Opinion
C/A No.: 1:15-4440-RBH-SVH
08-11-2016
Freddie Bradley, Plaintiff, v. Bryan Sterling, SCDC Director; Neana W. Staley, Warden at Manning; Mr. Roberts, A/W at Manning; Ms. Jeannie McKay, A/W at Manning; and Dr. Valpey, SCDC Doctor, Defendants.
ORDER
Freddie Bradley ("Plaintiff"), proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, brought this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging violations of his constitutional rights. Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment June 7, 2016. [ECF No. 33]. As Plaintiff is proceeding pro se, the court entered an order pursuant to Roseboro v. Garrison, 528 F.2d 309 (4th Cir. 1975), advising him of the importance of the motion and of the need for him to file an adequate response by July 11, 2016. [ECF No. 34]. Plaintiff was specifically advised that if he failed to respond adequately, Defendants' motion may be granted. Id. On June 30, 2016, 2016, the undersigned extended Plaintiff's deadline, granting him until August 10, 2016, to respond to Defendants' motion. [ECF No. 38].
Notwithstanding the specific warning and instructions set forth in the court's Roseboro order, Plaintiff failed to properly 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 Defendants' motion for summary judgment by August 25, 2016. 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. August 11, 2016
Columbia, South Carolina
/s/
Shiva V. Hodges
United States Magistrate Judge