UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK YAHYA ABDUL-ALEEM, Plaintiff, -against- 24-CV-9097 (JGLC) MARK MILLER; MICHAEL LAGO; D. ORDER STRONG; MICHELLE M. LIBERTY; JOHN DOE #1; JOHN DOE #2; CATHY Y. SHEEHAN; JANE DOE #1; JANE DOE #2, Defendants. JESSICA G. L. CLARKE, United States District Judge: Plaintiff, who is currently incarcerated at Green Haven Correctional Facility, brings this action pro se asserting violations of his Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment rights. ECF No. 1. The complaint named several defendants, including two John Does and two Jane Does. Id. On April 16, 2025, the Court issued an Order of Service dismissing the John Doe defendants (due to a lack of identifying information), and instructing Defendants to identify the Jane Doe defendants. ECF No. 10. The Court granted several extensions to the Office of the Attorney General (“OAG”) to identify the Jane Doe defendants. ECF Nos. 21, 26, 29. During that time, Plaintiff sought an extension to file an amended complaint, and the Court instructed that Plaintiff would be permitted time to file an amended complaint after reviewing Defendants’ response to the Order of Service. ECF No. 21. By letter dated August 29, 2025, Defendants identified Jane Doe #1 as social worker Christa Lloyd. ECF No. 30. Defendants assert, however, they have been unable to identify Jane Doe #2 based on the information in the original complaint. At this time, the Court will not issue another Valentin order, and will instead instruct Plaintiff to proceed based on the information presently known. “[W]here a defendant reasonably complies with a Valentin Order and . . . where a defendant is unable to identify the relevant parties based on the information a plaintiff has provided, courts have directed plaintiffs to amend their complaint based on whatever information a defendant has provided, and [subsequently] given leave to amend if discovery reveals the relevant parties’ identity.” Lurch v. Doe Officers, No. 22-CV-2324 (VSB),

, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 13, 2022). The Court will take the same approach: should discovery reveal further information sufficient to identify Jane Doe #2, the Court will provide Plaintiff another opportunity to amend his complaint. Tn light of the above, Plaintiff shall file an amended complaint on or before October 30, 2025. The amended complaint should update the caption with the identity of Jane Doe #1. In addition, as the Court stated in its prior order (see ECF No. 14), Plaintiff may add Alissa Davis as a plaintiff and add any relevant claims or allegations with respect to Alissa Davis in the amended complaint if Ms. Davis seeks to join this action pro se. Finally, the Court notes that Plaintiff, in his prior letter, mentioned submitting his amended complaint to name “The John Does #1 and #2.” ECF No.15. For the avoidance of doubt, the Court reminds plaintiff that John Does 1 and 2 (members of IGRC Office Personnel of Green Haven Correctional Facility) have been dismissed from this action. See ECF No. 10. Therefore, the forthcoming amended complaint may only substitute Jane Doe #1 as set forth above. Dated: September 2, 2025 New York, New York SO ORDERED. . ESGICA G. L. CLARKE United States District Judge