Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00856/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00856-53/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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KEITH BLACKWELL,

Plaintiff,

v.

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT

OF CORRECTIONS, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

CASE NO. 1:05-cv-00856-AWI-SMS PC

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND

DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT VO’S

MOTION TO COMPEL AND FOR

SANCTIONS

(Doc. 167)

ORDER REQUIRING PLAINTIFF TO PAY

DEFENDANT VO REASONABLE EXPENSES

IN THE AMOUNT OF $375.00 WITHIN

SIXTY DAYS

Plaintiff Keith Blackwell, a former state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis,

filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on June 20, 2005. This action is

proceeding on Plaintiff’s second amended complaint, filed July 5, 2007, against Defendants Vo,

Escobara, Pennywell, McGrew, and Lawhorn under section 1983 for acting with deliberate

indifference to Plaintiff’s serious medical needs, in violation of the Eighth Amendment. On July 23,

2009, Defendant Vo filed a motion to compel. Plaintiff did not file a response.

Defendant served interrogatories and a request for the production of documents on Plaintiff 

on April 9, 2009. (Doc. 167, Motion, Paul Dec., ¶4.) Pursuant to the Court’s scheduling order and

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(d), Plaintiff was required to serve his responses on or before May

29, 2009. Plaintiff failed to respond to the discovery requests and failed to respond to Defendant’s

letter, mailed July 6, 2009, demanding that Plaintiff respond within seven days. (Id., Paul Dec., ¶¶6,

7.) Defendant seeks an order dismissing the claim against him, or in the alternative, an order

1

Case 1:05-cv-00856-AWI -SMS Document 186 Filed 01/28/10 Page 1 of 3
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

compelling Plaintiff to serve responses to the discovery requests. Defendant also seeks reasonable

expenses in the amount of $525.00.

Plaintiff may not refuse to respond to properly served discovery requests, and his failure to

respond entitles Defendant to an order compelling a response. Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(a)(3)(B). 

With respect to sanctions, Rule 37(d) authorizes the Court to dismiss Plaintiff’s claim against

Defendant Vo as a sanction for failing to serve responses to Defendant’s interrogatories and request

for the production of documents. However, because dismissal is a drastic sanction reserved for

extreme circumstances, e.g., In re Exxon Valdez, 102 F.2d 429, 432 (9th Cir. 1996), it is not one the

Court is willing to entertain at this stage, based on a one time failure to respond to discovery requests

and in the absence of disobedience of an order directing Plaintiff to respond. Therefore, Defendant’s

1

request for dismissal as a sanction is denied. 

With respectto reasonable expenses, Defendant is entitled to the expenses incurred in making

his motion to compel. Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(d)(3). Given that Plaintiff did not respond to the motion,

Defendant’s anticipated expenses in reviewing and researching Plaintiff’s opposition and in drafting

a replyare disregarded. There has been no showing that Plaintiff was substantially justified in failing

to respond, and therefore, Defendant’s motion for $375.00 in reasonable expenses is granted. Id. 2

As previously stated, Defendant is entitled to an order compelling Plaintiff to serve

responses. However, in light of the pending recommendation to grant Defendant judgment on the

merits, the Court shall stay the order given that judgment in Defendant’s favor will render this

discovery dispute moot.

///

///

///

///

Further, in findings and recommendations issued separately from this order, the Court recommended that

1

Defendant’s motion for summary judgment be granted. If adopted in full, Defendant will be granted judgment on the

merits.

2.5 hours at the rate $150.00 an hour. (Doc. 167, Paul Dec., ¶¶8, 9.)

2

2

Case 1:05-cv-00856-AWI -SMS Document 186 Filed 01/28/10 Page 2 of 3
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

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Defendant’s motion to compel and for sanctions, filed July 23, 2009, is GRANTED

IN PART and DENIED IN PART as follows:

a. Defendant’s motion to compel a response to his interrogatories and request

for the production of documents is GRANTED but the order compelling

Plaintiff to serve responses is stayed pending resolution of the Court’s

recommendation that Defendant’s motion for summary judgment be granted;

b. Defendant’s motion to dismiss the claim against him as a sanction is

DENIED;

c. Defendant’s motion for reasonable expenses in the amount of $375.00 is

GRANTED; and

d. Plaintiff shall pay Defendant Vo $375.00 within sixty (60) days from the

date of service of this order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 27, 2010 /s/ Sandra M. Snyder 

icido3 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

3

Case 1:05-cv-00856-AWI -SMS Document 186 Filed 01/28/10 Page 3 of 3