Uppal v. NYS Department of Health

Background

Neelam Uppal was proceeding without a lawyer and without paying the filing fee. In a September 27, 2019 order, the court allowed her to amend her complaint to add the Florida State Department of Health and Carlton Fields Law Firm, referred to as the “Remaining Defendants,” and dismissed all other defendants from the case.

On October 29, 2019, the court directed the clerk to send Uppal one U.S. Marshals Service Process Receipt and Return form for each remaining defendant. The order required Uppal either to complete and return the forms within 30 days or to notify the court that she wanted to serve the defendants herself and needed summonses issued directly to her. The order also stated that Uppal was responsible for completing service or requesting an extension of time if necessary.

Failure to Serve

The court stated that Uppal had not returned the service forms, requested that summonses be issued directly to her, filed an affidavit of service, or taken any other action to prosecute the case. The earlier order had warned that failure to serve the defendants or request an extension could lead to dismissal under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 4(m) and 41(b).

Order

Judge Vernon S. Broderick ordered Uppal to submit, no later than 30 days after the order, a letter of no more than three pages showing good cause why the case should not be dismissed under Rule 4(m). The court explained that good cause generally exists only in exceptional circumstances in which the failure to serve process resulted from circumstances beyond the plaintiff’s control, and that courts consider the plaintiff’s diligence and any prejudice caused by the delay.

The court warned that failure to submit the letter and demonstrate good cause for failing to serve the defendants within 90 days after the complaint was filed would result in dismissal. The order required a response and warned of a possible dismissal; it did not itself dismiss the action.