Zepeda v. Tate et al
Plaintiff: Jaime L. Zepeda
Defendant: Harold Tate, L. Bluford, M. O' Brien and The Secretary of CDC&R
Case Number: 1:2007cv00982
Filed: July 10, 2007
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of California
Office: Fresno Office
County: Kern
Presiding Judge: Lawrence J. O'Neill
Presiding Judge: William M. Wunderlich
Nature of Suit: Prisoner: Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
July 13, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 45 ORDER, signed by Senior Judge Stephen M. McNamee on 7/12/2011.IT IS HEREBY ORDERED DENYING Plaintiffs Motion for Reconsideration forRelief from Judgment (Doc. 40 ).IT IS FURTHER ORDERED DENYING as moot Plaintiffs Application for Extension of Time to File Exhibits and Declarations in Support (Doc. 41 ).IT IS FURTHER ORDERED DENYING Plaintiffs Request for Judicial Notice(Doc. 43 ). (Fahrney, E)
May 20, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 38 ORDER DISMISSING Plaintiff's Third Amended Complaint for Failure to State a Claim with Prejudice signed by Senior Judge Stephen M. McNamee on 05/18/2011. CASE CLOSED. (Flores, E)
March 18, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 36 ORDER Granting Plaintiff's Motion for an Extenstion of Time to File Third Amended Complaint 35 , signed by Senior Judge Stephen M. McNamee on 3/18/11. If Plaintiff fails to file an amended complaint by Friday, May 6, 2011, the Clerk of Court must, without further notice, enter a judgment of dismissal of this action with prejudice that states that the dismissal counts as a strike under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). (Verduzco, M)
March 3, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 34 ORDER GRANTING 27 Motion to Amend the Complaint; ORDERED DISMISSING Plaintiff's SECOND Amended Complaint for failure to state a claim; ORDERED that if Plaintiff fails to file an Amended Complaint within 30 days, the dismissal will count as a STRIKE; ORDERED Clerk of Court to send copy of the form for filing a civil rights complaint (attached), signed by Senior Judge Stephen M. McNamee on 03/03/2011. Amended Complaint due by 4/7/2011 (Martin, S)
January 5, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 30 ORDER That Defendant File a Response to Plaintiffs 27 Motion for Leave to Amended Complaint, signed by Senior Judge Stephen M. McNamee on 1/5/2011. (Response Deadline: 1/19/2011; Any Reply shall be filed by by 2/2/2011) (Marrujo, C)
December 9, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 26 ORDER DENYING 25 Motion for "Relief from Order Due to Miskake and/or Inadvertence" signed by Senior Judge Stephen M. McNamee on 12/9/2010. (Sant Agata, S)
December 2, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 24 ORDER Denying Motions (Doc. 16 and 22 ), signed by Senior Judge Stephen M. McNamee on 12/2/2010. (Fahrney, E)
November 10, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 21 ORDER that Plaintiff's 18 Second Amended Complaint is STRICKEN as Improperly Filed; ORDER that Plaintiff must File a RESPONSE to Defendants' 16 Motion to Dismiss no later than November 26, 2010; ORDER that Defendant may File a REPLY no later than December 6, 2010 signed by Senior Judge Stephen M. McNamee on 11/9/2010. (Sant Agata, S)
October 15, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 17 ORDER signed by Senior Judge Stephen M. McNamee on 10/14/2010. Plaintiff's Response to Motion to Dismiss 16 is due by 11/12/2010. (Verduzco, M)
June 29, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 13 ORDER signed by Senior Judge Stephen M. McNamee on 06/28/2010 directing USM to serve Amended Complaint filed 08/31/2009 on Defendant, M. O'Brien. Service Deadline set for 10/29/2010. (Lundstrom, T)
January 7, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 8 ORDER signed by Senior Judge Stephen M. McNamee on 1/7/2009; The Court advises the parties that the Court is conducting statutory screening.The matter will proceed following the issuance of the statutory screening order.(Figueroa, O)
July 13, 2007 Opinion or Order Filing 6 FIRST INFORMATIONAL ORDER signed by Judge William M. Wunderlich on 07/13/2007. (Esteves, C)
Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the California Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Zepeda v. Tate et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Jaime L. Zepeda
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Harold Tate
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: L. Bluford
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: M. O' Brien
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: The Secretary of CDC&R
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?