Opinion
Civil Action No. 05-cv-01028-EWN-BNB.
October 24, 2006
ORDER
This matter is before me on the plaintiff's Motion for Order Compelling Inspection [Doc. #63, filed 9/25/06] (the "Motion"). The plaintiff seeks an order compelling the defendants to produce documents that he requested in "Plaintiff [sic] Amended Written Discovery to Defendants." The plaintiff asserts that the defendants have not produced the documents sought in Requests No. 5, 6, and 10. The Requests are attached to the Motion. I have reviewed the Requests and the defendants' responses to the Requests.
The defendants' responses are not attached to the Motion. Instead, the plaintiff sets forth verbatim the responses. The defendants do not dispute the plaintiff's representation of their responses.
Requests No. 5 and 6 are not relevant to the issues in this case and are not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Therefore, the Motion is denied to the extent it seeks production of documents in response to the plaintiff's Requests No. 5 and 6. The plaintiff states that the defendants responded to Request No. 10 as follows:
Defendants object to this request as unduly burdensome and on the grounds that the documents are confidential. Without waiving these objections, Defendants respond that they will produce these documents upon entry of a protective order.Motion, p. 4.
A Protective Order was entered in this case on August 22, 2006 [Doc. #57]. Therefore, I assume that the defendants have produced the responsive documents and that the Motion is moot with respect to Request No. 10. If the documents have not been produced, the defendants shall produce them on or before November 6, 2006.
IT IS ORDERED that the Motion is DENIED insofar as it seeks an order compelling the defendants to produce documents responsive to Requests for Documents Nos. 5 and 6.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if the defendants have not produced documents responsive to Request No. 10, they shall produce them on or before November 6, 2006.