Zorrer v. Spartanburg County Detention Center et al

Filing 49

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)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA Thomas R. Zorrer, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ) 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, ) ) Defendants. ) ) C/A No.: 1:16-3085-PMD-SVH ORDER 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, 2017. 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 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?