Browning v. Mansukhani
ORDER directing the petitioner to advise the court as to whether he wishes to continue with this case and to file a response to the respondent's 13 motion to dismiss, or in the alternative, for summary judgment withi n fourteen (14) days from the date of this order. The petitioner is further advised that if he fails to respond, this action will be recommended for dismissal with prejudice for failure to prosecute. (Response to Motion due by 2/9/2017. 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 Paige J. Gossett on 1/26/2017. (bgoo)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
Thomas W. Browning,
A. Mansukhani, Warden Federal Correctional )
Inst. - Estill,
C/A No. 0:16-3237-RMG-PJG
The petitioner has filed this action, pro se, seeking a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 2241. The respondent filed a motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, for summary
judgment on December 21, 2016, pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (ECF No. 13.)
As the petitioner is proceeding pro se, the court entered an order pursuant to Roseboro v. Garrison,
528 F.2d 309 (4th Cir. 1975), on December 21, 2016, advising the petitioner of the importance of
a motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, for summary judgment and of the need for him to file an
adequate response. (ECF No. 14.) The petitioner was specifically advised that if he failed to
respond adequately, the respondent’s motion may be granted, thereby ending his case.
Notwithstanding the specific warning and instructions set forth in the court’s Roseboro order,
the 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 the petitioner shall advise the court as to whether he wishes to continue with
this case and to file a response to the respondent’s motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, for
Page 1 of 2
summary judgment within fourteen (14) days from the date of this order. The 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.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Paige J. Gossett
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
January 26, 2017
Columbia, South Carolina
Page 2 of 2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?