Sample Response to Request for Production of Documents

Legal content overseen by Nathan Walter, Esq., attorney licensed in California (State Bar No. 313299).

Under FRCP 34(b)(2)(B)–(C), a federal response must address each item or category by permitting inspection as requested or stating specific objection grounds and reasons. An objection must say whether responsive materials are withheld on that basis. If you elect to produce copies, production must finish by the requested inspection time or another reasonable time specified in the response.

This sample response to request for production of documents walks through six federal patterns, with the rule behind each sentence.

For background, see federal requests for production and written discovery responses.

What a federal production response must say

A request, a written response and the production itself are three separate events. The written response says what will be produced, what is objected to and what is withheld. The production is the delivery of documents or electronically stored information (ESI).

Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (FRCP) 34(a)(1), a party may request items “in the responding party’s possession, custody, or control.” The request must fall within the scope of Rule 26(b). That scope covers any nonprivileged matter that is relevant to a party’s claim or defense and proportional to the needs of the case, weighing factors such as the amount in controversy, the parties’ relative access to information and whether the burden outweighs the likely benefit (FRCP 26(b)(1)).

For the requesting side, see these examples of document requests.

Match each response to the request

FRCP 34(b)(2)(B) requires a response “for each item or category.” The response must either state that inspection and related activities will be permitted as requested or state with specificity the grounds for objecting, including the reasons. A party may say it will produce copies instead, and production must then be completed by the time stated in the request or another reasonable time specified in the response.

Under Rule 34(b)(2)(C), an objection must state whether any responsive materials are being withheld on the basis of that objection. An objection to part of a request must specify the part and permit inspection of the rest.

A practical skeleton follows. It is a drafting habit, not a form the rule prescribes:

1. Restate the request number.
2. State what will be or has been produced, with Bates references (page-level identifiers stamped on each produced page).
3. If objecting, state the specific ground and the reasons.
4. State whether responsive materials are withheld on that objection.
5. State when production is or will be complete.

Separate confidentiality from privilege

Confidentiality and privilege are different things in the rules. A privilege or trial-preparation protection is asserted under FRCP 26(b)(5)(A): the party must expressly make the claim and describe what was withheld so that other parties can assess the claim without learning the protected content.

Confidentiality is addressed through protective measures. Under FRCP 26(c)(1), a party may move for a protective order, and the court may issue one for good cause, including one requiring that a trade secret or other confidential commercial information be revealed only in a specified way (Rule 26(c)(1)(G)). The rule text does not make “confidential” a stand-alone reason to withhold documents.

Federal response and production deadlines

The written response, the delivery of copies and a stipulated extension are governed by different parts of the rules.

Event	Timing	Authority
Written response to a request	Within 30 days after service	FRCP 34(b)(2)(A)
Response to an early request delivered under Rule 26(d)(2)	Within 30 days after the first Rule 26(f) conference	FRCP 26(d)(2); 34(b)(2)(A)
Completing production of copies	By the inspection time in the request, or another reasonable time specified in the response	FRCP 34(b)(2)(B)
Different response time	As stipulated under Rule 29 or ordered by the court	FRCP 34(b)(2)(A)
Stipulation that interferes with discovery, motion or trial dates	Needs court approval	FRCP 29(b)

More time requires the right mechanism

Rule 34(b)(2)(A) says a shorter or longer response time may be stipulated under FRCP 29 or ordered by the court. Rule 29(b) adds that a stipulation extending the time for any form of discovery must have court approval if it would interfere with the time set for completing discovery, for hearing a motion, or for trial.

A separate question is when production is completed. Rule 34(b)(2)(B) lets the response specify another reasonable time for completing production. That is not a way to postpone the written response itself, and any scheduling order still applies. The rules set no automatic grace period.

Sample response to request for production of documents

The following examples are invented and illustrate federal response drafting; they are not court-approved forms. Bates ranges and dates are made up.

1. Full production with Bates references

Employment case, plaintiff responding. Request No. 1: Produce Plaintiff’s offer letter and signed employment agreement.

The response names the location and says production is complete. It uses the present tense because the documents go out with it. Bates numbering is a common practice, not a Rule 34 requirement. The authority is FRCP 34(a)(1) and (b)(2)(B).

2. Partial production with a withholding statement

Employment case, plaintiff responding. Request No. 4: Produce all communications concerning any job application Plaintiff submitted at any time in the last ten years.

This pattern follows Rule 34(b)(2)(C): the objection names the part challenged and says what is held back, and the rest is produced. The example assumes the stated relevance and retrieval facts support the objection; the lost-wage period alone does not establish the proper discovery boundary under Rule 26(b)(1). This objection does not involve privilege.

3. A specific objection followed by production

Employment case, employer responding. Request No. 7: Produce payroll records for Plaintiff, in image-only PDF form.

Rule 34(b)(2)(D) permits an objection to a requested form for ESI, and when a party objects it must state the form it intends to use. Here the objection is about format only, and the response says plainly that nothing is being held back. Native files are not Bates-stamped page by page the way images are, so the response identifies them by file designation. The form can still be resolved by agreement or court order.

