Parker v. Warden, Goodman Correctional Institution

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA

Kerwin S. Parker, ) C/A No.: 1:23-251-MGL-SVH ) Petitioner, ) ) vs. ) ORDER ) Warden, Goodman Correctional ) Institution, ) ) Respondent. )

Petitioner, proceeding pro se, brought this action requesting a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Respondent filed a motion for summary judgment on May 15, 2023. [ECF No. 21]. As Petitioner is proceeding pro se, the court entered an order pursuant to , 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 June 16, 2023. [ECF No. 22]. Petitioner was specifically advised that if he failed to respond adequately, Respondent’s motion may be granted, thereby ending this case. . Notwithstanding the specific warning and instructions set forth in the court’s 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 July 6, 2023. Petitioner is further advised that if he fails to respond, this action will be reeommended 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. PP Ut Slalger June 20, 2023 Shiva V. Hodges Columbia, South Carolina United States Magistrate Judge