Heggins v. US Foods, Inc.

Filing 32

ORDER directed to advise the court whether he wishes to continue with this case and to file a response to Defendants 29 MOTION to Dismiss by May 22, 2017. 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 Shiva V Hodges on 5/8/2017. (mwal)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
ROCK HILL DIVISION
Dregory C. Heggins,
Plaintiff,
vs.
US Foods, Inc.,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

C/A No.: 0:16-2786-SVH

ORDER

Dregory C. Heggins (“Plaintiff”), proceeding pro se, filed this employment case
on July 7, 2016 and it was removed to this court on August 10, 2016. [ECF No. 1]. On
April 4, 2017, Defendant filed a motion to dismiss for failure to prosecute. [ECF No. 29].
As 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 the motion
and of the need for him to file an adequate response by May 5, 2017. [ECF No. 30].
Plaintiff was specifically advised that if he failed to respond adequately, Defendant’s
motion may be granted. Id.
Notwithstanding the specific warning and instructions set forth in the court’s
Roseboro order, Plaintiff 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 to dismiss by May 22, 2017. Plaintiff is
further advised that if he fails to respond, this action will be dismissed 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.

May 8, 2017
Columbia, South Carolina

Shiva V. Hodges
United States Magistrate Judge

2