Objections to request for production of documents
Below are usable federal objections to requests for production, but each must be tailored to the specific request. Boilerplate objections such as “vague, overbroad, and unduly burdensome” are generally insufficient. Fed. R. Civ. P. 34(b)(2)(B) [2]
<generated_document filename="RFP_Objections_Template.docx">
RESPONSES AND OBJECTIONS TO REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION
General Objections
-
Responding Party objects to each Request to the extent it seeks documents protected by the attorney-client privilege, work-product doctrine, or any other applicable privilege or protection. Any such documents are being withheld and will be identified in a privilege log as required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(5)(A).
-
Responding Party objects to each Request to the extent it seeks information that is not relevant to any party’s claim or defense or is not proportional to the needs of the case under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(1).
-
Responding Party objects to each Request to the extent it is vague or ambiguous, including as to the meaning of “[identify term].” Responding Party has interpreted the Request to mean “[state interpretation].”
-
Responding Party objects to each Request to the extent it is overbroad in subject matter, temporal scope, geographic scope, or custodial scope. To the extent appropriate, Responding Party limits its response to documents created or received between [date] and [date] concerning [specific subject], maintained by [specific custodians or sources].
-
Responding Party objects to each Request to the extent it seeks documents not within its possession, custody, or control. Fed. R. Civ. P. 34(a)(1)
-
Responding Party objects to each Request to the extent it seeks confidential, proprietary, private, or commercially sensitive information absent appropriate protections, including a protective order under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c).
-
Responding Party objects to each Request to the extent it seeks electronically stored information from sources that are not reasonably accessible because of undue burden or cost under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(2)(B).
-
Responding Party objects to each Request to the extent it seeks duplicative or cumulative materials, or materials more conveniently, less burdensomely, or less expensively available from another source under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(2)(C).
-
Responding Party objects to each Request to the extent it seeks documents prepared in anticipation of litigation or for trial, except as permitted by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(3).
-
Responding Party does not waive any objection based on privilege, protection, relevance, proportionality, authenticity, admissibility, or any other applicable ground by responding to a Request or producing documents.
Specific Responses
Request for Production No. 1
[Insert the request verbatim.]
Response: Responding Party objects to this Request as vague and overbroad because the terms “[identify terms]” are undefined and the Request contains no reasonable limitation as to [subject, time period, custodians, or data sources]. Responding Party further objects that the Request is disproportionate to the needs of the case because [state specific burden and why it outweighs likely benefit].
Subject to and without waiving these objections, Responding Party will produce nonprivileged, responsive documents concerning [defined subject], created or received between [date] and [date], in its possession, custody, or control. Responsive documents are being withheld to the extent they fall outside that limitation, are privileged or protected, or are otherwise nonresponsive.
Request for Production No. 2
[Insert the request verbatim.]
Response: Responding Party objects to this Request to the extent it seeks attorney-client communications, attorney work product, or materials prepared in anticipation of litigation. Responsive documents are being withheld on that basis. Nonprivileged responsive documents, if any, will be identified and produced in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(5)(A).
Request for Production No. 3
[Insert the request verbatim.]
Response: Responding Party objects to the requested form of production under Fed. R. Civ. P. 34(b)(2)(D). Responding Party will produce electronically stored information in [native format / searchable PDF / TIFF with load files], which is the form in which the information is ordinarily maintained or a reasonably usable form under Fed. R. Civ. P. 34(b)(2)(E).
Subject to this objection, Responding Party will produce nonprivileged, responsive documents in that form.
Request for Production No. 4
[Insert the request verbatim.]
Response: Responding Party objects that this Request is not proportional to the needs of the case because it seeks [all documents / nationwide materials / an extensive historical period] without limitation to the claims or defenses at issue. The Request would require review of approximately [number] documents or searches of [systems], at an estimated burden of [hours/cost]. Responding Party will instead search [specified sources] for documents from [date] through [date] concerning [specific issue].
Request for Production No. 5
[Insert the request verbatim.]
Response: Responding Party objects to this Request to the extent it seeks documents equally available to Requesting Party from [identified source]. Subject to this objection, Responding Party will produce responsive, nonprivileged documents in its possession, custody, or control that are not duplicative of materials already produced or available to Requesting Party.
</generated_document>
Practical Requirements
- State whether documents are being withheld based on each objection.[1]
- If objecting only to part of a request, identify the disputed portion and produce the remainder.[1]
- State the specific time period, custodians, data sources, and subject-matter limits used.
- Do not use “not reasonably calculated to lead to admissible evidence”; the current standard is relevance and proportionality under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(1). [1]
- Ensure counsel’s signature complies with Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(g). [3]