Washington v. Mallory
MEMORANDUM OPINION. SEE OPINION FOR COMPLETE DETAILS. Signed by District Judge M. Hannah Lauck on 11/28/2017. Copy of Memorandum Opinion sent to Plaintiff as directed.(ccol, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
~o~2 B20!7 ~
CLLRr\. U.S 1):")Tt'11CT COURT
HICI H/101 ID. VA
Civil Action No. 3:17CV636
Plaintiff, a Virginia inmate proceeding prose, has submitted a "CIVIL ACTION
HABEAS CORPUS (UNDER 28 U.S.C. § 2254)." (ECF No. 1.) Despite his labeling of the
action as a 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition, it was not clear from Plaintiff's submissions whether he
wished to pursue a civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 or a petition for a writ of habeas
corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. By Memorandum Order entered on October 10, 2017, the Court
directed Plaintiff to complete and return, within fifteen (15) days of the date of entry thereof,
either the standardized form for filing a § 2254 petition or a standardized form for filing a 42
U.S.C. § 1983 action. The Court warned Plaintiff that the failure to comply with the above
directive would result in the dismissal of the action without prejudice. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4l(b).
More than fifteen (15) days have elapsed since the entry of the October I 0, 2017
Memorandum Order and Plaintiff has not responded. Accordingly, the action will be
DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. A certificate of appealability will be DENIED.
An appropriate Order shall accompany this Memorandum Opinion.
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?