Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_12-cv-00568/USCOURTS-caed-1_12-cv-00568-3/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

I. Background

Plaintiff Jesse Alfaro (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in 

this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action proceeds against Defendants 

McGuinness, Moon, Neubarth, John Doe and Jane Doe for deliberate indifference to serious medical 

needs in violation of the Eighth Amendment. On February 18, 2014, Defendants McGuinness, Moon 

and Neubarth filed an answer to the complaint. (ECF No. 18.) On February 19, 2014, the Court 

issued a Discovery and Scheduling Order, which opened discovery in this matter and set the deadline 

to complete such discovery as October 19, 2014. (ECF No. 20.) 

JESSE ALFARO,

 Plaintiff,

v.

WILLIAM J. MCGUINNESS, et al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:12-cv-00568-LJO-BAM (PC)

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION 

TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO DISCOVERY

(ECF No. 25)

ORDER REQUIRING DEFENDANTS TO FILE A 

STATEMENT OF REASONABLE EXPENSES 

INCURRED WITHIN THIRTY DAYS AND 

REQUIRING PLAINTIFF TO FILE A RESPONSE 

WITHIN THIRTY DAYS THEREAFTER

Case 1:12-cv-00568-LJO-BAM Document 26 Filed 08/20/14 Page 1 of 4
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

On June 16, 2014, Defendants McGuinness, Moon and Neubarth filed the instant motion to 

compel Plaintiff to respond to their discovery requests and for sanctions. (ECF No. 25.) Plaintiff did 

not file an opposition and the motion is deemed submitted. Local Rule 230(l). 

II. Motion to Compel Discovery

On March 21, 2014, Defendants propounded the following discovery: (1) Defendant 

McGuinness’s Special Interrogatories, Set One; (2) Defendant McGuinness’s Request for Production 

of Documents, Set One; (3) Defendant Neubarth’s Special Interrogatories, Set One; (4) Defendant 

Neubarth’s Request for Production of Documents, Set One; (5) Defendant Moon’s Special 

Interrogatories, Set One; and (6) Defendant Moon’s Request for production of Documents, Set One. 

(Defs’ Ex. 1.)

Plaintiff’s responses were due by May 5, 2014. On May 13, 2014, defense counsel sent 

Plaintiff a meet-and-confer letter advising Plaintiff that if responses were not received by May 23, 

2014, then Defendants would file a motion to compel. (Defs’ Ex. 2.) Plaintiff did not submit 

responses. (ECF No. 25, p. 3; Lewis Dec. ¶ 5.) 

Defendants now move to compel responses pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37. 

Rule 37 provides that a motion to compel may be filed when a party fails to answer interrogatories or 

fails to produce documents following a good faith attempt to confer in an effort to obtain a response. 

Fed. R.Civ. P. 37(a)(3)(B). Defendants also seek the imposition of sanctions in the amount of 

$1,390.00. Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(a)(5)(A). 

1. Interrogatories

An interrogatory is a written question propounded by one party to another who must answer 

under oath and in writing. Interrogatories are limited to anything within the permissible scope of 

discovery, namely, any nonprivileged matter that is relevant to any party’s claim or defense. Fed. R. 

Civ. P. 33, 26(b)(1). The responding party is obligated to respond to the interrogatories to the fullest 

extent possible, Fed. R. Civ. P. 33(b)(3), and any objections must be stated with specificity, Fed. R. 

Civ. P. 33(b)(4). Generally, the responding party does not need to conduct extensive research in 

answering the interrogatory, but a reasonable effort to respond must be made. Evans v. Tilton, 2010 

WL 1136216, at *6 (E.D. Cal. Mar. 19, 2010). 

