Burton v. America
- Rearden
- 1:18-cv-02039
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Burton v. United States of America, Judge Rearden ordered disclosure of contact information for service and extended defendants’ response deadline.
The order affected the plaintiffs; Rosalind Silvia and Shaadiq Shakir, whose contact information was ordered disclosed for service; the defendants seeking more time to respond; Terrance Thomas; and the United States Attorney’s Office.
What happened
In Burton v. United States of America, the plaintiffs asked for contact information for Rosalind Silvia and Shaadiq Shakir, current or former Bureau of Prisons employees whom they needed to serve with the lawsuit. They also requested more time to complete service.
The defendants asked for more time to respond to the Second Amended Complaint. The parties did not dispute that the Privacy Act allows a court to order disclosure of agency records for litigation purposes.
Judge Rearden granted the plaintiffs’ motion to compel and required the information to be disclosed under the case’s Protective Order, only for serving Silvia and Shakir. She extended the service deadline to April 23, 2023, extended the defendants’ response deadline to March 31, 2023, and required the United States Attorney’s Office to clarify whether it represented Terrance Thomas.
The detailed version
- Burton v. America · No. 1:18-cv-02039
- Rearden
- Mar. 24, 2023
Background
The plaintiffs filed a Second Amended Complaint naming seven additional Bureau of Prisons employees as defendants in their individual capacities under Bivens v. Six Unknown Federal Narcotics Agents. The newly named defendants were Lorenzo Barazza, Gerald Castillo, Quentin Holzendorf, Shaadiq Shakir, Wilson Silva, Terrance Thomas, and Rosalind Silvia.
The defendants had previously received an extension to respond to the Second Amended Complaint through March 17, 2023. On March 17, the defendants requested another extension, through March 31, 2023. The United States Attorney’s Office stated that it was authorized to represent five of the newly added defendants, but the letter contained an inconsistent reference to whether it represented Shaadiq Shakir and stated that it was not currently authorized to represent Terrance Thomas and Rosalind Silvia.
The plaintiffs also asked the court to order disclosure of Silvia’s and Shakir’s personal addresses, email addresses, and telephone numbers so they could serve those defendants. They requested an extension of the deadline for service under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m), from March 2, 2023, to April 23, 2023.
Court’s Analysis
The Privacy Act generally restricts a federal agency from disclosing records in its systems of records without a written request or the person’s prior consent. But the Act includes an exception allowing disclosure pursuant to an order from a court with jurisdiction. The court determined that the requested information was relevant and necessary for the plaintiffs to serve Silvia and Shakir.
Rulings
The court granted the plaintiffs’ motion to compel. It ordered that the requested information be disclosed under the Protective Order already entered in the case and used only to complete service on Silvia and Shakir. The plaintiffs were given until April 23, 2023, to complete service on those defendants.
The court also granted the defendants’ request for an extension to respond to the Second Amended Complaint. Defendants represented by the United States Attorney’s Office were required to respond by March 31, 2023. The office was required to file a letter by March 27, 2023, confirming whether it represented Terrance Thomas, who had not appeared as of the order’s date. If it did not represent Thomas, the plaintiffs were required by March 31, 2023, either to request an amended summons for him or to propose next steps for serving him. The court directed the Clerk to terminate docket entries 81 and 82.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.