Judge: David A. Hoffer, Case: 30-2019-1117449, Date: 2022-11-21 Tentative Ruling

Plaintiff, Avalon Funding Corporation’s (“Plaintiff”) motion to compel Defendant Aptim Environmental & Infrastructure, LLC’s (“Aptim”) compliance with supplemental response to Request for Production, Request No. 23 is MOOT.

If a party filing a response to a demand for inspection, copying, testing, or sampling ... thereafter fails to permit the inspection, copying, testing, or sampling in accordance with that party's statement of compliance, the demanding party may move for an order compelling compliance.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.320(a).)

The Court deems the motion moot as Aptim’s opposition shows that it has produced all documents responsive to Request No. 23.  (See Miner Decl. [ROA 619], ¶¶ 2, 5-6, 8, Exs. A and C; Rankovich Decl. [ROA 615], ¶¶ 3-6.)

While Plaintiff contends that 1,740 closeout packages exist (or 1,793 based on what is stated in its reply brief), Aptim has submitted a declaration of its Document Management Specialist, Aimee Rankovich, who attests that she personally gathered all of the closeout packages, that there were 1,324 closeout packages which were then provided to Aptim’s counsel (who then produced them to Plaintiff’s counsel on September 6, 2022), and that no additional closeout packages exist.  (Rankovich Decl. ¶¶ 3-4; Miner Decl. ¶ 6, Ex. C.)  Ms. Rankovich explains in her declaration that the “master list” that Plaintiff is relying on to conclude that there are 1,740 packages does not reflect the total number of closeout packages because not all homes/applicants had work completed on them which would have required a closeout package to be completed.  (Rankovich Decl. ¶ 4.) 

Ms. Rankovich also attests that she looked for any native files of the closeout packages and that there are no other native files to provide other than what she exported in October of 2022.  (Id. ¶ 6.)  Aptim’s counsel states that all such native files were produced to Plaintiff’s counsel on October 27, 2022.  (Miner Decl. ¶ 8, Ex. A.)  Thus, it appears to the Court that all responsive documents have been produced and Defendant has fully complied with its statement of compliance as to Request No. 23.

Accordingly, the motion is deemed moot.

Given the scope of the document search and the fact that the motion was not unmeritorious when filed, the Court finds that sanctions are not warranted in this matter as to either party.  (Code Civ. Proc. §2031.320(b).)  The requests for sanctions are thus denied.

Counsel for Aptim is ordered to give notice of this ruling.