Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_03-cv-00119/USCOURTS-caed-2_03-cv-00119-2/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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

AARON JONES,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-03-0119 DFL DAD P

vs.

LOU BLANAS, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to

42 U.S.C. § 1983. Before the court is defendant Mabeus’ motion to compel responses to

discovery requests and for sanctions. Plaintiff has not filed any opposition.

Defendant contends that on April 22, 2005, plaintiff was served with special

interrogatories and requests for production of documents. When plaintiff failed to respond to the

discovery requests, defendant sent a letter to plaintiff and extended the deadline for the responses

to July 5, 2005. On July 9, 2005, plaintiff served responses on defendant’s counsel, however,

defendant argues that the responses were neither signed nor verified as required by Rules 26(g)

and 33(b)(1) and (2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. In addition, defendant contends

that plaintiff has failed to furnish the requested information. For example, in response to a

question requesting the names of witnesses and to identify documents which support his claim,

Case 2:03-cv-00119-JKS-DAD Document 51 Filed 10/20/05 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

2

plaintiff responded, “To be presented at/on witness list[]” and “To be presented upon completion

of Discovery [sic].” Defendant requests that the court order plaintiff to provide further responses

to the discovery requests and to pay defendant $862.50 for attorney fees in connection with this

motion. 

The court has reviewed the responses to the interrogatories and requests for

production of documents. The court will order plaintiff to provide defendant with a signed and

verified copy of his July 9, 2005 responses to interrogatories, and to provide signed and verified

supplemental responses to interrogatories which were evasive or incomplete. Plaintiff is

cautioned that the following responses are unacceptable: “TBD,” “not applicable or

appropriate,” or “N/A.” As to defendant’s requests for production of documents, it appears that

plaintiff produced no documents and provided “N/A,” as his response to most of the production

requests. The court will order plaintiff to respond to all of the production of documents requests. 

Despite plaintiff’s inadequate responses, it appears that plaintiff made some attempt to respond to

defendant’s discovery requests. Therefore, the court will not order the imposition of monetary or

other sanctions at this time.

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that:

1. Defendant Mabeus’ July 14, 2005 motion to compel is granted in part as

follows;

2. Plaintiff shall provide a signed and verified copy of his July 9, 2005 responses

to defendant’s first set of interrogatories;

3. Plaintiff shall provide signed and verified supplemental responses for special

interrogatories numbered 3, 4, 5, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16, 17, 18, 21, 23, 24 and 25; and

/////

/////

/////

/////

Case 2:03-cv-00119-JKS-DAD Document 51 Filed 10/20/05 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

3

4. Plaintiff shall produce the documents requested by defendant Mabeus in his

request for production of documents, set one. See Rule 34 of the Federal Rules of Civil

Procedure.

DATED: October 19, 2005.

DAD:4

jone0119.disc

Case 2:03-cv-00119-JKS-DAD Document 51 Filed 10/20/05 Page 3 of 3