Washington et al v. Fresno County Sheriff et al
ORDER requiring Plaintiff to comply with Local Rule 260 and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and striking Plaintiff's responses to Defendants' requests for admission and interrogatories signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 11/16/2017. (Filing Deadline: 11/20/2017). (Lundstrom, T)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
PERRY WASHINGTON, et al,
Case No. 1:14-cv-00129-SAB
ORDER REQUIRING PLAINTIFF TO
COMPLY WITH LOCAL RULE 260 AND
THE FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL
PROCEDURE AND STRIKING
PLAINTIFF’S RESPONSES TO
DEFENDANTS’ REQUESTS FOR
ADMISSION AND INTERROGATORIES
FRESNO COUNTY SHERIFF, et al.,
DEADLINE: NOVEMBER 20, 2017
On October 9, 2017, Defendant Velos filed a motion for summary judgment in this
20 action. (ECF No. 114.) On November 14, 2017, Plaintiff filed his opposition to the motion for
21 summary judgment. (ECF No. 116.)
The Local Rules of the Eastern District of California require that the opposition to the
23 motion for summary judgment reproduce the itemized facts in the statement of undisputed facts
24 and admit those facts that are undisputed and deny those that are disputed citing to the portion of
25 “any pleading, affidavit, deposition, interrogatory answer, admission, or other document relied
26 upon in support of that denial.”
Plaintiff shall be required to reproduce
27 Defendant’s statement of undisputed facts and cite to those materials that support the denial of
28 any fact contained therein.
Additionally, pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure,
A party asserting that a fact cannot be or is genuinely disputed must support the
assertion by: (A) citing to particular parts of materials in the record, including
depositions, documents, electronically stored information, affidavits or
declarations, stipulations (including those made for purposes of the motion only),
admissions, interrogatory answers, or other materials; or (B) showing that the
materials cited do not establish the absence or presence of a genuine dispute, or
that an adverse party cannot produce admissible evidence to support the fact.
6 Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c). Here, in support of his opposition to the motion for summary judgment,
7 Plaintiff submits unsigned discovery responses. (ECF No. 116-3.)
As relevant here, Rule 26 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that
every discovery request, response, or objection must be signed by at least one
attorney of record in the attorney’s own name--or by the party personally, if
unrepresented. . . . By signing, an attorney or party certifies that to the best of the
person’s knowledge, information, and belief formed after a reasonable inquiry:
(B) with respect to a discovery request, response, or objection, it is:
(i) consistent with these rules and warranted by existing law or by a nonfrivolous
argument for extending, modifying, or reversing existing law, or for establishing
(ii) not interposed for any improper purpose, such as to harass, cause unnecessary
delay, or needlessly increase the cost of litigation; and
(iii) neither unreasonable nor unduly burdensome or expensive, considering the
needs of the case, prior discovery in the case, the amount in controversy, and the
importance of the issues at stake in the action.
Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(g)(1). The rule further provides that the court must strike an unsigned
disclosure, request, response, or objection “unless a signature is promptly supplied after the
omission is called to the attorney’s or party’s attention.”
Here, Plaintiff’s responses to
Defendant’s request for admission and interrogatories is unsigned and shall be stricken from the
record on that ground. If Plaintiff seeks to have the discovery responses considered in opposition
to the motion for summary judgment, the signed responses must be filed.
Failure to file
supplemental documents will result in the motion being decided based only on those documents
submitted by Defendant, and the documents in the opposition that have not been stricken from
the record, as well as those documents in the Court record relied on by the parties.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
Plaintiff’s responses to Defendants’ requests for admission and interrogatories
(ECF No. 116-3) is STRICKEN FROM THE RECORD as unsigned;
On or before November 20, 2017, Plaintiff shall file a supplemental opposition
which includes a reproduction of the itemized undisputed facts admitting or
denying each fact; and
Defendant’s reply, if any, shall be filed on or before November 27, 2017.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
November 16, 2017
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?