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.

Whitt v. Reynolds

United States District Court, D. South Carolina

March 25, 2015

Steven Whitt, #255456, Petitioner,
v.
Warden Cecilia Reynolds, Respondent.

ORDER

SHIVA V. HODGES, Magistrate Judge.

Petitioner, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, brought this action requesting a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254. Respondent filed a motion for summary judgment on February 11, 2015. [ECF No. 18]. As Petitioner is proceeding pro se, the court entered an order pursuant to Roseboro v. Garrison, 528 F.2d 309 (4th Cir. 1975), on February 12, 2015, advising him of the importance of a motion for summary judgment and of the need for him to file an adequate response by March 19, 2015. [ECF No. 20]. Petitioner was specifically advised that if he failed to respond adequately, Respondent's motion may be granted, thereby ending this case.

Notwithstanding the specific warning and instructions set forth in the court's Roseboro order, Petitioner has failed to respond to the motion. As such, it appears to the court that he does not oppose the motion and wishes to abandon this action. Based on the foregoing, it is ordered that Petitioner shall advise the court as to whether he wishes to continue with this case and to file a response to Respondent's motion for summary judgment by April 8, 2015. Petitioner 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.