Briefpoint

RFP Responses Examples: How to Respond to Common Requests

 In Best Practice

RFP Responses Examples: How to Respond to Common Requests

Handling discovery can be one of the most time-consuming parts of litigation. Each request for production (RFP) asks for specific documents that could affect the outcome of a case, so accuracy and organization are key.

Legal teams need a clear system for collecting, reviewing, and producing information while keeping everything compliant and easy to follow.

This guide breaks down what RFPs are, what makes a strong response, and includes real-world examples you can use for reference. In the final sections, we’ll look at how RFP automation tools can simplify the process and save time across multiple matters.

What Is a Request for Production?

A request for production is part of the discovery process in a lawsuit. It’s a formal written request that one party sends to another, asking for documents, records, or files that contain necessary information about the case.

These could include:

  • Contracts
  • Emails
  • Reports
  • Financial statements
  • Any materials that help clarify the facts in dispute

The goal of an RFP is to make sure both sides have access to the same information before going to court. This makes sense because it allows each party to prepare its arguments based on complete and accurate evidence.

When a law firm receives an RFP, it reviews each request carefully, gathers the relevant materials, and decides which documents can be shared. Privileged or confidential data must be reviewed and redacted before being produced.

Managing this process manually takes time and increases the chance of missing important files. To handle it more efficiently, many firms use RFP automation tools that organize, tag, and produce documents automatically.

This saves hours of work and gives both the firm and the client confidence that every request has been handled correctly and consistently throughout the discovery process.

What Makes a Strong RFP Response

A strong RFP response depends on the case, the client, and the type of legal documents requested. But usually, here’s what makes an RFP response clear, defensible, and useful to both sides.

  • Complete and accurate: It includes all the information requested, organized by request number and supported with clear references or exhibits.
  • Concise and focused: The response avoids unnecessary detail and keeps the language direct. Each answer should make sense without long explanations.
  • Well-structured: Every response lists the request first, followed by the reply. This helps readers follow the document easily.
  • Relevant and precise: The response focuses only on materials related to the request and avoids mixing unrelated topics.
  • Transparent: When documents are withheld or redacted, the reason is clearly stated. This helps demonstrate fairness in the discovery process.
  • Professional tone: Even when objecting, the wording stays neutral and polite.

Sometimes, it’s also helpful to include additional information that clarifies how the data was collected or reviewed.

Overall, a good RFP response should demonstrate that the producing party handled the process carefully and in good faith. This shows both preparation and respect for the opposing side’s right to review evidence.

RFP Response Examples

These examples show how law firms usually structure their replies to different types of requests for production. They’re based on common discovery situations and demonstrate how to stay professional, clear, and compliant with court rules.

Each example reflects a different scenario:

Full Compliance Response

Request No. 1:

Produce all contracts signed between Plaintiff and Defendant from January 2021 through December 2023.

Response:

Defendant will produce all responsive documents. The legal team reviewed every contract within the requested time frame, confirmed that each document is accurate and complete, and attached the full set as Exhibit A.

No documents are being withheld. All materials were collected directly from the client’s files and verified before submission.

This example shows a thorough, direct reply written in active voice. It explains what actions the team took (reviewing, confirming, and attaching) and makes it clear that production is complete.

The language is confident, transparent, and easy to read, which helps maintain credibility during discovery.

Partial Compliance Response

Request No. 2:

Produce all internal emails between company executives regarding the product recall from 2020 to 2023.

Response:

Defendant objects to this request as overly broad and not limited in scope or time. After review, the legal team identified relevant communications concerning the Model X recall between March and August 2023.

Defendant will produce those emails as Exhibit B. All unrelated or privileged communications have been withheld.

This one shows how to comply in part while keeping the response reasonable. It demonstrates that the team reviewed the request, narrowed the focus, and provided only what was relevant.

Plus, the wording stays factual and professional, which acknowledges the discovery objection but still shows cooperation and good faith in the production process.

Objection Due to Scope or Relevance

Request No. 3:

Produce all employee performance evaluations from 2018 to 2024.

Response:

Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it seeks irrelevant and confidential information not related to the issues in dispute. The request also lacks reasonable limits in time and subject matter. No documents will be produced in response.

This response shows a clear and professional objection. It explains the reason for refusing production (irrelevance and confidentiality) without unnecessary language. The response stays direct and avoids emotional or defensive wording.

A well-written objection like this helps protect client data while keeping the tone neutral and respectful, which can make future negotiations or revisions to the request smoother.

Clarification or Request for Narrower Terms

Request No. 4:

Produce all documents related to communications with third-party vendors.

Response:

Defendant objects to this request as vague and overly broad. It is unclear which vendors or time period the request covers.

Defendant requests clarification or a narrower scope limited to specific vendors and relevant projects. Once clarified, Defendant will review and produce responsive documents.

This type of response shows professionalism while maintaining control of the discovery process. It acknowledges the request, identifies the pain points, and invites clarification instead of rejecting the RFP issuer outright.

That approach demonstrates cooperation and helps avoid unnecessary disputes about scope or interpretation later in the case.

