Kinkeade v. Beard et al
Filing
41
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 2/23/2017 GRANTING defendant Oddie's 34 motion to deem requests admitted; and defendant's Requests for Admission to Plaintiff, Set One are deemed admitted under Rule 36 (a) of the Federal Rules of Procedure. (Yin, K)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
CARLOS KINKEADE,
12
Plaintiff,
13
14
No. 2:15-cv-1375 TLN CKD P
v.
ORDER
JEFFERY BEARD, et al.,
15
Defendants.
16
17
Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding through counsel in this civil rights action. Before
18
the court is defendant Oddie’s motion to deem admitted Defendant’s Requests for Admission to
19
Plaintiff, Set One, pursuant to Rule 36(a)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (ECF No.
20
34.) Plaintiff has filed an opposition, and defendant Oddie has replied. (ECF Nos. 35 & 36.)
As plaintiff acknowledges, under Rule 36(a), the failure to timely respond to requests for
21
22
admission results in automatic admission of the matters requested. Here it is undisputed that,
23
after plaintiff obtained counsel, plaintiff’s responses to the RFAs were due on January 6, 2017.
24
(See ECF No. 34-2, Ex. A & B.) Plaintiff’s counsel concedes that, due to an inadvertent
25
calendaring error, plaintiff did not timely respond or object to the RFAs. Therefore, these matters
26
are deemed admitted.
27
////
28
////
1
1
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
2
1. Defendant Oddie’s motion to deem requests admitted (ECF No. 34) is granted; and
3
2. Defendant’s Requests for Admission to Plaintiff, Set One are deemed admitted under
4
Rule 36(a) of the Federal Rules of Procedure.
5
Dated: February 23, 2017
_____________________________________
CAROLYN K. DELANEY
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
6
7
8
9
10
11
2 / kink1375.rfas
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
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?