Centeno v. Meeks et al
Filing
41
ORDER: The motion to dismiss 26 is being converted to a motion for summary judgment. Defendants have an additional five days from the date of this order to make any additional submissions in accordance with Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Signed by Magistrate Judge Thomas E Rogers, III on 1/18/2017. (dsto, )
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
FLORENCE DIVISION
Alexis Centeno, #14146-055,
) C/A No. 4:16-1482-BHH-TER
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
ORDER
)
vs.
)
Mr. J. Meeks, Warden; Mrs. Simmons, Assistance)
Warden; Mr. Ray Burn, Capetian; Mrs. Urrea, HSA;)
Mr. Whitehurst, AHSA; Dr. Luranth, Medical Director;)
)
Dr. Massa, Medical Doctor,
)
)
Defendants.
____________________________________________)
Plaintiff Alexis Centeno, a federal prisoner proceeding pro se, filed this Bivens1 action
on May 6, 2016. Plaintiff is currently housed at FCI Williamsburg. Defendants filed a Motion
to Dismiss pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) on September 27, 2016.
As both parties have submitted evidence outside of the pleadings, the motion to
dismiss is being converted to a motion for summary judgment. Defendants have an additional
five days from the date of this order to make any additional submissions in accordance with
Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The court is issuing an order pursuant to
Roseboro v. Garrison, 528 F.2d 309 (4th Cir. 1975), advising Plaintiff of the possible
consequences if he fails to respond adequately to the Defendants’ motion for summary
judgment and make submissions in accordance with Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure.
1
See Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388,
397 (1971).
AND IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Thomas E. Rogers
Thomas E. Rogers, III
United States Magistrate Judge
January18, 2017
Florence, South Carolina
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?