Case 1:12-cv-00568-LJO-BAM Document 26 Filed 08/20/14 Page 2 of 4
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

As Plaintiff has failed to oppose the motion, he has presented no justification for the lack of 

response to Defendants’ interrogatories. Accordingly, the Court will grant Defendants’ motion to 

compel responses to their interrogatories. Plaintiff shall be required to answer the interrogatories 

separately and fully in writing under oath. Fed. R. Civ. P. 33(b)(3). 

2. Requests for Production of Documents

Defendants are entitled to discovery regarding any nonprivileged matter relevant to the claims 

and defenses in this action. Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(1). In responding to requests for production, 

Plaintiff must produce documents or other tangible things which are in his “possession, custody, or 

control.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 34(a). Responses must either state that inspection and related activities will 

be permitted as requested or state an objection to the request, including the reasons. Fed. R. Civ. P. 

34(b)(2)(B). 

Actual possession, custody or control is not required. “A party may be ordered to produce a 

document in the possession of a non-party entity if that party has a legal right to obtain the document 

or has control over the entity [that] is in possession of the document.” Soto v. City of Concord, 162 

F.R.D. 603, 619 (N.D. Cal.1995); see also Allen v. Woodford, 2007 WL 309945, at *2 (E.D. Cal. Jan. 

30, 2007) (“Property is deemed within a party’s ‘possession, custody, or control’ if the party has actual 

possession, custody, or control thereof or the legal right to obtain the property on demand.”) (citation 

omitted). 

Defendants move to compel responses to their requests for production of documents. In failing 

to oppose the motion, Plaintiff has not presented any basis for his lack of discovery responses. 

Accordingly, the Court will grant Defendants’ motion to compel responses to their requests for 

production of documents. Plaintiff shall be required to provide documents responsive to Defendants’ 

requests without objections. Fed. R. Civ. P. 34(b)(2)(B). 

III. Motion for Expenses

If a motion to compel is granted, the Court shall require the party whose conduct necessitated 

the motion, the party or attorney advising that conduct, or both to pay the movant’s reasonable 

expenses incurred in making the motion. Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(a)(5)(A) (quotation marks omitted). 

Before doing so, the Court must provide an opportunity to be heard and the Court shall not order 

Case 1:12-cv-00568-LJO-BAM Document 26 Filed 08/20/14 Page 3 of 4
4

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

payment if circumstances make an award of expenses unjust. Fed. R. Civ .P. 37(a)(5) (quotation marks 

omitted).

In this case, Defendants request an order that Plaintiff pay sanctions in the amount of 

$1,390.00. (ECF No. 25, p. 5.) However, in the supporting declaration, defense counsel declares 

under penalty of perjury that he expended two hours preparing the motion at an hourly rate of $170.00 

and that he is seeking a sanction in the total amount of $340.00. (ECF No. 25, Lewis Dec. ¶ 7.) Given 

the discrepancy between the moving papers and the supporting declaration, Defendants have thirty 

days from the date of service of this order within which to set forth, under penalty of perjury, the 

reasonable expenses incurred in making this motion and the total amount requested. Plaintiff shall 

have thirty days from the date of service of Defendants’ statement to be heard regarding the payment 

of reasonable expenses.

IV. Conclusion and Order

For the reasons stated, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows:

1. Defendants’ motion to compel discovery responses, filed on June 16, 2014, is GRANTED;

2. Within thirty (30) days of the date of service of this order, Plaintiff shall serve responses to 

Defendants’ interrogatories. Plaintiff must answer each interrogatory separately and fully 

in writing and under oath; 

3. Within thirty (30) days of the date of service of this order, Plaintiff shall produce 

documents responsive to Defendants’ requests for production of documents; 

4. Within thirty (30) from the date of service of this order, Defendants shall set forth the 

reasonable expenses incurred in bringing the motion to compel on June 16, 2014; and

5. Plaintiff has thirty (30) days from the date of service of Defendants’ statement within 

which to file a response regarding the requested expenses. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 20, 2014 /s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe _

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:12-cv-00568-LJO-BAM Document 26 Filed 08/20/14 Page 4 of 4