2 oud SDNY ) DOCUMENT PELECTRONICALLY SILED UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4: mene □ SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK Hs mars CH od 0. ry □ (rare TEV UL □ |

Plaintiff, 21-CV-7120 (VB) -against- ORDER OF SERVICE MCGGINNES, Superintendent, Downstate C.F., Defendant.

VINCENT L. BRICCETTI, United States District Judge: Plaintiff, currently incarcerated at Great Meadow Correctional Facility, brings this pro se action alleging that the Superintendent of Downstate Correctional Facility violated his right to practice his religion during his incarceration at Downstate. The Court construes Plaintiff’s allegations as a First Amendment challenge to Downstate’s failure to recognize his religion in its rules and regulations, in violation of

. By order dated September 9, 2021, the Court granted Plaintiff’s request to proceed without prepayment of fees, that is, in forma pauperis.’ DISCUSSION Because Plaintiff has been granted permission to proceed IFP, he is entitled to rely on the Court and the U.S. Marshals Service to effect service. Walker v. Schult,

, 123 n.6 (2d Cir. 2013); see also

(d) (“The officers of the court shall issue and serve all process ... in [IFP] cases.”); Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(3) (the court must order the Marshals Service to serve if the plaintiff is authorized to proceed IFP)). Although Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure generally requires that the summons and complaint be served within 90 days of

! Prisoners are not exempt from paying the full filing fee even when they have been granted permission to proceed in forma pauperis. See

(b)(1).

the date the complaint is filed, Plaintiff is proceeding IFP and could not have served the summons and complaint until the Court reviewed the complaint and ordered that a summons be issued. The Court therefore extends the time to serve until 90 days after the date the summons is issued. If the complaint is not served within that time, Plaintiff should request an extension of time for service. See Meilleur v. Strong,.

(2d Cir. 2012) (holding that it is the plaintiff’s responsibility to request an extension of time for service); see also Murray v. Pataki,

(2d Cir. 2010) (“As long as the [plaintiff proceeding IFP] provides the information necessary to identify the defendant, the Marshals’ failure to effect service automatically constitutes ‘good cause’ for an extension of time within the meaning of Rule 4(m).”). To allow Plaintiff to effect service on Defendant Downstate Correctional Facility Superintendent Mcgginnes through the U.S. Marshals Service, the Clerk of Court is instructed to fill out a U.S. Marshals Service Process Receipt and Return form (“USM-285 form”) for this defendant. The Clerk of Court is further instructed to issue a summons and deliver to the Marshals Service all the paperwork necessary for the Marshals Service to effect service upon this defendant. Plaintiff must notify the Court in writing if Plaintiff’s address changes, and the Court may dismiss the action if Plaintiff fails to do so. CONCLUSION The Clerk of Court is directed to mail a copy of this order to Plaintiff, together with an information package. The Clerk of Court is further instructed to issue a summons as to Defendant Mcgginnes, complete the USM-285 forms with the addresses for this defendant, and deliver all documents necessary to effect service to the U.S. Marshals Service.

The Court certifies under

(a)(3) that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith, and therefore in forma pauperis-status is denied for the purpose of an appeal. Cf Coppedge v. United States,

(1962) (holding that an appellant demonstrates good faith when he seeks review of a nonfrivolous issue). SO ORDERED. Dated: September 30, 2021 Iu White Plains, New York Vu ~_VINCENTL.BRICCETTI United States District Judge

DEFENDANT AND SERVICE ADDRESS

Downstate Correctional Facility Superintendent Mcgginnes Downstate Correctional Facility 121 Red Schoolhouse Rd P.O. Box 445 Fishkill, NY 12524