Objections and Responses to Requests for Admission
(Plaintiff to Defendant) (Federal)

Summary

This template provides objections and responses to requests for admission (RFAs) that a plaintiff may use in a federal civil case. It includes practical guidance, drafting notes, and alternate clauses. Requests for admission are used to establish matters about which there is no real dispute. Fed. R. Civ. P. 36. These can be particularly helpful in expediting and streamlining litigation and can save litigants time and money. A request is admitted unless you serve a written answer or objection within 30 days of service. Fed. R. Civ. P. 36(a)(3). Written requests for admission may relate to the following matters: • Statements or opinions of fact • The application of law to fact or opinions thereabout • The genuineness of documents A request is admitted unless you serve a written answer or objection within 30 days of service. Fed. R. Civ. P. 36(a)(3). Duty to Respond You must serve your responses within 30 days after being served with the requests. Fed. R. Civ. P. 36(a)(3). An additional 3 days are allowed if requests were served by mail or other specific means set forth in Rule 6(d). Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(d). The time for responding may be shortened or lengthened by either a court order or stipulation under Rule 29. Fed. R. Civ. P. 36(a)(3). A matter presented in an RFA is "admitted unless, within 30 days after being served the party to whom the request is directed serve on the requesting party a written answer or objection[.]" Fed. R. Civ. P. 36(a)(3); see Batyukova v. Doege, 994 F.3d 717, 724 (5th Cir. 2021) (facts deemed admitted cannot be overcome on summary judgment by pointing to contradictory evidence). Duty to Inquire As a party responding to a request for admission, you must conduct a reasonable inquiry into the factual basis of its responses and provide responses based on that inquiry. A. Farber & Partners, Inc. v. Garber, 234 F.R.D. 186, 189 (C.D. Cal. 2006); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(g) (Advisory Committee's Note to 1983 Amendment: "The duty to make a 'reasonable inquiry' [under Rule 26(g)] is satisfied if the investigation . . . and the conclusions drawn therefrom are reasonable under the circumstances. It is an objective standard similar to the one imposed by Rule 11."). You may not refuse to admit or deny a request for admission based upon a lack of personal knowledge if the information relevant to the request is reasonably available to the party. Asea, Inc. v. S. Pac. Transp. Co., 669 F.2d 1242, 1245 (9th Cir. 1981). Your of reasonable inquiry in responding to requests for admission is similar to your duty in answering interrogatories. FDIC v. Halpern, 271 F.R.D. 191, 193 (D. Nev. 2010); see Interrogatories: Responding to Interrogatories (Federal). If you represent the responding party, upon receipt of requests for admission, immediately: • Send the requests to your client –and– • Set up a meeting to discuss the client's responses Be sure that your client understands the scope of their obligations in formulating the responses and the consequences of improperly denying a request. This will help to ensure that your client satisfies their duty to engage in a reasonable inquiry and diligently searches for the requested information. Supplementing or Correcting As with other written discovery methods, a responding party has a duty to supplement or correct a response to include information thereafter acquired if ordered by the court. Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(e). Further, the responding party has an ongoing duty to timely amend a prior response to a request for admission if: • The party learns that the response is in some material respect incomplete or incorrect –and– • The additional or corrective information has not otherwise been made known to the other parties during the discovery process or in writing. Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(e)(1); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(c)(1) (sanctions for failure to amend). Generally, any amended response may simply be served on the other parties to the action. However, if the original response is an admission, the responding party must first obtain a court order allowing the amendment. Fed. R. Civ. P. 36(b); Foss v. Marvic Inc., 994 F.3d 57, 63 (1st Cir. 2021). Related Content For a full listing of key content covering fundamental civil litigation tasks throughout a federal court litigation lifecycle, see Civil Litigation Fundamentals Resource Kit (Federal). For more on RFAs, see: • Requests for Admission: Responding to RFAs (Federal) • Requests for Admission: Drafting and Serving RFAs (Federal) For related templates, see: • Objections and Responses to Requests for Admission (Defendant to Plaintiff) (Federal) • Requests for Admission (Plaintiff to Defendant) (Federal) • Requests for Admission (Defendant to Plaintiff) (Federal)