Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Eaddy v. Pate

United States District Court, D. South Carolina

May 22, 2014

Donald Earl Eaddy, Plaintiff,
v.
John Pate, Defendants.

ORDER

KAYMANI D. WEST, Magistrate Judge.

Plaintiff, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, brought this action alleging violations of his constitutional rights pursuant to 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983. On April 15, 2014, Defendant John Pate filed a Motion for Summary Judgment. ECF No. 31. Plaintiff is proceeding pro se, the court entered an order pursuant to Roseboro v. Garrison, 528 F.2d 309 (4th Cir. 1975), advising him of the importance of such motions and of the need for him to file adequate responses. ECF No. 32. Plaintiff was specifically advised that if he failed to respond adequately, the Defendant's motion may be granted, thereby ending this case.

Notwithstanding the specific warning and instructions set forth in the court's Roseboro order, Plaintiff has failed to respond to these motions. As such, it appears to the court that he does not oppose these motions and wishes to abandon this action against these Defendants. Based on the foregoing, Plaintiff is directed to advise the court whether he wishes to continue with this case and to file a response to Defendant John Pate's Motion for Summary Judgment by June 9, 2014. Plaintiff is further advised that if he fails to respond, this action will be recommended for dismissal with prejudice for failure to prosecute. See Davis v. Williams, 588 F.2d 69, 70 (4th Cir. 1978); Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b).

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.