Dist. Ct. did not err in granting defendant’s motion for summary judgment in action under Computer Fraud and Abuse Act arising out of defendant-former employer’s action in locking plaintiff out of his personal email account held by defendant and in removing several years of plaintiff’s personal correspondence from said account, where basis of motion was plaintiff’s failure to establish all elements of his case, including requirement that he incurred at least $5,000 in damages. Plaintiff failed to provide any evidentiary support for allegations in his complaint, and Dist. Ct. was free to overlook any failure by defendant to comply with requirements set forth in Local Rule 56.1. Ct. also noted that plaintiff could have defended instant summary judgment motion with fact that at time defendant had filed summary judgment motion, it had failed to file timely answer to instant complaint.