Judge: Cherol J. Nellon, Case: 25STCV02857, Date: 2025-05-28 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 25STCV02857    Hearing Date: May 28, 2025    Dept: 14

#16

Case Background

This is a lemon law action.

On February 3, 2025, Plaintiff Marcial Y. Cruz Lopez filed her Complaint against Defendants General Motors, LLC (GM) and 72 Hour LLC.

On April 28, 2025, GM filed the instant motion for a protective order. On May 14, 2025, Plaintiffs filed an opposition. On May 20, 2025, GM replied.

Instant Pleading

Defendant moves for a protective order which would allow Defendant to designate (1) warranty policies and procedure manuals and (2) Defendant’s policies and procedures used to evaluate customer requests for restitution or replacement as confidential.

Ruling

Defendant’s motion for a protective order is DENIED. The motion is MOOT as to personal identifying information, including information identifying non-party consumers; such material is not subject to section 871.26 and should be redacted from any disclosures made pursuant to that section.

Discussion

Code of Civil Procedure, section 2031.060 provides that “[w]hen an inspection, copying, testing, or sampling of documents, tangible things, places, or electronically stored information has been demanded, the party to whom the demand has been directed, and any other party or affected person, may promptly move for a protective order.”

“The court, for good cause shown, may make any order that justice requires to protect any party or other person from unwarranted annoyance, embarrassment, or oppression, or undue burden and expense,” including “[t]hat a trade secret or other confidential research, development, or commercial information not be disclosed, or be disclosed only to specified persons or only in a specified way.”  (Code Civ. Proc., section 2031.060, subd. (b)(5).)  

Code of Civil Procedure section 871.26(h) requires Defendant to make an initial disclosure of confidential policies, procedures, and training materials. Defendant contends a protective order is warranted because section 871.26 requires disclosure of trade secrets, propriety business information, personal identifying information, and information that will infringe on the privacy rights of GM and non-party consumers.

Plaintiffs argue that section 871.26 requires Defendant to produce preliminary materials without a protective order.

Section 871.26(b) states:

“Within 60 days after the filing of the answer or other responsive pleading, all parties shall, without awaiting a discovery request, provide to all other parties an initial disclosure and documents pursuant to subdivisions (f), (g), and (h).”

The Court agrees with Plaintiffs that section 871.26 requires preliminary disclosures without a procedure for a protective order. Defendant relies on Code of Civil Procedure section 2031.060. Section 2031.060 is part of the Civil Discovery Act; it applies only to demands for inspection, copying, testing, or sampling of documents. Section 871.26 expressly applies without a discovery request. Section 2031.060 does not supply the Court with authority to impose a protect order.

As to individual privacy interests: identifying information for GM personnel or non-party consumers is not subject to section 871.26. If such information appears in records otherwise subject to section 871.26, that information should – and in some cases must – be redacted before disclosure.

The motion for a protective order is DENIED.

Conclusion

Defendant’s motion for a protective order is DENIED. The motion is MOOT as to personal identifying information, including information identifying non-party consumers; such material is not subject to section 871.26 and should be redacted from any disclosures made pursuant to that section.