Alexander v. Marshall

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA FLORENCE DIVISION JAMES WALTER ALEXANDER, ) C/A No.: 4:20-1214-JD-TER ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ORDER ) SGT. TAWANA HARDEN ) ) ) Defendant. ) ________________________________________________ ) ) Plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro se, filed this action under 42 U.S.C. § 19831 on March 30, 2020, alleging a violation of his constitutional rights. After a proper form order was issued on April 13, 2020, Plaintiff filed an amended complaint on May 6, 2020. On February 9, 2021, Defendant Harden filed a motion for summary judgment . (ECF No. 56). As the Plaintiff is proceeding pro se, the court issued an order on or about February 10, 2021, pursuant to Roseboro v. Garrison, 528 F.2d 309 (4th Cir. 1975), advising Plaintiff of the motion for summary judgment procedure and the possible consequences if he failed to respond adequately. Plaintiff failed to file a response.

Plaintiff has not filed any documents or had any communication with the court since the filing of his amended complaint on May 6, 2020. Therefore, the Plaintiff has 1All 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 fourteen days from the date of this order to inform the court if he desires to proceed with this action and file a response to the motion for summary judgment. If Plaintiff does not inform the court or respond to the motion for summary judgment within fourteen days from the date of this order, the court will assume that Plaintiff desires to abandon this action, and it may be dismissed pursuant to Rule 41 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Thomas E. Rogers, III Thomas E. Rogers, III United States Magistrate Judge March 29, 2021 Florence, South Carolina