Wilson v. Eagleton et al

Filing 53

ORDER directing the plaintiff to advise this court as to whether he wishes to continue with this case and to file a response to the defendants' 42 45 motions for summary judgment within fourteen (14) days from the dat e of this order. Plaintiff is further advised that if he fails to respond, this action will be recommended for dismissal with prejudice for failure to prosecute. (Response to Motions due by 3/15/2018. 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 3/1/2018. (bgoo)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
Dantwan A. Wilson,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
Willie Eagleton, Warden; Edward Bittinger,
)
DHO Officer; Addison Waddell, Correctional )
Officer; Fritz Ford, Captain; Pamela Oliver,
)
Counsel Substitute; Ms. Duressa Roberts,
)
Caseworker/Classification,
)
)
Defendants.
)
_____________________________________ )

C/A No. 0:17-1196-JFA-PJG

ORDER

The plaintiff has filed this action, pro se, seeking relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
Plaintiff, an inmate with the South Carolina Department of Corrections, alleges violations of his
constitutional rights by the named defendants. The defendants filed motions for summary judgment
on January 18, 2018, and January 19, 2018, pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (ECF
Nos. 42 & 45.) As the plaintiff is proceeding pro se, the court entered orders pursuant to Roseboro
v. Garrison, 528 F.2d 309 (4th Cir. 1975), on January 19, 2018 and January 22, 2018, advising the
plaintiff of the importance of a motion for summary judgment and of the need for him to file an
adequate response. (ECF Nos. 43 & 47.) The plaintiff was specifically advised that if he failed to
respond adequately, the defendants’ motions may be granted, thereby ending his case.
Despite his extension of time and notwithstanding the specific warning and instructions set
forth in the court’s Roseboro orders, the plaintiff has failed to respond to the motions. As such, it
appears to the court that he does not oppose the motions and wishes to abandon this action.

Page 1 of 2

Based on the foregoing, it is
ORDERED that the plaintiff shall advise the court as to whether he wishes to continue with
this case and to file a response to the defendants’ motions for summary judgment within fourteen
(14) days from the date of this order. 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.

____________________________________
Paige J. Gossett
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
March 1, 2018
Columbia, South Carolina

Page 2 of 2