Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_11-cv-02105/USCOURTS-caed-1_11-cv-02105-7/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 Timothy LeCompte (“Plaintiff”) is a prisoner in the custody of the California 

Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (“CDCR”). Plaintiff is proceeding pro se in this civil 

rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On February 1, 2013, the Court ordered that the action 

proceed on Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment claim against Defendants Dhah, Moon, Wang, Macias and 

Zamora.

On September 2, 2014, Defendant Dhah filed a motion for summary judgment. 

On October 6, 2014, Defendants Macias, Moon, Wang and Zamora filed their motion for 

summary judgment.

TIMOTHY LECOMPTE,

 Plaintiff,

v.

DHAH, et al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:11cv02105 LJO DLB (PC)

ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFF’S FAILURE 

TO OPPOSE DEFENDANTS’ 

MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

TWENTY-ONE DAY DEADLINE

Case 1:11-cv-02105-LJO-DLB Document 39 Filed 12/02/14 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

Both motions contained the requirements for opposing summary judgment. However, Plaintiff 

has not filed an opposition to either motion.1

This order serves to notify Plaintiff that if he does not file an opposition to the pending motions 

within twenty-one (21) days of the date of this order, they will be decided without his input. 

Defendants may file a reply to Plaintiff’s oppositions, if any, within seven (7) days of the date of 

service.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 2, 2014 /s/ Dennis L. Beck 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

 

 

1

On September 18, 2014, an order was returned to this Court as “Undeliverable, Inmate Refused.” However, a subsequent 

order was not returned.

Case 1:11-cv-02105-LJO-DLB Document 39 Filed 12/02/14 Page 2 of 2