Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_12-cv-01712/USCOURTS-caed-1_12-cv-01712-9/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DEVON BRADFORD,

Plaintiff,

v.

RANDY DAVIS, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:12-cv-01712-AWI-SAB

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ 

MOTION TO COMPEL

ECF NO. 32

On October 23, 2013, Defendants Randy Davis, John Carrico, Jacob Keiser, Paul 

MacDonald and Douglas Ridenour (“Defendants”) filed a motion to compel Plaintiff Devon 

Bradford (“Plaintiff”) to provide Defendants with initial disclosures and responses to discovery 

requests. (ECF No. 32.)

Pursuant to Local Rule 230(g), the Court finds that adjudication of this matter is 

appropriate upon the record and briefs on file and oral argument is not necessary. The hearing in 

this matter is therefore vacated. For the reasons set forth below, the Court grants Defendants’ 

motion to compel.

I.

BACKGROUND

Plaintiff filed the complaint in this action on August 20, 2012. (ECF No. 1.) Plaintiff, 

proceeding pro se, raises claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Defendants for the use of 

Case 1:12-cv-01712-AWI-SAB Document 36 Filed 11/14/13 Page 1 of 5
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

excessive force during Plaintiff’s arrest.

The Court issued a scheduling order on July 3, 2013. (ECF No. 25.) Pursuant to this 

scheduling order, the parties were to exchange initial disclosures under Federal Rule of Civil 

Procedure 26(a) by August 2, 2013. Defendants claim that they have not yet received initial 

disclosures from Plaintiff. Moreover, Defendants claim that they have not yet received 

responses to certain discovery requests propounded by Defendants on Plaintiff on August 31, 

2013.

On October 8, 2013, Defendants sent a correspondence to Plaintiff in an informal attempt 

to resolve the discovery dispute. Defendants did not receive a response from Plaintiff. 

Defendants filed the present motion to compel on October 23, 2013.

Plaintiff’s opposition to Defendants’ motion was due on November 6, 2013. See Local 

Rule 230(c). To date, no opposition to the motion has been filed.

II.

LEGAL STANDARDS

Motions to compel are governed by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37. Rule 37 states, 

in pertinent part:

(a) Motion for an Order Compelling Disclosure or Discovery.

(1) In General. On notice to other parties and all affected 

persons, a party may move for an order compelling disclosure or

discovery. The motion must include a certification that the movant 

has in good faith conferred or attempted to confer with the person 

or party failing to make disclosure or discovery in an effort to 

obtain it without court action.

...

(3) Specific Motions.

(A) To Compel Disclosure. If a party fails to make a disclosure 

required by Rule 26(a), any other party may move to compel 

disclosure and for appropriate sanctions.

(B) To Compel a Discovery Response. A party seeking 

discovery may move for an order compelling an answer, 

designation, production, or inspection....

Rule 37(a)(5) authorizes the imposition of sanctions against the party whose conduct 

necessitated the motion to compel. Rule 37(c) states that a party who fails to make initial 

disclosures required by Rule 26(a) is not permitted to use the information or witnesses that 

should have been disclosed unless the failure was substantially justified or is harmless. 

Case 1:12-cv-01712-AWI-SAB Document 36 Filed 11/14/13 Page 2 of 5
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

3

Moreover, Rule 37 authorizes the following types of sanctions against a party for the failure to 

make initial disclosures under Rule 26(a) and the failure to respond to discovery requests:

(i) directing that the matters embraced in the order or other 

designated facts be taken as established for purposes of the action, 

as the prevailing party claims;

(ii) prohibiting the disobedient party from supporting or 

opposing designated claims or defenses, or from introducing 

designated matters in evidence;

(iii) striking pleadings in whole or in part;

(iv) staying further proceedings until the order is obeyed;

(v) dismissing the action or proceeding in whole or in part;

(vi) rendering a default judgment against the disobedient party; 

or

(vii) treating as contempt of court the failure to obey any order 

except an order to submit to a physical or mental examination.

Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(b)(2)(A), (c)(1)(C), (d)(3).

III.

DISCUSSION

Defendants seek an order compelling Plaintiff to provide initial disclosures under Rule 

26(a) as well as responses to Defendants’ discovery requests. Defendants have demonstrated 

that no disclosures or responses have been provided by Plaintiff. Accordingly, the Court will 

order Plaintiff to provide responses within fourteen (14) days.

Rule 26(a)(1) requires all parties to provide the following information to the other parties 

without awaiting a discovery request:

(i) the name and, if known, the address and telephone number 

of each individual likely to have discoverable information—along 

with the subjects of that information—that the disclosing party 

may use to support its claims or defenses, unless the use would be 

solely for impeachment;

(ii) a copy—or a description by category and location—of all 

documents, electronically stored information, and tangible things 

that the disclosing party has in its possession, custody or control

and may use to support its claims or defenses, unless the use would 

be solely for impeachment;

(iii) a computation of each category of damages claimed by the 

disclosing party—who must also make available for inspection and 

copying as under Rule 34 the documents or other evidentiary 

material, unless privileged or protected from disclosure, on which 

each computation is based, including materials bearing on the 

nature and extent of injuries suffered; and

(iv) for inspection and copying as under Rule 34, any insurance 

agreement under which an insurance business may be liable to 

Case 1:12-cv-01712-AWI-SAB Document 36 Filed 11/14/13 Page 3 of 5
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

4

satisfy all or part of a possible judgment in the action or to 

indemnify or reimburse for payments made to satisfy the judgment.

The Court will order Plaintiff to produce all of the above-described information to Defendants 

within fourteen (14) days.

Defendants propounded several discovery requests, including five sets of interrogatories 

(Rule 33), one set of requests for production (Rule 34) and one set of requests for admission 

(Rule 36). The Court will order Plaintiff to provide responses to these discovery requests within 

fourteen (14) days.

The Court further finds that Plaintiff has waived any objections to Defendants’ discovery 

requests, including any objections based upon privilege. See Richmark Corp. v. Timber Falling 

Consultants, 959 F.2d 1468, 1473 (9th Cir. 1992) (“It is well established that a failure to object 

to discovery requests within the time required constitutes a waiver of any objection.”).

Finally, Plaintiff is forewarned that the failure to provide initial disclosures and discover 

responses in a timely manner in compliance with this order will result in the imposition of 

sanctions. The failure to comply with a court order to provide discovery may result in the 

same types of sanctions described above, see discussion, supra Part II, including but not 

limited to evidentiary sanctions, issue sanctions, striking Plaintiff’s pleadings, staying this 

action, dismissing of this action and/or a finding that Plaintiff is in contempt of court.

IV.

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

Based upon the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Defendants’ motion to compel is GRANTED;

2. Within fourteen (14) days of the date of service of this order, Plaintiff shall 

provide Defendants with the required disclosures under Federal Rule of Civil 

Procedure 26(a) as well as responses to Defendants’ discovery requests:

 Set No. One of the Specially Prepared Interrogatories by Defendant Randy 

Davis

/ / /

Case 1:12-cv-01712-AWI-SAB Document 36 Filed 11/14/13 Page 4 of 5
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

5

 Set No. One of the Specially Prepared Interrogatories by Defendant John 

Carrico

 Set No. One of the Specially Prepared Interrogatories by Defendant Jacob 

Keiser

 Set No. One of the Specially Prepared Interrogatories by Defendant Paul 

MacDonald

 Set No. One of the Specially Prepared Interrogatories by Defendant 

Douglas Ridenour

 Set No. One of the Requests for Identification, Production and Copying of 

Documents by Defendant Randy Davis; and

 Set No. One of the Requests for Admissions by Defendant John Carrico

3. Plaintiff is forewarned that the failure to comply with this order will result in 

the imposition of sanctions, up to and including dismissal of this action.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 14, 2013 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:12-cv-01712-AWI-SAB Document 36 Filed 11/14/13 Page 5 of 5