Murphy v. Southwest Regional Jail Authority et al

Filing 39

MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Chief Judge Michael F. Urbanski on 9/30/2019. (tvt)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
ROANOKE DIVISION
JAMES B. MURPHY,
Plaintiff,
v.
SOUTHWEST REGIONAL
JAIL AUTHORITY, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Civil Action No. 7:19cv00319
MEMORANDUM OPINION
By: Michael F. Urbanski
Chief United States District Judge

Plaintiff James B. Murphy, a Virginia inmate proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights
action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On June 28, 2019, defendant Medico Medical filed a
motion to dismiss and, on July 1, 2019, the court issued a notice pursuant to Roseboro v.
Garrison, 528 F.2d 309, 310 (4th Cir. 2005). See ECF Nos. 17 and 19. On August 5, 2019,
defendants Light, Montgomery, Parks, and Southwest Regional Jail Authority filed motions to
dismiss and for summary judgment, and on August 6, 2019, the court issued a notice pursuant to
Roseboro. See ECF Nos. 27, 29 and 31. On August 22, 2019, defendant Flanary filed motions
to dismiss and for summary judgment, and on August 23, 2019, the court issued a notice
pursuant to Roseboro. See ECF Nos. 34, 35, and 36. Each Roseboro notice gave Murphy
twenty-one days to file a response to the motions and advised him that, if he did not respond, the
court would “assume that Plaintiff has lost interest in the case, and/or that Plaintiff agrees with
what the Defendant[s] state[] in their responsive pleading(s).” See ECF Nos. 19, 31, and 36.
The notice further advised Murphy that, if he wished to continue with the case, it was “necessary
that Plaintiff respond in an appropriate fashion,” and that if he failed to file some response within
the time allotted, the court “may dismiss the case for failure to prosecute.” Id. On August 23,
2019, Murphy filed a motion for an extension of time to respond to the motion for summary
judgment of defendants Light, Montgomery, Parks, and Southwest Virginia Regional Jail

Authority. See ECF No. 37. The court granted the motion and gave him an additional twentyone days to respond. See ECF No. 38. Murphy did not respond to any of the motions filed by
defendants. Therefore, the court will dismiss Murphy’s complaint without prejudice for failure
to prosecute.
30th
ENTER: This ____ day of September, 2019.