Wimberly v. automotiveMastermind, Inc.
- John Koeltl
- 1:20-cv-02880-JGK
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Wimberly v. automotiveMastermind, Judge Caproni ordered the Marshals to serve the pro se plaintiff’s complaint, extended the service deadline, and denied fee-waiver status for an appeal.
Jason Wimberly and Automotive Mastermind, Inc.; the order primarily affected the procedure for serving Automotive Mastermind and Wimberly’s ability to proceed without paying fees on an appeal.
What happened
In Wimberly v. automotiveMastermind, Inc., Jason Wimberly brought a lawsuit claiming that his employer discriminated against him based on race, sex, disability, and genetic status under several federal, state, and city laws.
The court had already allowed Wimberly to proceed without paying filing fees. Because he was proceeding without a lawyer and could not arrange service before the court reviewed his complaint, the court extended the deadline for service until 90 days after the summons was issued.
Judge Valerie Caproni directed the Clerk of Court to issue the summons and provide the necessary papers to the U.S. Marshals Service so it could serve Automotive Mastermind, Inc. The court also directed that a copy of the order and an information package be mailed to Wimberly, required him to report address changes, and denied fee-waiver status for any appeal from this order.
The detailed version
- Wimberly v. automotiveMastermind, Inc. · No. 1:20-cv-02880-JGK
- John Koeltl
- May 22, 2020
Background
Jason Wimberly filed this case without a lawyer against Automotive Mastermind, Inc. He alleged employment discrimination based on race, sex, disability, and genetic status under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1981, the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act, and New York State and New York City human-rights laws. A prior order allowed him to proceed without paying filing fees.
Service of Process
Because Wimberly was allowed to proceed without paying filing fees, the court explained that he could rely on the U.S. Marshals Service to serve the summons and complaint. The court also explained that the usual 90-day service period could not begin in the ordinary way because Wimberly could not serve the papers until the court reviewed the complaint and ordered a summons issued. The court therefore extended the service period until 90 days after the summons was issued.
The Clerk of Court was directed to complete a U.S. Marshals Service Process Receipt and Return form for Automotive Mastermind, Inc., issue the summons, and provide the Marshals Service with the documents needed for service. The order also stated that Wimberly must notify the court in writing if his address changes and that the case could be dismissed if he failed to do so.
Disposition
The court ordered the Clerk to mail Wimberly a copy of the order and an information package and to deliver the service documents to the Marshals Service. Judge Valerie Caproni also certified that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without paying fees for purposes of an appeal. The order addressed service and appeal-related fee status; it did not decide the merits of Wimberly’s discrimination claims.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.