Zorrer v. Spartanburg County Detention Center et al
ORDER directing Plaintiff to advise the court whether he wishes to continue with this case and to file a response to Defendants' 41 MOTION for Summary Judgment. Response to Motion due by 8/3/2017. 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 7/20/2017. (mwal)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
Thomas R. Zorrer,
Spartanburg County Detention Center;
Sheriff Chuck Wright; Major Neil Urch; )
Ms. Ashley McCann; Captain Garcia;
Deputy Jacob Brock; Deputy Greene;
Deputy Preltlove; Deputy Nichols;
Deputy Britt; Deputy Thomas; Deputy
Ballew; Deputy Cooper; Deputy Rigsby; )
Deputy Wright; Deputy McCreary;
Deputy Benstead; Ms. K. White; Nurse
D. Simmons; Nurse Sonya; Deputy
Rollins; and Victoria Carswell,
C/A No.: 1:16-3085-PMD-SVH
Thomas R. Zorrer (“Plaintiff”), proceeding pro se, filed this action on September
9, 2016. [ECF No. 1]. On May 5, 2017, Defendants filed a motion for summary
judgment. [ECF No. 41]. 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 June 8,
2017. [ECF No. 42]. Plaintiff was specifically advised that if he failed to respond
adequately, Defendants’ motion may be granted. Id. On June 8, 2017, the undersigned
extended Petitioner’s deadline, granting him until July 10, 2017, to respond to
Defendants’ motion. [ECF No. 47].
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 Defendants’ motion for summary judgment by August 3,
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.
July 20, 2017
Columbia, South Carolina
Shiva V. Hodges
United States Magistrate Judge
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?