Opinion
C. A. 1:22-2135-CMC-SVH
10-12-2022
Michael Greenwood, Petitioner, v. Warden, Respondent.
ORDER
Shiva V. Hodges, United States Magistrate Judge.
Petitioner, proceeding pro se, brought this action requesting a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Respondent filed a motion to dismiss, or in the alternative, for summary judgment, on September 2, 2022. [ECF No. 11]. As Petitioner 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 October 3, 2022. [ECF No. 12]. Petitioner was specifically advised that if he failed to respond adequately, Respondent's motion may be granted, thereby ending this case. Id.
Notwithstanding the specific warning and instructions set forth in the court's Roseboro order, Petitioner has failed to 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, Petitioner is directed to advise the court whether he wishes to continue with this case and to file a response to Respondent's motion by October 26, 2022. Petitioner 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.