Stiltner v. Duffield Regional Jail et al, No. 7:2023cv00594 - Document 20 (W.D. Va. 2024)
Court Description: OPINION. Signed by Senior Judge James P. Jones on 5/3/2024. (Opinion mailed to Pro Se Party/Parties via US Mail)(aab)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Stiltner v. Duffield Regional Jail et al Doc. 20 $-&3,h4 0''*$& 6 4 %*45 $0635 "5 30"/0,& 7" '*-&% IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT May 03, 2024 FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA -"63" " "645*/ $-&3, ROANOKE DIVISION JOSHUA ADAM STILTNER, Plaintiff, v. DUFFIELD REGIONAL JAIL, ET AL., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) #: s/A. Beeson %&165: $-&3, Case No. 7:23CV00594 OPINION JUDGE JAMES P. JONES Joshua Adam Stiltner, Pro Se Plaintiff; Brian J. Brydges, JOHNSON, AYERS & MATTHEWS, P.L.C., Roanoke, Virginia, for Defendant Duffield Regional Jail; Taylor D. Brewer and Sophia M. Brasseux, MORAN REEVES & CONN PC, Richmond, Virginia, for Defendant Wexford Health Sources. The plaintiff, Joshua Adam Stiltner, a Virginia inmate proceeding pro se, filed these civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that the defendants violated his constitutional rights. On November 2, 2023, and December 8, 2023, the defendants filed separate Motions to Dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. At the time of each filing, the court mailed a Notice advising Stiltner that the court would give him twenty-one days to submit any further counter-affidavits or other relevant evidence contradicting, explaining or avoiding the defendant’s evidence before ruling on the summary judgment motion. The Notice warned Stiltner that if he did not respond to the motions, the court would assume that he had lost interest in the case or that he agrees with the defendants’ Dockets.Justia.com arguments for dismissal. The Notice advised Stiltner that if he wished to continue with the case, it was “necessary that [he] respond in an appropriate fashion” and if he did not file some response to the defendants’ motions within the twenty-one day period, the Court might “dismiss the case for failure to prosecute.” Notices, ECF Nos. 11, 18. The time allotted for Stiltner to respond to the defendants’ motions has passed, and he has failed to comply with the described conditions. Accordingly, I will dismiss the action and the pending motions without prejudice. An appropriate Final Order will issue herewith. ENTER: May 3, 2024 /s/ JAMES P. JONES Senior 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.
