Washington et al v. Fresno County Sheriff et al

Filing 118

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)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 PERRY WASHINGTON, et al, Plaintiffs, 12 13 14 15 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 v. FRESNO COUNTY SHERIFF, et al., Defendants. DEADLINE: NOVEMBER 20, 2017 16 17 18 19 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.) 22 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.” L.R. 260(b). 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. 1 1 Additionally, pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 2 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. 3 4 5 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.) 8 As relevant here, Rule 26 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that 9 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 new law; (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. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(g)(1). The rule further provides that the court must strike an unsigned 17 disclosure, request, response, or objection “unless a signature is promptly supplied after the 18 omission is called to the attorney’s or party’s attention.” 19 Here, Plaintiff’s responses to Defendant’s request for admission and interrogatories is unsigned and shall be stricken from the 20 record on that ground. If Plaintiff seeks to have the discovery responses considered in opposition 21 to the motion for summary judgment, the signed responses must be filed. Failure to file 22 supplemental documents will result in the motion being decided based only on those documents 23 submitted by Defendant, and the documents in the opposition that have not been stricken from 24 the record, as well as those documents in the Court record relied on by the parties. 25 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 26 1. Plaintiff’s responses to Defendants’ requests for admission and interrogatories 27 (ECF No. 116-3) is STRICKEN FROM THE RECORD as unsigned; 28 2 2. 1 On or before November 20, 2017, Plaintiff shall file a supplemental opposition 2 which includes a reproduction of the itemized undisputed facts admitting or 3 denying each fact; and 3. 4 Defendant’s reply, if any, shall be filed on or before November 27, 2017. 5 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. 7 Dated: November 16, 2017 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3

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?