Ford v. Warden

Filing 13

ORDER directing Petitioner to advise the court as to whether he wishes to continue with this case and to file a response to Respondent's 10 MOTION to Dismiss by August 25, 2016. Signed by Magistrate Judge Shiva V Hodges on 8/11/2016. (mwal)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
Glenn Ford,
Petitioner,
vs.
Warden of FCI-Edgefield,
Respondent.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

C/A No.: 1:16-1534-RMG-SVH

ORDER

Petitioner, proceeding pro se, brought this action requesting a writ of habeas
corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Respondent filed a motion to dismiss, or in the
alternative, for summary judgment on July 5, 2016. [ECF No. 10]. As Petitioner 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 a motion and of the need for him
to file an adequate response by August 8, 2016. [ECF No. 11]. Petitioner was specifically
advised that if he failed to respond adequately, Respondent’s motion may be granted,
thereby ending this case.
Notwithstanding the specific warning and instructions set forth in the court’s
Roseboro order, 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, the undersigned orders Petitioner to advise the court as to whether he wishes
to continue with this case and to file a response to Respondent’s motion to dismiss, or in
the alternative, for summary judgment by August 25, 2016. 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. 41(b).
IT IS SO ORDERED.

August 11, 2016
Columbia, South Carolina

Shiva V. Hodges
United States Magistrate Judge

2