Pena
(PC) Stanford v. Pena
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 JAMES R. STANFORD, No. 2:18-cv-03007-KJM-JDP (PC) Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION
TO COMPEL IN PART
v. ECF No. 40 A. PENA, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He alleges that he was attacked by another inmate, D. Chan, and that defendants were deliberately indifferent in failing to protect him. ECF No. 6 at 11-18. He has filed a motion to compel, ECF No. 40, and defendants have filed an opposition, ECF No. 41. Plaintiff has not filed a reply and the time to do so has passed. For the reasons stated below, I grant his motion in part. Legal Standards Parties are obligated to respond to interrogatories to the fullest extent possible, under oath, Fed. R. Civ. P. 33(b)(3), and must state any objections with specificity, Fed. R. Civ. P. 33(b)(4); Davis v. Fendler, 650 F.2d 1154, 1160 (9th Cir. 1981)…