Judge: Craig Griffin, Case: Alsaid v. Sameer, Date: 2022-09-29 Tentative Ruling

Defendant, Gonzalez Legacy, Inc.’s (“Moving Party”) Motions to Compel Plaintiff’s responses to Request for Production of Documents, Form Interrogatories and Special Interrogatories, all Sets One, and Motion to Deem Requests for Admission, Set One, admitted are DENIED without prejudice.

A propounding party may seek a court order compelling answers if the party to whom the interrogatories or requests for production are directed fails to respond. (CCP § 2030.290(b) [rogs]; 2031.300(b) [rfp].) A propounding party may seek a court order that the genuineness of any documents and the truth of any matter specified in requests for admission be deemed admitted. (CCP § 2033.280.)

In order for the motion to be granted, the movant must show that (1) the discovery requests were properly served; (2) the time to respond has expired; and (3) no response of any kind was served. (Leach v. Superior Court (1980) 111 Cal.App.3d 902, 905-06.)

Here, the subject discovery (attached as Exhibits A to the motions) do not contain a proof of service.

True, the motions each attach a declaration of Victoire Marqué attesting that service was made upon Plaintiff’s attorney, but the declarations provide none the particulars required for a valid proof of service under the Code of Civil Procedure.

Thus, the Court is unable to verify if the discovery was properly served on Plaintiff.

Accordingly, the motions are DENIED without prejudice to renewal. Moving Party is given leave to re-file the motions with proofs of service of the subject discovery attached.

Moving Party to give notice.