Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-01896/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-01896-9/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Plaintiff Tyrone Thompson is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action 

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

On October 15, 2015, Plaintiff filed a motion for contempt of court and sanctions against the 

Deputy Attorney General assigned to this action and Deputy Attorney General Kamala D. Harris. 

(ECF No. 35.) On October 23, 2015, Defendants filed a motion to strike Plaintiff’s motion. (ECF No. 

38.) 

On October 29, 2015, the Court denied Defendants’ motion to strike and directed Defendants 

to file a response to Plaintiff’s motion. (ECF No. 40.) 

On November 5, 2015, Defendants filed a motion for reconsideration of the Court’s October 

29, 2015, order. (ECF No. 42.) On this same date, Plaintiff filed a motion for an extension of time to 

file an opposition to Defendants’ motion to strike. (ECF No. 41.) 

TYRONE THOMPSON,

 Plaintiff,

v.

VIDURRIA, et al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:14-cv-01896-LJO-SAB (PC)

ORDER DENYING AS MOOT DEFENDANTS’ 

MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION AND 

PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF 

TIME

[ECF Nos. 41, 42]

Case 1:14-cv-01896-LJO-SAB Document 46 Filed 11/17/15 Page 1 of 2
2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

On November 13, 2015, Defendants filed a response to Plaintiff’s motion for contempt of court 

and sanctions, thereby mooting their prior motion for reconsideration. (ECF No. 45.) 

Inasmuch as Defendants have filed a response to Plaintiff’s motion for contempt of court and 

sanctions, Defendants’ pending motion for reconsideration and Plaintiff’s motion for extension of time 

to file an opposition to the prior motion to strike are DENIED as MOOT. The Court will issue a 

ruling on Plaintiff’s motion for contempt of court and sanctions in due course pursuant to Local Rule 

230(l). 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 16, 2015 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

 

Case 1:14-cv-01896-LJO-SAB Document 46 Filed 11/17/15 Page 2 of 2