Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_10-cv-00397/USCOURTS-caed-1_10-cv-00397-4/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

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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LEONARD RANSOM, JR.,

Plaintiff,

 vs.

DANIEL GONZALEZ, et al.,

Defendants.

1:10-cv-00397-GSA-PC

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S 

REQUEST TO FILE SUPPLEMENTAL 

OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS’ 

MOTION TO REVOKE IN FORMA 

PAUPERIS STATUS

(Doc. 36.)

THIRTY DAY DEADLINE FOR 

DEFENDANTS TO FILE REPLY TO 

SUPPLEMENTAL OPPOSITION, IF THEY 

SO WISH

Leonard Ransom, Jr., (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with this civil 

rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed the Complaint commencing this 

action on March 8, 2012. (Doc. 1.) This case now proceeds on the original Complaint, against 

defendants C/O M. Amador, C/O Daniel Nava, C/O R. Marquez, and C/O Ralph Nunez for use 

of excessive force; and against defendants C/O Daniel Nava, C/O R. Marquez, and Lt. Carlos 

Sandoval for failure to protect Plaintiff.1

 

1 On August 8, 2012, the Court dismissed Plaintiff’s claim regarding his disciplinary process from this 

action for failure to state a claim. (Doc. 17.) The Court also dismissed defendants Daniel Gonzalez and Sergeant 

Ybarra from this action, based on Plaintiff’s failure to state any claims against them. Id. The Court also dismissed 

defendants Saul Ochoa, Harold Tyson, Eric Lunsford, Daniel Gonzalez, and Gina Marquez, without prejudice, on 

Plaintiff’s motion. Id.

Case 1:10-cv-00397-AWI-EPG Document 42 Filed 04/15/13 Page 1 of 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

2

On April 4, 2013, Plaintiff filed a request to file a supplemental opposition to 

Defendants’ motion to revoke Plaintiff’s in forma pauperis status. (Doc. 36.) Plaintiff seeks 

leave to add further argument in support of the opposition he filed on February 21, 2013. 

Plaintiff submitted his proposed supplemental opposition, which was filed by the Clerk on 

April 4, 2013. (Doc. 37.)

Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s request to file a supplemental opposition to Defendants’ motion to 

revoke Plaintiff’s in forma pauperis status is GRANTED nunc pro tunc;

2. Plaintiff’s supplemental opposition, filed on April 4, 2013, is deemed properly 

filed; and

3. Within thirty days of the date of service of this order, Defendants may file a 

reply to Plaintiff’s supplemental opposition, if they so wish.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 13, 2013 /s/

Gary S. Austin 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE DEAC_Signature-END:

6i0kij8d

Case 1:10-cv-00397-AWI-EPG Document 42 Filed 04/15/13 Page 2 of 2