Bracey v. City of New York

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 10/1/2021 JAMAHL BRACEY, Plaintiffs, -against- 1:20-cv-06768-MKV CITY OF NEW YORK, POLICE OFFICER JONATHAN ORDER RUIZ, SERGEANT THOMPSON, and ONE OTHER UNKNOWN POLICE OFFICER, Defendants.

MARY KAY VYSKOCIL, United States District Judge: A review of Court records indicates that the Amended Complaint in this action was filed on February 11, 2021 [ECF Nos. 21–22], and that no proof of service of the summons and Amended Complaint has been filed. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) provides: If a defendant is not served within 90 days after the complaint is filed, the court – on motion or on its own after notice to the plaintiff – must dismiss the action without prejudice against that defendant or order that service be made within a specified time. But if the plaintiff shows good cause for the failure, the court must extend the time for service for an appropriate period.

On August 30, 2021, the Court issued an order directing Plaintiff to serve the summons and Complaint on Defendants on or before September 30, 2021 or to show cause, in writing, why service has not been made. There have been no further filings from Plaintiff.

Plaintiff is directed to serve the summons and Complaint on Defendants on or before November 1, 2021. If service has not been made on or before November 1, 2021, and if Plaintiff fails to show cause, in writing, why service has not been made, the Amended Complaint will be dismissed for failure to prosecute, pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 4 and 41. See LeSane v. Hall’s Sec. Analyst, Inc., 239 F.3d 206, 209 (2d Cir. 2001).

SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 1, 2021 New York, NY _____________________________ MARY KAY VYSKOCIL United States District Judge