Ayala v. Sephora

Background

Maria J. Ayala filed this pro se action—that is, an action brought without a lawyer—under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. She alleges that her employer discriminated against her because of her disability. The defendants are Sephora and Jennifer Rivera. The court had previously granted Ayala permission to proceed in forma pauperis, meaning without paying the filing fee.

Service of process

The order concerns service of process, which is the formal delivery of the summons and complaint to the defendants. Because Ayala was proceeding without paying the filing fee, the court stated that she could rely on the court and the U.S. Marshals Service to complete service. The court explained that the usual 90-day service period could not begin in the ordinary way because Ayala could not serve the defendants until the court reviewed the complaint and ordered a summons issued.

The court therefore extended the time for service until 90 days after the summons is issued. It stated that, if service is not completed within that period, Ayala should request an extension of time. The order also noted that the Marshals Service’s failure to complete service can constitute good cause for an extension when a plaintiff has provided the information needed to identify the defendant.

Order

The court directed the Clerk of Court to complete U.S. Marshals Service Process Receipt and Return forms for Sephora and Jennifer Rivera, issue a summons, and deliver the required documents to the Marshals Service. The Clerk was also directed to mail Ayala a copy of the order and an information package. Ayala must notify the court in writing if her address changes; the court stated that it may dismiss the action if she fails to do so. Judge John G. Koeltl’s order addressed service and case administration; it did not decide whether the alleged disability discrimination occurred or whether Ayala’s claims have merit.