Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Further Responses is denied.
Standards for Compelling Further Responses in General Unlike other discovery devices, requests to inspect documents are governed by a higher standard whereby the moving party must set forth specific facts showing good cause justifying the discovery sought by the demand. (CCP § 2031.310(b)(1); see Williams v. Superior Court (2017) 3 Cal.5th 531, 550 (citing Calcor Space Facility, Inc. v. Superior Court (1997) 53 Cal.App.4th 216, 223.) Declarations are generally used to show the good cause and should offer “specific facts” rather than mere conclusions. (Cal. Prac. Guide Civ. Pro. Before Trial ¶ 8:1495.1 - .9 (Rutter Group 2018) and Calcor, 53 Cal.App.4th at 224.) The greater showing is needed because demands for inspection of documents are more intrusive than merely asking questions. The broad fishing expeditions that may be allowed in other areas of discovery are less permissible in the context of demanding documents of the oppon