Opinion
No. CV-07-01553-ROS.
January 25, 2011
ORDER
On January 21, 2011, Plaintiff filed a Motion to Compel Defendants to produce documents (Doc. 68). Plaintiff's Motion to Compel asserts Defendants refused to produce documents based on the attorney-client privilege or Defendants' inability to locate the documents. (Doc. 68, at 5). Plaintiff does not specify the requests for production to which he is seeking a response. Instead, Plaintiff attaches one page of what appears to be Defendants' responses to Plaintiff's requests for production. Only one response invokes the attorney-client privilege, and there are no objections on the grounds Defendants cannot find the documents. (Doc. 68, at 9). According to Defendants' response attached to the Motion to Compel, Request for Production No. 8 seeks "Investing reports, inquiry reports, incident, 602 reports specificaly [sic] incident log number 1) K.VSPD-07-00320 2.) KVSP-0-08-00041." (Id.). In response, Defendants object on the grounds the request is vague and ambiguous and "seeks information protected by the attorney-client privilege and work product doctrine[s]. Without waiving the objections, responding parties hereby produce inmate appeal log nos. 07-00320 and 08-00041." (Id.).
Without more information from Plaintiff regarding what is missing from Defendants' responses, the Court cannot determine why Defendants' responses may be insufficient. From the information Plaintiff has provided, it appears Defendants stated an objection then responded by producing the requested appeals logs. As such, Plaintiff's Motion to Compel will be denied.
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED Plaintiff's Motion to Compel (Doc. 68) is DENIED.
DATED this 25th day of January, 2011.