Rosario v. R&M Richards, Inc.
- Jesse Furman
- 1:22-cv-10096
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Rosario v. R&M Richards, Judge Furman ordered Marshals Service service in Rosario’s jury-service termination lawsuit after she received permission to proceed without paying fees.
Nathalia Rosario, who may rely on the U.S. Marshals Service to serve her lawsuit, and R&M Richards, Inc., which is to be served with the summons and complaint.
What happened
Nathalia Rosario sued R&M Richards, Inc., alleging that the company terminated her employment because she served on a federal jury. The court treated her complaint as raising claims under the Jury System Improvements Act.
The court had already allowed Rosario to proceed without paying filing fees. Because of that status, the court ordered the Clerk and the U.S. Marshals Service to prepare and serve the summons and complaint on R&M Richards, Inc.
The order gives Rosario 90 days after the summons is issued to complete service or request more time. It also requires her to notify the court of any address change. Judge Jesse M. Furman denied permission to proceed without paying fees for any appeal from this order.
The detailed version
- Rosario v. R&M Richards, Inc. · No. 1:22-cv-10096
- Jesse Furman
- Dec. 13, 2022
Background
Nathalia Rosario filed this action without a lawyer against her employer, R&M Richards, Inc. She alleges that her employment was terminated because she served on a federal jury. The court construed the complaint as asserting claims under the Jury System Improvements Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1875.
In an order dated December 12, 2022, the court granted Rosario permission to proceed without prepaying filing fees. This status is commonly called proceeding in forma pauperis.
Service of the lawsuit
Because Rosario was allowed to proceed without prepaying fees, the court explained that she could rely on the court and the U.S. Marshals Service to serve R&M Richards, Inc. The court directed the Clerk of Court to complete a U.S. Marshals Service Process Receipt and Return Form, issue a summons, and deliver the necessary paperwork to the Marshals Service for service on the defendant.
The court stated that if the complaint is not served within 90 days after the summons is issued, Rosario should request an extension of time. The court also ordered her to notify the court in writing if her address changes and stated that failure to do so may result in dismissal of the case.
Disposition
The court entered an order directing issuance of the summons and service by the U.S. Marshals Service. It did not decide whether Rosario’s jury-service termination claim has merit. The court certified that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without prepaying fees for purposes of an appeal.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.