UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ISAAC PETTIGREW, Plaintiff, 24-CV-4013 (DEH) (GS) -against- ORDER OF SERVICE RADIUS GLOBAL SOLUTIONS LLC, Defendant. GARY STEIN, United States Magistrate Judge: Plaintiff Isaac Pettigrew, who is appearing pro se, brings this action under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C § 1681 et seq. He sues Radius Global Solutions LLC, seeking declaratory relief and damages for Defendant’s allegedly having accessed his consumer report from Transunion without a permissible purpose. By order dated May 30, 2024, 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, he is entitled to assistance from the Court and the United States 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).

1Although 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 effected service until the Court reviewed the amended complaint and ordered that a summons be issued. The Court therefore extends the time to serve until 90 days after the date that a summons is issued. To allow Plaintiff to effect service on Defendant Radius Global Solutions LLC through the United States Marshals Service, the Clerk of Court is instructed to fill out a United States Marshals Service Process Receipt and Return form (“USM-285 form”) for Defendant. The Clerk of Court is further instructed to issue a summons for Radius Global Solutions LLC and deliver to the Marshals Service all of the paperwork necessary for the Marshals Service to effect service. If the complaint is not served within 90 days after the date that the summons issues, 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 his address changes, and the Court may dismiss the action if Plaintiff fails to do so. CONCLUSION The Court directs the Clerk of Court to mail an information package to Plaintiff. The Court further directs the Clerk of Court to issue a summons for Defendant Radius Global Solutions LLC, complete a USM-285 form with the service address for Defendant, and deliver to the United States Marshals Service all documents necessary to effect service. SO ORDERED. Dated: June 12, 2024 New York, New York 1 Mea GARY STEIN United States Magistrate Judge

SERVICE ADDRESS FOR DEFENDANT 1. Radius Global Solutions LLC c/o CT Corporation System 711 Capitol Way S, Suite 204 Olympia, Washington 98501 c/o CT Corporation System 28 Liberty Street New York, New York 10005