Tentative Ruling

 

PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER DISCOVERY RESPONSES FROM DEFENDANT, AND REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS – FIRST SET OF REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS is CONTINUED as the parties are to further meet and confer.

 

Background

 

This is a lemon law case.

 

On December 2, 2022, Plaintiffs MIGUEL JIMENEZ MARTINEZ aka MIGUEL M JIMENEZ and OLGA JIMENEZ filed suit for SBA violations.

 

On May 10, 2023, Plaintiffs filed the instant motion.

 

On June 13, 2023, Defendant filed its opposition.

 

On June 22, 2023, Plaintiffs filed their reply.

 

Discussion

 

Plaintiff seeks further production of documents as to RFPs 16, 19-32 and 45-46.

 

The court continues the hearing for further meet and confer efforts for a couple of reasons.

 

First, the separate statement of 130 pages merely provides boilerplate and conclusive explanations as to why further document production is warranted; that does not aid the court in understanding the relevancy of the information sought in a basic SBA case. Documents about other complaints from or by other consumers, or the design of specific component systems or parts are not relevant to Plaintiffs’ claim that GM failed to repair their vehicle within a reasonable number of attempts.

 

Second, as explained by Defendant, Plaintiffs served 157 discovery requests on GM: 46 Requests for Production, 27 Form Interrogatories, 49 Special Interrogatories, and 35 Requests for Admission. GM responded to all 157 plus requests and, to date, has produced all these materials, suggesting that Plaintiffs already have access to a plethora of relevant information. 

 

Therefore, as neither Plaintiff’s motion nor separate statement make it clear as to the relevancy of the documents, the court orders the parties to meet and confer to resolve the matters. Prior to the continued hearing, Plaintiff is to submit a supplemental meet and confer declaration that concisely explains the relevancy of each RFP and as supported by a couple of cases that are instructive on the RFPs (with an appropriate analysis to the case).

 

Conclusion

 

Based on the foregoing, the motion is continued for the parties to further meet and confer. Prior to the next hearing date, Plaintiff is to file a supplemental separate statement that provides, in a few sentences, the relevancy of each RFP sought with citation to a couple of relevant cases with a proper analysis.