PASCHAL v. LOTT, 3:14-4737-TLW-PJG. (2016)
Court: District Court, D. South Carolina
Number: infdco20160204d57
Visitors: 28
Filed: Feb. 03, 2016
Latest Update: Feb. 03, 2016
Summary: ORDER PAIGE J. GOSSETT , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiff, who is represented by counsel, filed this matter alleging violations of her civil rights by the named defendants. 1 The defendants filed a motion for summary judgment on December 22, 2015, pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (ECF No. 40.) Plaintiff moved for and was granted an extension of time with which to respond to the defendants' motion. (ECF Nos. 42 & 46.) However, as of the date of this order, the plaintiff has fai
Summary: ORDER PAIGE J. GOSSETT , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiff, who is represented by counsel, filed this matter alleging violations of her civil rights by the named defendants. 1 The defendants filed a motion for summary judgment on December 22, 2015, pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (ECF No. 40.) Plaintiff moved for and was granted an extension of time with which to respond to the defendants' motion. (ECF Nos. 42 & 46.) However, as of the date of this order, the plaintiff has fail..
More
ORDER
PAIGE J. GOSSETT, Magistrate Judge.
Plaintiff, who is represented by counsel, filed this matter alleging violations of her civil rights by the named defendants.1 The defendants filed a motion for summary judgment on December 22, 2015, pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (ECF No. 40.) Plaintiff moved for and was granted an extension of time with which to respond to the defendants' motion. (ECF Nos. 42 & 46.) However, as of the date of this order, the plaintiff has failed to respond to the motion in accordance with Local Civil Rule 7.06 (D.S.C.). As such, it appears to the court that she does not oppose the motions and wishes to abandon this action.
Based on the foregoing, it is
ORDERED that the plaintiff shall advise the court as to whether she wishes to continue with this case and to file a response to the defendants' motion for summary judgment within seven (7) days from the date of this order. Plaintiff is further advised that if she fails to respond, this action may be decided on the record presented in support of the defendants' motion, see Local Civil Rule 7.06 DSC, or may 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.
FootNotes
1. This action was removed from the Richland County Court of Commons Pleas.
Source: Leagle
