Judge Holly J. Fujie, Case Number: 22STCV12249, Date: 2023-07-12 Tentative Ruling

DEPARTMENT 56 JUDGE HOLLY J. FUJIE, LAW AND MOTION RULINGS. The court makes every effort to post tentative rulings by 5.00 pm of the court day before the hearing. The tentative ruling will not become the final ruling until the hearing [see CRC 3.1308(a)(2)], and are also available in the courtroom on the day of the hearing [see CRC 3.1308(b)]. If the parties wish to submit on the tentative ruling and avoid a court appearance, all counsel must agree and choose which counsel will give notice. That counsel must 1) call Dept 56 by 8:30 a.m. on the day of the hearing (213/633-0656) and state that all parties will submit on the tentative ruling, and 2) serve notice of the ruling on all parties. If any party declines to submit on the tentative ruling, then no telephone call is necessary and all parties should appear at the hearing in person or by Court Call. Court reporters are not provided, and parties who want a record of motions and other proceedings must hire a privately retained certified court reporter.

MOVING PARTY: Defendants Zhoujun Gellis, Shirley Li, Lihong Jia, and Mancai Yue (collectively, “Moving Defendants”)

The Court has reviewed the moving papers. No opposition papers were filed. Any opposition papers were required to have been filed and served at least nine court days before the hearing under California Code of Civil Procedure (“CCP”) section 1005, subdivision (b).

Plaintiff’s complaint (the “Complaint”) alleges: (1) members right of inspection and accounting; (2) breach of fiduciary duty; (3) conversion; (4) violation of the California Uniform Voidable Transactions Act; (5) aiding and abetting; and (6) money lent.

On July 14, 2023, Moving Defendants filed a motion to quash deposition subpoenas that Plaintiff served on third parties Bank of America (“BofA”) and JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A (“Chase”) (the “Motion”).[1]

If a subpoena requires the attendance of a witness or the production of books, documents, electronically stored information, or other things before a court, or at the trial of an issue therein, or at the taking of a deposition, the court, upon motion made by any person described in CCP section 1987.1, subdivision (b), or upon the court’s own motion after giving counsel notice and an opportunity to be heard, may make an order quashing the subpoena entirely, modifying it or directing compliance with it upon those terms or conditions as the court shall declare. (CCP § 1987.1, subd. (a).) Any consumer whose personal records are sought by a subpoena duces tecum and who is a party to the civil action in which this subpoena duces tecum is served may, prior to the date for production, bring a motion under CCP section 1987.1 to quash or modify the subpoena duces tecum. (CCP § 1985.3, subd. (g).) With respect to subpoenas for consumer records, every copy of the subpoena duces tecum and affidavit, if any, served on a consumer or his or her attorney in accordance with subdivision (b) shall be accompanied by a notice, in a typeface designed to call attention to the notice, indicating that: (1) records about the consumer are being sought from the witness named on the subpoena; (2) if the consumer objects to the witness furnishing the records to the party seeking the records, the consumer must file papers with the court or serve a written objection as provided in subdivision (g) prior to the date specified for production on the subpoena; and (3) if the party who is seeking the records will not agree in writing to cancel or limit the subpoena, an attorney should be consulted about the consumer's interest in protecting his or her rights of privacy. (CCP § 1985.3, subd. (e).)

Moving Defendants provide evidence of the deposition subpoenas served on BofA and Chase on June 20, 2023 (collectively, the “Subpoenas”). (See Declaration of Zhen Yang Pan (“Pan Decl.”) ¶ 4, Exhibit B.) The Subpoenas seek financial records related to Moving Defendants and non-moving Defendants who are entities. (See id.) Based on the evidence presented in the Motion, the Subpoenas did not provide Moving Defendants the necessary notice to consumer. (See Pan Decl. ¶ 8.)

Based on Plaintiff’s failure to provide Moving Defendants the requisite notice to consumer and the lack of opposition, the Court GRANTS the Motion.[2] (Sexton v. Superior Court (1997) 58 Cal.App.4th 1403, 1410.)

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at SMC_DEPT56@lacourt.org as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org. If the department does not receive an email and there are no appearances at the hearing, the motion will be placed off calendar.

[1] Moving Defendants previously filed a motion to quash earlier versions of the subpoenas served on BofA and Chase, which they took off calendar.

[2] This order applies to the Subpoenas only insofar as they concern Moving Defendants.