Moroshkin v. National Council on the Aging

Background

Sergei A. Moroshkin is proceeding without a lawyer. His amended complaint alleges retaliation under Title VII’s anti-retaliation provision and 42 U.S.C. § 1981 after he complained of discrimination and defendants terminated his participation in the Senior Community Service Employment Program. The court also construed the amended complaint as asserting claims under the New York State Human Rights Law and the New York City Human Rights Law.

The court had previously allowed Moroshkin to proceed without prepaying filing fees. Because he was allowed to proceed without prepaying fees, federal law requires the court to arrange service through the U.S. Marshals Service.

Order

The court directed the Clerk of Court to complete a U.S. Marshals Service Process Receipt and Return form for each of these defendants: National Council on Aging Senior Community Service Employment Program and Siveem El-Nashar, identified as the Senior Director of the Adult Workforce of SCSEP/New York City Department for the Aging. The Clerk must also issue summonses and provide the Marshals Service with the documents needed to serve them.

The order extends the service period to 120 days after the summonses are issued. If service is not completed within that period, Moroshkin should request an extension. If he does not request an extension, the court states that the amended complaint against the identified defendants may be dismissed for failure to prosecute under Rules 4 and 41 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Moroshkin must also notify the court in writing if his address changes.

What the Order Does Not Decide

Judge Margaret M. Garnett did not rule on the merits of Moroshkin’s retaliation or human-rights claims. The order concerns issuing summonses and arranging service, not whether the alleged retaliation occurred or whether Moroshkin will ultimately prevail.