Cruz v. Hodnett et al, No. 7:2022cv00374 - Document 24 (W.D. Va. 2022)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge Thomas T. Cullen on 12/7/2022. (Opinion mailed to Pro Se Party via US Mail)(aab)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Cruz v. Hodnett et al Case 7:22-cv-00374-TTC-RSB Document 24 Filed 12/07/22 Page 1 of 2 Pageid#: 126 Doc. 24 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA ROANOKE DIVISION JORGE CRUZ, ) ) Plaintiff, ) Civil Action No. 7:22cv00374 ) v. ) MEMORANDUM OPINION ) MAYOR GARY HODNETT, et al., ) By: Hon. Thomas T. Cullen ) United States District Judge Defendants. ) ________________________________________________________________________ Plaintiff Jorge Cruz, an inmate proceeding pro se, filed this civil action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On November 3, 2022, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss, and the court issued a notice pursuant to Roseboro v. Garrison, 528 F.2d 309, 310 (4th Cir. 2005), on November 4. (See ECF Nos. 21–23.) The Roseboro notice gave Cruz 21 days to file a response to the motion to dismiss and advised him that, if he did not respond to the defendants’ motion, the court would “assume that Plaintiff has lost interest in the case, and/or that Plaintiff agrees with what the Defendant states in their responsive pleading(s).” (See ECF No. 23.) The notice further advised Cruz that, if he wished to continue with the case, it was “necessary that [he] respond in an appropriate fashion,” and that if he failed to file a response to the motion within the time allotted, the court “may dismiss the case for failure to prosecute.” (Id.) Cruz did not respond to the motion and, therefore, the court will dismiss this action without prejudice for failure to prosecute. Dockets.Justia.com Case 7:22-cv-00374-TTC-RSB Document 24 Filed 12/07/22 Page 2 of 2 Pageid#: 127 The Clerk shall send copies of this Memorandum Opinion and the accompanying Order to the parties. ENTERED this 7th day of December, 2022. /s/ Thomas T. Cullen_________________ HON. THOMAS T. CULLEN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
