Judge Gary I. Micon, Case Number: 23CHCV00683, Date: 2024-04-08 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Gary I. Micon, Case: 23CHCV00683, Date: 2024-04-08 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23CHCV00683 Hearing Date: April 12, 2024 Dept: F43

Dept. F43

Date: 4-12-24

Case #23CHCV00683 , Cecilia Thompson, et al. vs. White House Recover and Detox LLC, et al.

Trial Date: N/A

MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION

MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff Cecilia Thompson

RESPONDING PARTY: No timely response was filed

RELIEF REQUESTED

Defendant’s responses to Plaintiff’s Requests for Production, as well as sanctions

RULING: Plaintiff’s motion to compel responses to requests for production is granted.

SUMMARY OF ACTION

On January 4, 2024, Plaintiff Cecilia Thompson (Plaintiff) served Defendant Kyle Perez (Defendant) with Requests for Production. Responses to the requests were due on or before February 8, 2024. Defendant failed to serve any responses by the deadline. On February 13, 2024, Plaintiff served a meet and confer letter on Defendant advising of the failure to respond and requesting verified responses by February 20, 2024. No responses were ever received by Plaintiff. Plaintiff’s counsel attempted to call Defendant on March 6 and 7, but Defendant did not answer. Plaintiff filed this motion on March 8, 2024. Plaintiff seeks an order compelling responses to the requests for production. Plaintiff also seeks sanctions in the amount of $2,315 against Defendant.

The court declines to consider the defendant’s opposition papers filed on April 8, 2024. Defendant does not deny receiving the motion to compel, and only complains that he did not have enough time to respond. Defendant could have filed an ex parte application with the court asking to extend the time to respond but did not do so. When the court inquired about this at the hearing for a previous motion on April 9, defendant claimed that he was out of state. However, defendant’s points and authorities and supporting declaration list his address as Chatsworth, California. Additionally, all three oppositions filed by defendant were signed on April 4, and his declarations state that they were executed in Los Angeles. Regardless, being out of state is no impediment to remotely filing documents and appearing in court, as defendant did on April 9.

ANALYSIS

A propounding party may move to compel responses to requests for production of documents where the responding party fails to provide responses. (CCP § 2031.300.) The responding party must provide responses within thirty days after the demand is served. (CCP § 2031.030(c)(2) & (3).) The responding party waives all objections, including privilege and work product, by failing to timely respond to requests for production of documents. (CCP § 2031.300.)

Defendant has failed to respond to Plaintiff’s Requests for Production. Plaintiff has moved for an order compelling Defendant’s response to these Requests. The Court grants Plaintiff’s motion to compel responses to the Requests for Production.

Sanctions

CCP § 2023.030 authorizes the Court to issue sanctions against a party engaging in conduct that is a misuse of the discovery process. Failure to respond to discovery, evasive responses, and objections lacking substantial justification are “misuses of the discovery process.” (CCP § 2023.010, subd. (d)-(f).)

Plaintiff has requested sanctions in the amount of $2,315 against Defendant for having to bring this motion. The amount was based on Plaintiff’s counsel spending 1.1 hours preparing the motion at $550 an hour, plus an anticipated 3 hours reviewing Defendant’s opposition and preparing a reply, plus the $60 filing fee. (Alexander Decl., ¶ 7.) Because no timely opposition was filed, it was unnecessary for Plaintiff to review the opposition or prepare a reply beyond the notice of non-opposition. Therefore, the Court will not assess the additional 3 hours requested by Plaintiff. That means that the sanctions would be 1.1 hours at $550 an hour, plus the $60 filing fee, for a total of $665 in sanctions.

Plaintiff’s requests for sanctions against Defendant is granted in the amount of $665 for this motion.

ORDER

1. Plaintiff’s motion to compel responses to requests for production is granted.

2. Defendant is ordered to serve responses within twenty (20) days.

3. Defendant is ordered to pay sanctions in the total amount of $665. Defendant is ordered to pay these sanctions to Plaintiff’s counsel within twenty (20) days.