Allan v. Sahota et al

Filing 46

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 11/20/2018 GRANTING 43 Motion to Compel. Plaintiff shall serve responses to Defendant Sahotas interrogatories numbered 1-9, Defendant Porsonas interrogatories numbered 1-5, and Defendant Chaiken s interrogatories numbered 1-4, within 30 days after the date of service of this order. Plaintiff shall serve responses to Defendants requests for production numbered 1-12 within 30 days after the date of service of this order. The matters stated in Defendants requests for admission numbered 1-17 are deemed admitted. (Henshaw, R)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

TRISTAN D. ALLAN,

12
13

No. 2:16-cv-0695 MCE AC P
Plaintiff,

ORDER

v.

14
15

P. SAHOTA, et al.,
Defendants.

16
17
18

On September 18, 2018, defendants Sahota, Chaiken, and Porsona filed a motion to compel

19

discovery responses and deem certain matters admitted based on plaintiff’s failure to respond to

20

interrogatories, requests for production, and requests for admissions that defendants had served

21

on plaintiff. See ECF No. 43 et seq. The motion requests that plaintiff be ordered to provide

22

responses to defendants’ interrogatories and requests for production. See ECF No. 43-1 at 3. It

23

also requests that this court deem admitted defendants’ requests for admission. See id. at 3-4.

24

On November 19, 2018, defendants filed a reply in support of the motion to compel. ECF

25

No. 45. Defendants point out the fact that plaintiff has not responded to the motion to compel

26

within the requisite twenty-one-day period. As a result, they request that their motion to compel

27

be granted. See id.

28
1

1
2
3

To date, plaintiff has not filed a response to the motion. Despite this fact, for the reasons
stated below, the court will grant defendants’ motion in part and deny it in part.
The motion and supporting declarations demonstrate that despite plaintiff’s representation

4

to defense counsel that the prison has been on periods of lockdown (see generally ECF No 43-3 at

5

2), plaintiff has had more than enough time to respond to defendants’ discovery requests.

6

Plaintiff was served defendants’ first sets of interrogatory, production and admission requests a

7

year ago, on November 20, 2017. See id. at 1-2. Defendants have not only been diligent in

8

attempting to obtain discovery responses from plaintiff, it appears that they have also been more

9

than accommodating to plaintiff, allowing him significant flexibility with respect to filing

10

deadlines. See, e.g., ECF No. 43-3 at 2 (indicating between February 2018 and September 2018,

11

plaintiff both actively and constructively requested extensions of time to file discovery

12

responses). Finally, defense counsel states that on September 13, 2018, plaintiff refused to accept

13

a call from defense counsel to discuss the instant motion and plaintiff’s discovery responses. See

14

id. at 2.

15

These facts suggest that plaintiff is not acting in good faith with respect to the discovery

16

process, which warrants a full grant of each of defendants’ requests and could support more

17

serious sanctions. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(b)(2); see also Local Rule 230(l). Moreover, plaintiff’s

18

failure to respond to the motion to compel demonstrates a lack of respect for the court and a

19

failure of plaintiff’s responsibility as the party bringing this lawsuit. Defendant’s motion will be

20

granted in full. Plaintiff is cautioned that failure to provide the discovery responses ordered

21

below could result in terminating sanctions, meaning dismissal of this action. Id. There will be

22

no extension of the deadlines set below.

23

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows:

24

1.

Defendants’ motion to compel, ECF No. 43, is GRANTED;

25

2.

Plaintiff shall serve responses to Defendant Sahota’s interrogatories numbered 1-9,

26

Defendant Porsona’s interrogatories numbered 1-5, and Defendant Chaiken’s

27

interrogatories numbered 1-4, within thirty days after the date of service of this order;

28
2

1

3.

2
3
4
5

Plaintiff shall serve responses to Defendants’ requests for production numbered 1-12
within thirty days after the date of service of this order; and

4.

The matters stated in Defendants’ requests for admission numbered 1-17 are deemed
admitted.

DATED: November 20, 2018

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3