Robinson v. McHugh

Filing 59

ORDER re 55 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by John M McHugh. Plaintiff 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 actio n. 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 Defendant's motion for summary judgment by January 23, 2014. Plaintiff is further advised that if he fails to respond, this action will be recommended for dismissal with prejudice for failure to prosecute. Signed by Magistrate Judge Shiva V Hodges on 1/9/2014. (abuc)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
Willie Earl Robinson,
Plaintiff,
vs.
John M. McHugh, Secretary of the
Department of the Army,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

C/A No.: 1:12-1146-TLW-SVH

Plainti
ORDER

Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, brought this action alleging disability discrimination
in violation of the American with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101, et seq. Defendant
filed a motion for summary judgment on December 2, 2013. [Entry #55]. As Plaintiff is
proceeding pro se, the court entered an order pursuant to Roseboro v. Garrison, 528 F.2d
309 (4th Cir. 1975) on December 3, 2013, advising him of the importance of the motion
for summary judgment and of the need for him to file an adequate response. [Entry #56].
Plaintiff was specifically advised that if he failed to respond adequately, Defendant’s
motion may be granted.
Notwithstanding the specific warning and instructions set forth in the court’s
Roseboro order, Plaintiff 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, Plaintiff is directed to advise the court whether he wishes to continue with this
case and to file a response to Defendant’s motion for summary judgment by January 23,
2014. 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 9, 2014
Columbia, South Carolina

Shiva V. Hodges
United States Magistrate Judge

2