Scott v. South Carolina Department of Corrections et al

Filing 29

ORDER directing the plaintiff to advise the court as to whether he wishes to continue with this action and to file a response to the defendants' 25 motion for summary judgment within ten (10) days from the date of t his order. Plaintiff is further advised that if he fails to respond, this matter may be decided on the record presented in support of the defendants' motion, or may be recommended for dismissal with prejudice for failure to prosecute. (Response to Motion due by 12/12/2016. Add an additional 3 days only if served by mail or otherwise allowed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 6 or Fed. R. Crim. P. 45.) Signed by Magistrate Judge Paige J. Gossett on 12/2/2016. (bgoo)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
ROCK HILL DIVISION
James D. Scott,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
South Carolina Department of Corrections;
)
Warden Robert Stevenson, III; Warden Cecilia )
Reynolds; Chaplain B. Collough; Chaplain J. )
Michael Brown; Chaplain Leonard Cain;
)
)
Defendants.
)
____________________________________ )

C/A No. 0:16-533-BHH-PJG

ORDER

Plaintiff, who is represented by counsel, filed this matter alleging violations of his civil rights
by the named defendants. The defendants filed a motion for summary judgment on November 10,
2016, pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (ECF No. 25.) As of the date of this order,
the plaintiff has failed to respond to the defendants’ motion in accordance with Local Civil Rule 7.06
(D.S.C.). As such, it appears to the court that he does not oppose this motion and wishes to abandon
this action.
Based on the foregoing, it is
ORDERED that the plaintiff shall advise the court as to whether he wishes to continue with
this action and to file a response to the defendants’ motion for summary judgment within ten (10)
days from the date of this order. Plaintiff is further advised that if he fails to respond, this matter
may be decided on the record presented in support of the defendants’ motion, see Local Civil Rule
7.06 (D.S.C.), or may 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).
Page 1 of 2

IT IS SO ORDERED.

December 2, 2016
Columbia, South Carolina

____________________________________
Paige J. Gossett
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Page 2 of 2