UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK AKIL FOLBORG, Plaintiff, ORDER OF SERVICE -against- No. 24-CV-8913 (PMH) LIEUTENANT BLOT; SERGEANT JOHN DOE: OFFICER JOHN DOE: ROBERT BENTIVEGNA: NURSE JANE DOE, Defendants. PHILIP M. HALPERN, United States District Judge: On January 21, 2025, the Court issued an order, inter alia, directing the New York State Attorney General (“NYAG”) to identify the John Doe Correction Officer and John Doe Sergeant referred to in the complaint as having been present during the subject cell “extraction” as alleged in the complaint. (Doc. 8). On May 1, 2025, the NYAG filed a letter setting forth the identities and service addresses of Sergeant Alexander Schmitt and Correction Officer Lewis Boyd, who, based upon NYAG’s investigation, and information received from the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision (“DOCCS”), are the DOCCS employees who participated in the cell extraction at Green Haven Correctional Facility on November 9, 2021, as alleged in Plaintiff’s Complaint. (Doc. 14). Accordingly, the Court deems the complaint amended to substitute defendants “Officer John Doe” and “Sergeant John Doe” with the newly identified individuals, Sergeant Alexander Schmitt and Correction Officer Lewis Boyd. 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.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). To allow Plaintiff to effect service on defendants Sergeant Alexander Schmitt and Correction Officer Lewis Boyd 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 these defendants. 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 is reminded that he 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 Complaint is deemed amended to defendants “Officer John Doe” and “Sergeant John Doe” with the newly identified individuals, Sergeant Alexander Schmitt and Correction Officer Lewis Boyd. The Clerk of Court is directed to issue summonses for Defendants Sergeant Alexander Schmitt and Correction Officer Lewis Boyd, complete the USM-285 form with the addresses for

1 The time to serve Sergeant Alexander Schmitt and Correction Officer Lewis Boyd is extended until 90 days after the date summonses are issued. these defendants, and deliver all documents necessary to effect service on these defendants to the U.S. Marshals Service. The Clerk of Court is further directed to mail Plaintiff an information package. The Court certifies under

(a)(3) that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith, and therefore IFP 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: White Plains, New York May 2, 2025 Arnbhh/ □□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□ United States District Judge

DEFENDANTS AND SERVICE ADDRESS

Sergeant Alexander Schmitt Green Haven Correctional Facility 594 Rt. 216 Stormville, NY 12582-0010

Correction Officer Lewis Boyd Green Haven Correctional Facility 594 Rt. 216 Stormville, NY 12582-0010