Opinion
C/A No.: 4:12-00019-MGL-TER
08-27-2012
Jason Alan Johnson, Plaintiff, v. Freddie Arwood; Chaplin Lovingood, Defendants.
Report and Recommendation
The Plaintiff, Jason Alan Johnson ("Plaintiff"), filed this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on January 5, 2012. Plaintiff alleges that his constitutional rights were violated by Defendants while housed at York County Detention Center seeking only injunctive relief. Plaintiff is currently housed at the Kirkland R &E Evaluation Center. Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment on June 28, 2012. Because Plaintiff is proceeding pro se, the court issued an order on or about July 3, 2012, pursuant to Roseboro v. Garrison, 528 F.2d 309 (4th Cir. 1975), advising Plaintiff of the Defendants' motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff failed to file a response.
All pretrial proceedings in this case were referred to the undersigned pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A) and (B) and Local Rule 73.02(B)(2)(d),DSC. Because this is a dispositive motion, the report and recommendation is entered for review by the District Judge.
RULE 41(B) DISMISSAL
A complaint may be dismissed pursuant to Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for failure to prosecute and/or failure to comply with orders of the court. Ballard v. Carlson, 882 F.2d 93 (4th Cir. 1989), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 1084 (1990), and Chandler Leasing Corp. v. Lopez, 669 F.2d 919 (4th Cir. 1982). In considering whether to dismiss an action pursuant to Rule 41(b), the court is required to consider four factors:
(1) the degree of plaintiff's responsibility in failing to respond;Davis v. Williams, 588 F.2d 69 (4th Cir. 1978).
(2) the amount of prejudice to the defendant;
(3) the history of the plaintiff in proceeding in a dilatory manner; and,
(4) the existence of less drastic sanctions other than dismissal.
In the present case, the Plaintiff is proceeding pro se so he is entirely responsible for his actions. It is solely through Plaintiff's neglect, and not that of an attorney, that no responses have been filed to this motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff has not responded to Defendants' motion for summary judgment or the court's order requiring him to respond. No other reasonable sanctions are available. Accordingly, it is recommended that this action be dismissed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 41(b).
_______________
Thomas E. Rogers, III
United States Magistrate Judge
August 27, 2012
Florence, South Carolina