Greene v. Perry Correctional Institution

Filing 54

ORDER Plaintiff is directed to advise the court whether he wishes to continue with this case and to file a response to Defendants' 42 MOTION for Summary Judgment by February 12, 2019. Plaintiff is further advised th at if he fails to respond, this action will be recommended for dismissal with prejudice for failure to prosecute. (Response to Motion due by 2/12/2019. 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 1/29/2019. (lbak)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
Wilton Q. Greene, III,
Plaintiff,
vs.
Cecil Hawkins; M. Toth; and J.
Glenn,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

C/A No.: 1:18-1731-BHH-SVH

ORDER

Wilton Q. Greene (“Plaintiff”), proceeding pro se, filed this action on
June 22, 2018. [ECF No. 1]. On December 18, 2018, Defendants1 filed a
motion for summary judgment. [ECF No. 42]. 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 January 18, 2019. [ECF No. 45].
Plaintiff was specifically advised that if he failed to respond adequately,
Defendants’ motion may be granted. Id.
Notwithstanding the specific warning and instructions set forth in the
court’s Roseboro order, Plaintiff failed to respond to the motion.2 As such, it
appears to the court that he does not oppose the motion and wishes to
The motion was originally filed by defendants Toth and Glenn, but Hawkins
joined in the motion on December 21, 2018. [ECF Nos. 47, 48].
2 Plaintiff advised the court via letter received January 7, 2019, that he had
been placed in a control cell and did not have his evidence. [ECF No. 53]. To
the extent Plaintiff alleges he had evidence that has not been returned, he
should describe the missing evidence in his response. However, a lack of
evidence does not excuse his failure to respond to Defendants’ motion.
1

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 February 12, 2019. 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.

January 29, 2019
Columbia, South Carolina

Shiva V. Hodges
United States Magistrate Judge

2