4. No responsive documents after a search

Personal injury case, plaintiff responding. Request No. 3: Produce all photographs Plaintiff took on the date of the incident.

A response like this should describe the search actually done, and it fits only once the search is finished. It does not mean the photographs never existed. Rule 34 does not prescribe the phrase “diligent search.”

If the party later learns the response is incomplete or incorrect in a material respect, FRCP 26(e)(1) requires a timely supplement, unless the correct information has already been made known to the other parties during discovery or in writing. The authority for the response itself is Rule 34(a)(1) and (b)(2)(B).

5. Privileged documents identified in a log

Employment case, employer responding. Request No. 9: Produce all communications concerning the decision to terminate Plaintiff.

Rule 26(b)(5)(A) requires an express claim and a description of the nature of what was not produced, one that lets the other parties assess the claim without revealing privileged information. The hypothetical assumes counsel has reviewed those three items and concluded they are privileged.

The rule does not prescribe a log format, and a case order may set its own expectations.

6. Rolling production with a stated end date

Business records case, employer responding. Request No. 12: Produce all monthly equipment inspection records for the Springfield facility.

The unproduced batches are scheduled production, not withholding. The response gives dates and a concrete reason for the schedule (archived records in offline storage). Dates alone would not show that the schedule is reasonable. The sample assumes the schedule fits the scheduling order and has been agreed to; real wording should identify any actual stipulation or order.

Rule 34(b)(2)(B) allows completion by the inspection time or another reasonable time specified in the response. An extension of the written-response deadline runs through Rule 34(b)(2)(A) and Rule 29(b), and a message saying “we need 14 more days” is not a stipulated extension.

Check the documents against the written response

Before service, the documents and the written response should say the same thing. This checklist is a drafting aid, not a list of rule requirements:

• Bates ranges: confirm each range in the response matches files that actually exist in the production.
• Form and organization: check the applicable stipulation or order. Otherwise, Rule 34(b)(2)(E)(i) requires documents as kept in the usual course of business or organized and labelled to the request categories. State the ESI form where Rule 34(b)(2)(D) requires it.
• Withholding: confirm every objection says whether materials are withheld on it, and every redaction or withholding has a stated basis.
• Privilege entries: confirm each item described in the response appears in the log.
• “Subject to” language: “subject to and without waiving” should not leave the reader unable to tell whether documents are withheld.
• Incomplete search versus none found: keep them separate. “No responsive documents” should follow a completed search, not stand in for one still underway.
• Supplementation: note the Rule 26(e)(1) duty to supplement.

A cover letter can be a convenient way to transmit a production, but it does not replace the item-by-item response. For help with file organization, see how to organize discovery documents.

State rules

These examples apply the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. They are not state-specific forms, and state courts have their own requirements that must be checked separately.

For two state-level guides, see responding to requests for production in Texas and Florida requests for production.

Draft production responses with Briefpoint

Briefpoint drafts responses and objections to requests for production, interrogatories and requests for admission. Output is editable in Microsoft Word, and attorneys keep final review of every response before it is served.

For document-heavy requests, Autodoc finds responsive documents, adds page-level Bates citations and builds a Bates-numbered production package. Client Bridge sends clients plain-language questions through a secure link so they can answer and upload documents for attorney review.

Briefpoint supports all 50 states and 98 federal courts. Whether a particular objection, privilege claim or production schedule is appropriate remains the attorney’s decision. During final review, compare each draft response with the request, the records selected for production and any stated withholding.

Book a demo to see Briefpoint’s discovery-response workflow.

Watch the Briefpoint demo:

FAQs About a Sample Response to Request for Production of Documents

How do you respond to a request for production of documents?

Respond in writing to each item or category by stating that production or inspection will be permitted, or by stating specific grounds and reasons for objecting. Under FRCP 34(b)(2)(B)–(C), each objection must say whether responsive materials are withheld. The written response is separate from the documents themselves, which must be produced by the stated completion time.

How long do you have to respond in federal court?

Ordinarily 30 days after being served, under FRCP 34(b)(2)(A). For an early request delivered under Rule 26(d)(2), the 30 days run from the first Rule 26(f) conference. The parties may stipulate to a different time under Rule 29, or the court may order one. Completing production can follow a separate reasonable date stated in the response.

What do you say if you have no responsive documents?

State accurately that no responsive documents were located in your possession, custody, or control after the search you describe, and that nothing is withheld on an objection. Use that wording only once the search is finished. If the response proves materially incomplete or incorrect, FRCP 26(e)(1) requires a timely supplement, subject to the rule’s exception for information already made known.

How do you identify documents withheld as privileged?

Expressly make the privilege claim and describe the nature of the withheld documents so the other side can assess the claim without seeing protected content, as FRCP 26(b)(5)(A) requires. A privilege log is a common way to do this, but the rule does not set a fixed template. Local rules or case orders may add expectations.

Can you ask for more time or produce documents in batches?

You can seek a stipulated extension of the response time under FRCP 29, subject to court approval if it would interfere with discovery, motion or trial dates. Separately, a response may specify another reasonable time to complete production under Rule 34(b)(2)(B). State a firm completion date.

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.