Judge: Daniel S. Murphy, Case: 24STCV20424, Date: 2025-02-14 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24STCV20424    Hearing Date: February 14, 2025    Dept: 32

motion to compel further responses to plaintiff’s request for

Admission, Set one

            Request 26.  Defendant has denied the request for admission.  No further response is required.  Defendant provided an unequivocal denial.  (See, American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees v. Metropolitan Water Dist. of Southern Calif. (2005) 126 CA4th 247.)   

            Request 28. Defendant’s response is proper.  In lieu of admitting or denying the RFA, a party may respond by claiming inability (lack of sufficient information) to admit or deny the matter stated in the request. (See, CCP § 2033.220(c).)

            Request 29.  Defendant’s response is proper.  In lieu of admitting or denying the RFA, a party may respond by claiming inability (lack of sufficient information) to admit or deny the matter stated in the request. (See, CCP § 2033.220(c).)

            Request 31.  Defendant’s objections are overruled.  Defendant shall provide a code compliant response to this request for admission.

motion to compel further responses to plaintiff’s request for

Admission, Set one

The Court finds Plaintiff’s discovery to be overly broad and unduly burdensome. If Defendant MERCEDES-BNZ USA, LLC has not already done so, the Court issues the following discovery order:           

1.     Defendant MERCEDES-BNZ USA, LLC (“Defendant”) shall produce the “Warranty Policy and Procedure Manual” published by Defendant and provided to its authorized repair facilities, within the State of California, from date of purchase to present. 

2.     Defendant shall produce any and all Recall Notices and Technical Service Bulletins concerning the subject vehicle.  Defendant is not required to do a search of emails.

3.     Defendant shall produce all documents evidencing policies and procedures used to evaluate customer requests for repurchase pursuant to the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act, from date of purchase to present.

4.     Repair orders and invoices concerning the subject vehicle.

5.     Communications with dealer, factory representative and/or call center concerning the subject vehicle.

6.     Warranty claims submitted to and/or approved by Defendant concerning the subject vehicle.

7.     All other requests for further production are DENIED.

8.     Defendant shall provide supplemental responses in compliance with this order within 45 days of this order.     

9.     Production shall be subject to a protective order.

10.  The Court does not award sanctions as it finds both sides acted with substantial justification.