Arroyo v. Kent Security Services
- Katharine Parker
- 1:22-cv-00073
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Arroyo v. Kent Security Services, Judge Parker ordered Marshals Service assistance with serving the defendant.
Noel Arroyo and Kent Security Services; the order also directs the Clerk of Court and the U.S. Marshals Service to act.
What happened
In Arroyo v. Kent Security Services, the court learned that Noel Arroyo’s summons and complaint had not been served on Kent Security Services as previously ordered. Arroyo had permission to proceed without paying the usual court fees and could rely on the court and the U.S. Marshals Service for service.
The court extended the service deadline to 90 days after a new summons is issued. It said Arroyo should request more time if service is not completed by then.
The court ordered the clerk to prepare the service form, issue a new summons, and send the necessary papers to the Marshals Service. Judge Katharine H. Parker also directed Arroyo to notify the court if his address changes and stated that the action may be dismissed if he does not.
The detailed version
- Arroyo v. Kent Security Services · No. 1:22-cv-00073
- Katharine Parker
- June 28, 2022
Background
Noel Arroyo’s summons and complaint had not been served on Kent Security Services as previously ordered. The opinion states that Arroyo had been granted permission to proceed without paying the usual court fees. In such cases, the court and the U.S. Marshals Service can carry out service when the plaintiff provides the necessary information.
Order
The court extended the time for service until 90 days after a new summons is issued. If service is not completed within that period, the opinion states that Arroyo should request an extension of time.
The clerk of court was instructed to complete a U.S. Marshals Service Process Receipt and Return form for Kent Security Services, issue a new summons, and deliver the paperwork needed for the Marshals Service to serve the defendant. The clerk was also directed to mail Arroyo a copy of the order. Arroyo must notify the court in writing if his address changes, and the court stated that it may dismiss the action if he fails to do so.
Disposition
This order addresses service of the lawsuit and does not decide the underlying claims. Judge Katharine H. Parker ordered the clerk and Marshals Service to take the steps needed to attempt service.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.