Dike v. San Simeon By The Sound Center

Filing 10

ORDER granting #2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis; Plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis is GRANTED. On November 7, 2017, Defendant filed an answer notwithstanding the fact that no summons had yet been issued nor had service of the Summons and Complaint been ordered. Accordingly, Defendant shall apprise the Court in writing no later than fourteen (14) days from the date of this Order whether it shall require the Court to expend resources in ordering the United State Marshal Service to serve the Complaint. If Defendant elects to waive service by the USMS, the Court shall deem any defense based on improper service to be waived. The Court certifies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith and therefore in forma pauperis status is DENIED for the purpose of any appeal. The Clerk of the Court is further directed to mail a copy of this Order to the pro se Plaintiff. So Ordered by Judge Joanna Seybert on 11/28/2017. C/M; C/ECF (Valle, Christine)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
----------------------------------X
CHINEDU DIKE,
Plaintiff,
-against-

ORDER
17-CV-5999(JS)(GRB)

SAN SIMEON BY THE SOUND CENTER
FOR REHABILITATION AND NURSING,
Defendant.
-----------------------------------X
APPEARANCES:
For Plaintiff:
Chinedu Dike, pro se
332 Lake Pointe Drive
Middle Island, NY 11953
For Defendant:

Juan C. Gonzalez, Esq.
Rubin Sheeley Paterniti Gonzalez Kaufman LLP
420 Lexington Ave., Suite 1820
New York, New York 10017

SEYBERT, District Judge:
On October 13, 2017, pro se plaintiff Chinedu Dike
(“Plaintiff”) filed a Complaint pursuant to Title VII of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”), as codified, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e
to 2000e-17, alleging employment discrimination and retaliation.
Plaintiff’s Complaint is accompanied by an application to proceed
in forma pauperis.
Upon review of Plaintiff’s declaration in support of his
application to proceed in forma pauperis, the Court finds that
Plaintiff’s financial status qualifies him to commence this action
without prepayment of the filing fees. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1).
Accordingly, Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis
is GRANTED.

On

November

7,

2017,

Defendant

filed

an

answer

notwithstanding the fact that no summons had yet been issued nor
had

service

of

the

Summons

and

Complaint

been

ordered.

Accordingly, Defendant shall apprise the Court in writing no later
than fourteen (14) days from the date of this Order whether it
shall require the Court to expend resources in ordering the United
State Marshal Service to serve the Complaint.

If Defendant elects

to waive service by the USMS, the Court shall deem any defense
based on improper service to be waived.
The Court certifies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3)
that any appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith
and therefore in forma pauperis status is DENIED for the purpose
of any appeal.

See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-

45, 82 S. Ct. 917, 8 L. Ed. 2d 21 (1962).
The Clerk of the Court is further directed to mail a copy
of this Order to the pro se Plaintiff.
SO ORDERED.

/s/ JOANNA SEYBERT
Joanna Seybert, U.S.D.J.
Dated: November
28 , 2017
Central Islip, New York