Opinion
Civil Action No. 7:05-1660-HFF-W MC.
December 30, 2005
REPORT OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE
The defendant is proceeding in this action pro se. On September 29, 2005, the plaintiffs filed a motion for summary judgment. On October 24, 2005, pursuant to Roseboro v. Garrison, 528 F.2d 309 (4th Cir. 1975), the defendant was advised of the summary judgment procedure and the possible consequences if he failed to respond adequately. Despite this explanation, the defendant elected not to respond to the motion.
As the defendant is proceeding pro se, the court filed a second order on December 2, 2005, giving the defendant through December 27, 2005, to file his response to the motion for summary judgment. The defendant was specifically advised that if he failed to respond, judgment would be entered against him in this case. The defendant elected not to respond.
Based on the foregoing, it appears the defendant does not wish to contest this action. Accordingly, it is recommended that judgment be entered in favor of the plaintiffs in this case.