorkas, Judge Oetken ordered summonses issued and set a 90-day service deadline.
The order affects Paulo Ramos Da Silva Filho, who must serve the summonses and complaint and keep the court informed of any address change, and the named defendants Alejandro Mayorkas, Ur M. Jaddou, Pam Bondi, the United States of America, and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.
What happened
Paulo Ramos Da Silva Filho v. Alejandro Mayorkas is an order about starting the case, not about whether the claims are legally valid. The plaintiff paid the filing fees and is proceeding without a lawyer.
The court directed the Clerk of Court to issue summonses for Alejandro Mayorkas, Ur M. Jaddou, Pam Bondi, the United States, and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. The plaintiff must serve each defendant within 90 days after the summons is issued. The court extended the usual deadline because summonses were not issued when the complaint was filed.
If the plaintiff does not serve the defendants or request more time within that period, the court may dismiss the claims for failure to pursue the case. The plaintiff must also notify the court in writing of any address change. Judge J. Paul Oetken also directed the clerk to mail the plaintiff an information package and explained that the plaintiff may receive court documents by email by consenting to electronic service.
The detailed version
- Paulo Ramos Da Silva Filho v. Mayorkas · No. 1:25-cv-08864
- James Oetken
- Nov. 5, 2025
Background
Paulo Ramos Da Silva Filho filed this action, paid the filing fees, and is proceeding without a lawyer. The order does not describe the underlying claims or decide their merits.
Court’s action
The court directed the Clerk of Court to issue summonses for Alejandro Mayorkas, Ur M. Jaddou, Pam Bondi, the United States of America, and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. The plaintiff must serve the summons and complaint on each defendant within 90 days after the summons is issued.
The court explained that although Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4 generally requires service within 90 days after filing the complaint, the summonses in this case were not issued when the complaint was filed. The court therefore extended the service period to 90 days after the summonses are issued. If the plaintiff does not serve the defendants or request an extension within that period, the court may dismiss the claims under Rules 4 and 41 for failure to prosecute, meaning failure to move the case forward.
The plaintiff must notify the court in writing if his address changes, and the court may dismiss the action if he fails to do so. The clerk was also directed to mail the plaintiff an information package. The plaintiff may choose to receive court documents by email by completing a consent form; if he does so, he will no longer receive court documents by regular mail.
Disposition
Judge J. Paul Oetken entered an Order of Service. The order directs issuance of summonses and sets service requirements; it does not resolve the underlying legal claims.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.