Cohn v. Doe, 1-10 et al

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
SAMUEL COHN,
Plaintiff,
- v - 	1:25-CV-1723
(MAD/DJS)
JOHN DOE 1-10, et al.,
Defendants.
APPEARANCES: 	OF COUNSEL:
SAMUEL COHN
Plaintiff, Pro Se
768008
Suffolk County Correctional Facility
110 Center Dr.
Riverhead, New York 11901
DANIEL J. STEWART
United States Magistrate Judge
ORDER
Pro se Plaintiff commenced this action while being incarcerated at the Suffolk
County Correctional Facility. 	Dkt. No. 1, Compl. 	The Complaint names only Doe
Defendants. 	Plaintiff was advised that summonses could not be served on unidentified
Defendants. Dkt. No. 10. He was further advised that upon amendment of the Complaint
to name specific Defendants attempts to serve process could be made. 	Id. 	That Order
was returned as undeliverable with the notation that Plaintiff had been discharged. Dkt.
No. 11. An Order was then served advising Plaintiff of the need to amend his Complaint
Case 1:25-cv-01723-MAD-DJS Document 14 Filed 10/15/26 Page 1 of 2

2
and reminding him of his obligation to provide an updated address, as well as the potential
consequences of not doing so. Dkt. No. 12. That Order was not returned, and Plaintiff
subsequently filed a notice regarding his address that again listed the Suffolk County
Correctional Facility as his address. Dkt. No. 13. Plaintiff, however, has not provided an
amended complaint, named any of the Doe Defendants, or communicated with the Court
since March 2026.
Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that a court may, in
its discretion, dismiss an action based upon the failure of a plaintiff to prosecute an action,
or to comply with the procedural rules or orders of the court. F ED . R. CIV . P. 41(b); see
Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626 (1962). This power to dismiss may be exercised
when necessary to achieve orderly and expeditious disposition of cases. See Freeman v.
Lundrigan, 1996 WL 481534, at *1 (N.D.N.Y. Aug. 22, 1996). To date, Plaintiff has
failed to prosecute this matter consistent with the prior orders of the Court and has not
provided the name for any Defendant who can be served with process. 	Plaintiff,
therefore, is granted until November 16, 2026, to file an Amended Complaint. He is
specifically advised that failure to comply with this Order may result in dismissal of
this action based on his failure to prosecute the matter. The Clerk of the Court shall
serve a copy of this Order upon Plaintiff at his last known address.
Date: 	October 15, 2026
Albany, New York
Case 1:25-cv-01723-MAD-DJS Document 14 Filed 10/15/26 Page 2 of 2