Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05511/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05511-8/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MILES BONTY, CASE NO. CV-F-04-5511 LJO DLB P

Plaintiff, ORDER RE PLAINTIFF’S MOTION 

TO COMPEL

[DOC 66]

vs.

R. INDERMILL, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief under

42 U.S.C. § 1983. In this action plaintiff alleges that his constitutional rights are being violated because

defendants have denied him a vegetarian diet in compliance with his spiritual beliefs. 

On August 30, 2006, plaintiff filed a motion to compel discovery. After being ordered to do so,

defendants filed an opposition to the motion on March 16, 2007. Plaintiff did not file a reply. 

A. Discovery At Issue.

Plaintiff seeks to compel further responses to his request for production of documents Nos 2-5

and 7 through 10 served on August 30, 2006. Defendants object to request Nos. 7 through 10 because

they are not directed to a specific defendant. Defendants agree to respond to these requests after plaintiff

identifies a specific defendant from whom he seeks a response. Acco5dingly, plaintiff’s motion to

Case 1:04-cv-05511-DLB Document 72 Filed 03/28/07 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

compel is denied as to request Nos 7 through 10. Plaintiff shall identify specific defendant(s) from

whom he seeks responses to request numbers 7 through 10 and reserve them. Defendants shall respond

within 20 days.

Request Nos. 2, 3 and 6 seek policies of the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation

regarding religious diets. Defendants represent they have produced all existing responsive documents.

Plaintiff has failed to demonstrate that defendants’ response is deficient. Plaintiff’s motion is therefore

denied.

Request No. 4 seeks documents relating to the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation’s

policies and procedures concerning inmate appeals. Defendants object to this request as irrelevant to

any claim or defense is this action. Defendants’ objection is sustained. There is no claim in this action

concerning the inmate appeals process. 

Request No. 5 seeks a summaries of inmate appeals concerning religious diets in 3C-Facility.

Defendants object that such evidence would not be admissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 608.

Defendants further object to the request because such summaries do not exist. Defendants objection that

the documents would not be admissible is overruled. Discovery is not limited to admissible evidence

but may include evidence relevant to a claim or defense. However, if the summaries do not exist, they

cannot be produced. Plaintiff is granted leave to serve an amended request seeking the actual complaints

from 3C-Facility inmates concerning requests for accommodation of religious diets. Defendants may

redact personal information from any documents produced. 

 

 

 I T IS S O O R D E R E D . 

Dated: March 28, 2007 /s/ Dennis L. Beck 

3c0hj8 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:04-cv-05511-DLB Document 72 Filed 03/28/07 Page 2 of 2