MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding challenging a determination finding him guilty of violating prison disciplinary rules by failing to comply with urinalysis testing procedures and refusing a direct order. Supreme Court dismissed the proceeding for lack of personal jurisdiction over respondent given petitioner's admission that he failed to serve respondent with the petition and supporting papers as directed in the order to show cause. We affirm. "Failure of an inmate to satisfy the service requirements set forth in an order to show cause requires dismissal for lack of jurisdiction absent a showing that imprisonment presented obstacles beyond his [or her] control which prevented compliance" (Matter of Gittens v. Selsky, 193 A.D.2d 986, 987 [citations omitted]; see Matter of Townes v. Selsky, 309 A.D.2d 1106). No such showing has been made by petitioner, notwithstanding his assertion that he had insufficient funds for photocopying (see Matter of McCants v. Travis, 282 A.D.2d 851, lv denied 97 N.Y.2d 605).
Mercure, J.P., Spain, Rose, Lahtinen and Kane, JJ., concur.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.