MARY GORDON BAKER, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
MARY GORDON BAKER, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.
Petitioner Justin Michael Oxendine, appearing pro se, has filed a petition for habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. On July 6, 2021, Respondent filed a Motion for Summary Judgment. (Dkt. No. 17.) On July 7, 2021, this Court issued an Order pursuant to Roseboro v. Garrison, 528 F.2d 309 (4th Cir. 1975), advising Petitioner of the dismissal procedure and the possible consequences if he failed to adequately respond to the motion. (Dkt. No. 18.) Petitioner's response was due on August 9, 2021, and Petitioner failed to respond.
On August 17, 2021, the Court issued an Order extending the deadline for Petitioner to file a response to the Motion for Summary Judgment to September 6, 2021. (Dkt. No. 20.) Petitioner was specifically advised that if he failed to respond, this action could be dismissed pursuant to Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (Id.) Petitioner has still failed to respond to Respondent's Motion.
Based on the foregoing, it appears Petitioner no longer wishes to pursue this action. Accordingly, it is recommended that this action be dismissed with prejudice for lack of prosecution and for failure to comply with this Court's orders, pursuant to Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the factors outlined in Chandler Leasing Corp. v. Lopez, 669 F.2d 919, 920 (4th Cir. 1982). See Ballardv. Carlson, 882 F.2d 93 (4th Cir. 1989).
IT IS SO RECOMMENDED.
Notice of Right to File Objections to Report and Recommendation
The parties are advised that they may file specific written objections to this Report and Recommendation with the District Judge. Objections must specifically identify the portions of the Report and Recommendation to which objections are made and the basis for such objections. "[I]n the absence of a timely filed objection, a district court need not conduct a de novo review, but instead must 'only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.'" Diamond v. Colonial Life & Ace. Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310 (4th Cir. 2005) (quoting Fed.R.Civ.P. 72 advisory committee's note).
Specific written objections must be filed within fourteen (14) days of the date of service of this Report and Recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b); see Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(a), (d). Filing by mail pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5 may be accomplished by mailing objections to:
Robin L. Blume, Clerk
United States District Court
Post Office Box 835
Charleston, South Carolina 29402
Failure to timely file specific written objections to this Report and Recommendation will result in waiver of the right to appeal from a judgment of the District Court based upon such Recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Thomas v. Am, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841 (4th C¡r. 1985); United States v. Schronce, 727 F.2d 91 (4th Cir. 1984).