UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK CATHERINE M. MINCHALA, Plaintiff, 23-CV-9398 (AS) -against- ORDER OF SERVICE MARRIOTT INTERNATIONAL INC., et al., Defendants. ARUN SUBRAMANIAN, United States District Judge: Plaintiff, who is proceeding pro se, brings this action under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990,

; the New York State Human Rights Law,

to 297; and the New York City Human Rights Law, N.Y.C. Admin. Code §§ 8-101 to 131. She alleges that her employer discriminated and retaliated against her based on her disability. By order dated November 2, 2023, the Court granted Plaintiff’s request to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”), that is, without prepayment of fees. DISCUSSION Because Plaintiff has been granted permission to proceed IFP, she is entitled to rely on the Court and the U.S. Marshals Service to effect service.1 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)).

1 Although Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure generally requires that a summons be served within 90 days of the date the complaint is filed, Plaintiff is proceeding IFP and could not have served summonses and the complaint until the Court reviewed the complaint and ordered that summonses be issued. The Court therefore extends the time to serve until 90 days after the date summonses are issued. To allow Plaintiff to effect service on Defendants Marriott International, Inc., Sean Roche, Scott Selby, Shantrell Gaulden, and Tyler Wood 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 each defendant. The Clerk of Court is further instructed to issue summonses and deliver to the Marshals Service all the paperwork necessary for the Marshals Service to effect service upon Defendants. If the complaint is not served within 90 days after the date summonses are issued, 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). Plaintiff must notify the Court in writing if her address changes, and the Court may dismiss the action if Plaintiff fails to do so. CONCLUSION The Clerk of Court is instructed to issue summonses as to Defendant Defendants Marriott International, Inc., Sean Roche, Scott Selby, Shantrell Gaulden, and Tyler Wood, complete the USM-285 form with the addresses for these defendants, and deliver all documents necessary to effect service to the U.S. Marshals Service. The Clerk of Court is further instructed to mail an information package to Plaintiff. SO ORDERED. Dated: November 6, 2023 New York, New York ARUN SUBRAMANIAN United States District Judge

DEFENDANTS AND SERVICE ADDRESSES Marriott International, Inc. 7750 Wisconsin Avenue Bethesda, MD 20814 Sean Roche Marriott International, Inc. 7750 Wisconsin Avenue Bethesda, MD 20814 Scott Selby W Residences 123 Washington Street New York, NY 10006 Shantrell Gaulden W Residences 123 Washington Street New York, NY 10006 Tyler Wood W Residences 123 Washington Street New York, NY 10006