Vaughn v. Rawski

Filing 10

ORDER: If Petitioner wishes to pursue her case, she is ordered to file a legal memorandum in response to Respondent's Motion for Summary Judgment 8 no later than March 19, 2015. See Loc. Civ. R. 7.06. Pet itioner is advised that if she fails to comply with this deadline, the undersigned will recommend this case be dismissed with prejudice for failure to prosecute. Signed by Magistrate Judge Kaymani D West on 3/5/2015. (mcot, ) Modified on 3/5/2015 to replace main document with corrected document (clerical error corrected) (mcot, ).

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA Angela M. Vaughn, vs. Angelia Rawski, Warden, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) ) ) ) ) Respondent. ) ) C/A No. 5:14-04758-DCN-KDW ORDER Petitioner, appearing through counsel, is a state prisoner who filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On February 13, 2015, Respondent filed a Return to her Petition and Motion for Summary Judgment. Petitioner’s response to Respondent’s Motion was due no later than March 2, 2015. See Loc. Civ. R. 7.06, see also ECF Nos. 8, 9. To date, Petitioner has not filed a response to Respondent’s Motion, nor has she requested an extension of time within which to respond. Accordingly, it appears to the court that Petitioner may wish to abandon this action. If Petitioner wishes to pursue her case, she is ordered to file a legal memorandum in response to Respondent’s Motion for Summary Judgment no later than March 19, 2015. See Loc. Civ. R. 7.06. Petitioner is advised that if she fails to comply with this deadline, the undersigned will recommend this case be dismissed 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. March 5, 2015 Florence, South Carolina Kaymani D. West 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?