Extension or Need for Additional Time

Request No. 5:

Produce all reports and internal communications concerning the termination of the joint venture.

Response:

Defendant has begun collecting and reviewing the requested materials but requires additional time to complete the process. The legal team expects to finish review and production within 14 days.

Defendant will notify Plaintiff immediately once the responsive documents are ready for delivery.

This example reflects a practical and honest update. It shows that the responding party is taking action, managing the workload responsibly, and keeping communication open.

Formatting and Best Practices

A well-organized response makes the legal drafting process smoother and helps both sides review materials without confusion. Consistency across documents is key, especially when handling multiple RFPs in one case.

A clear format also reduces errors and gives the court more insight into how the documents were collected and reviewed.

Here are a few best practices for creating an effective RFP response:

  • Use a clear structure: List each request, followed by its response. Keep numbering consistent throughout the entire process.
  • Keep tone and language professional: Avoid unnecessary explanations or defensive language.
  • Reference exhibits properly: Link each response to exhibits or attachments when relevant.
  • Include an RFP cover letter: Summarize what’s being produced, note any objections, and provide contact details for follow-up.
  • Work from a standard template: Templates save time, help maintain accuracy, and make future RFPs easier to manage.

Automation tools like AutoDoc make this far simpler. AutoDoc auto-drafts every RFP, cites exact Bates pages, and packages the finished response with its production, ready for review in seconds. In other words, it replaces weeks of manual review with one upload.

If you’d like to end repetitive discovery work, join the AutoDoc waitlist for early access and see how it can handle your next round of RFPs in just 3–10 seconds per request.

Automating RFP Responses

RFP response software helps legal teams create accurate responses to requests for production without spending hours on manual review.

It takes over the repetitive parts of the job, like collecting files, applying Bates numbers, formatting discovery responses, and organizing attachments. With those tasks out of the way, your team can focus on higher-level work.

If you’ve ever managed discovery manually, you know how time-consuming it can be to search through folders, rename files, and double-check references.

Automation replaces those steps with a structured system that identifies responsive documents, fills in response templates, and keeps everything consistent across cases.

Here’s what automated RFP tools often handle:

  • Auto-draft responses: Build complete answers from uploaded files or data sources.
  • Apply Bates numbers automatically: Assign clear page identifiers in seconds.
  • Locate responsive materials: Detect and attach relevant files to each request.
  • Support collaboration: Allow attorneys, paralegals, and other team members to review and edit in one shared workspace.

Automation lets your team spend less time on administrative work and more time supporting clients and refining case strategies.

It also keeps a reliable record of each action taken, so that every RFP response stays organized, consistent, and defensible throughout the discovery process.

End Repetitive RFP Work With Briefpoint Autodoc

Each RFP is different, but the goal stays the same: produce complete, accurate, and defensible responses without wasting days on formatting and document review. That’s where Briefpoint helps you work smarter.

Briefpoint

With Briefpoint, you can propound and respond to RFPs, RFAs, and interrogatories across every U.S. state and federal district in just a few clicks.

Upload a discovery request, review AI-assisted objections, and export a formatted response ready to serve. It’s designed for real legal workflows that should be fast, defensible, and fully editable.

For teams managing heavy discovery workloads, Briefpoint eliminates the slow parts of the process. You’ll draft high-quality responses that match your firm’s preferred language, maintain compliance with local court rules, and keep every matter organized from start to finish.

Ready to see how it all works? Book a demo with Briefpoint today.

FAQs About RFP Responses Examples

What are examples of good RFP responses?

Good RFP responses are clear, complete, and well-organized. They address each request directly, include the right supporting documents, and explain any objections professionally. A strong response helps build trust with the opposing side by showing accuracy and transparency.

What are RFP responses?

RFP responses are written replies that a party provides during discovery to share or object to requested documents. They show which materials are being produced, which are withheld, and why.

What does a successful RFP look like?

A successful RFP response follows a clear plan, keeps formatting consistent, and references exhibits correctly. It’s also timely, defensible, and easy for others to review and understand.

How can you make RFP responses more engaging and complete?

Focus on clarity and relevance. Each response should maintain the reader’s interest, address the request with a direct solution, and present the information in a way that supports your overall case strategy.

The information provided on this website does not, and is not intended to, constitute legal advice; instead, all information, content, and materials available on this site are for general informational purposes only. Information on this website may not constitute the most up-to-date legal or other information. 

This website contains links to other third-party websites. Such links are only for the convenience of the reader, user or browser. Readers of this website should contact their attorney to obtain advice with respect to any particular legal matter. No reader, user, or browser of this site should act or refrain from acting on the basis of information on this site without first seeking legal advice from counsel in the relevant jurisdiction. Only your individual attorney can provide assurances that the information contained herein – and your interpretation of it – is applicable or appropriate to your particular situation. Use of, and access to, this website or any of the links or resources contained within the site do not create an attorney-client relationship between the reader, user, or browser and website authors, contributors, contributing law firms, or committee members and their respective employers.

Recent Posts