Abdus-Salaam v. Maddalon et al

Filing 27

ORDER as to 25 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim. (Responses due by 4/23/2012). Signed by Magistrate Judge David S. Cayer on 4/9/2012. (Pro se litigant served by US Mail.) (tmg)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
CHARLOTTE DIVISION
3:11-CV-410-MOC-DSC

KARIMAH ABDUS-SALAAM,
Plaintiff,
v.
BILLY MADDALON, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

THIS MATTER IS BEFORE THE COURT sua sponte regarding the filing of
“Defendants Employment Security Commission of North Carolina and Joseph D. Pearlman’s
Motion To Dismiss and Motion to Substitute a Party Pursuant to Rules 12(b) and 25 of the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure,” Doc. 25, on April 5, 2012.
In accordance with Roseboro v. Garrison, 528 F.2d 309 (4th Cir. 1975), the Court advises
Plaintiff, who is proceeding pro se, that she has a right to respond to Defendants’ Motion. The
Court also advises Plaintiff that failure to respond may result in Defendant being granted the relief
it seeks, that is, the DISMISSAL OF THE COMPLAINT WITH PREJUDICE.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff is allowed until April 23, 2012 to respond
to “Defendants Employment Security Commission of North Carolina and Joseph D. Pearlman’s
Motion To Dismiss and Motion to Substitute a Party Pursuant to Rules 12(b) and 25 of the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure.”

SO ORDERED.

Signed: April 9, 2012