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.

Green v. Kirkland

United States District Court, D. South Carolina

June 9, 2015

Douglas Green, Plaintiff,
v.
Lieutenant Sandra Kirkland, Defendant.

ORDER

Shiva V. Hodges United States 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. § 1983. Defendant filed a motion for summary judgment on April 29, 2015. [ECF No. 140].[1] As Plaintiff is proceeding pro se, the court entered an order pursuant to Roseboro v. Garrison, 528 F.2d 309 (4th Cir. 1975), on April 30, 2015, advising him of the importance of the motion for summary judgment and of the need for him to file an adequate response. [ECF No. 141]. Plaintiff was specifically advised that if he failed to respond adequately, Defendant’s motion may be granted.

Notwithstanding the specific warning and instructions set forth in the court’s Roseboro order, Plaintiff 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, Plaintiff is directed to advise the court whether he wishes to continue with this case and to file a response to Defendant’s motion for summary judgment by June 23, 2015. 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.