Jones v. Saul
- Vincent Briccetti
- 7:20-cv-07282
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Jones v. Saul, Judge Briccetti granted more time to serve the Social Security Commissioner and required proof of proper service.
The plaintiff and the Commissioner of Social Security; the order also directed the United States Attorney’s Office to help ensure delivery of the summons and complaint.
What happened
In Jones v. Saul, the plaintiff’s lawyer said postal delays prevented filing proof that the Social Security Commissioner had received the summons and complaint. The United States Attorney’s Office and the Attorney General had received service, but delivery to the Commissioner was still delayed.
The court granted the plaintiff’s request for more time. It directed the plaintiff either to resend the papers by registered or certified mail or to provide details showing that they had already been sent that way.
Judge Briccetti required the plaintiff to file a certificate of service by December 14, 2020, and directed the United States Attorney’s Office to email the papers to the Social Security Administration. The court said service would be complete when the certificate was filed.
The detailed version
- Jones v. Saul · No. 7:20-cv-07282
- Vincent Briccetti
- Dec. 7, 2020
Background
The plaintiff’s attorney filed a letter motion seeking an extension of time to serve the summons and complaint on the Commissioner of Social Security. The attorney stated that the complaint had been filed on September 5, 2020, and that the summons had been issued on September 8, 2020. Copies were mailed on November 13, 2020, to the Commissioner of Social Security, the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, and the Attorney General.
The attorney stated that the United States Attorney received service on November 23, 2020, and the Attorney General received service on November 30, 2020. Postal tracking showed that the package sent to the Commissioner at 26 Federal Plaza had been delayed. The attorney argued that the postal delay was good cause for extending the service deadline and that the government would not be prejudiced by a short extension.
Court’s Analysis
The court granted the letter motion for an extension of time to serve the complaint. The court noted that the plaintiff had said the summons and complaint were “mailed” but had not specifically stated whether they were sent to the Social Security Administration by registered or certified mail, as required by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
The court provided alternative instructions. If the papers had not already been sent by registered or certified mail, the plaintiff had to resend them by the appropriate method no later than December 14, 2020. If they had already been sent by registered or certified mail, the plaintiff had to file a certificate of service by that date describing the relevant facts, including the package’s tracking number.
The court also directed the United States Attorney’s Office to email a copy of the summons and complaint to the Social Security Administration. Because no lawyer had yet appeared for the defendant, the plaintiff was required to send a copy of the order to that office.
Disposition
The court granted the extension-of-time motion. It stated that service would be deemed complete when the plaintiff filed the certificate of service required by the order, and that future deadlines would be calculated from that date. The order did not decide the underlying Social Security claim.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.