Judge Holly J. Fujie, Case Number: 23STCV00118, Date: 2024-04-11 Tentative Ruling

The Court has considered the moving papers and Plaintiff’s Notice of Non-Opposition as to the following motions: 1) Motion for Order Deeming Admitted the Truth of Facts and Genuineness of Documents and Imposing Monetary Sanctions against Victor Chongman Pak (“Pak”) or his Counsel (the “RFA Motion”); 2) Motion to Compel Verified Responses without Objections to Special and Form Interrogatories, and for Sanctions against Pak or his Counsel (the “Interrogatory Motion”); and 3) Motion to Compel Attendance, Testimony and Production of Documents at a Deposition, and for Sanctions against JJWV Marketing Corporation (“JJWV”) or its Counsel (the “Deposition Motion”).

No opposition was filed to any of the motions by either Defendants Pak, JJWV or their counsel.

Plaintiff alleges that Defendants imported for sale 313 live specimens of Blacklip Abalone into LAX from Australia in November 2020 for sale on the wholesale fish market. Plaintiff alleges that a Restricted Species Permit is required to import each live specimen and that Defendants did not have such a permit, nor did they procure a fish wholesaler license as required by law in 2022.

Plaintiff filed this action on January 4, 2023. The operative complaint is the First Amended Complaint filed on November 29, 2023, alleging (1) violation of the California Civil Code’s Unfair Competition Law (“UCL”) Section 17200 based on violation of Fish and Gaming Code (“FGC”) Section 2218 and 14 CCR 671(a); (2) violation of UCL Section 17200 based on violations of 14 CCR 671.1(a); (3) violation of UCL Section 17200 for violations of FGC section 8035; (4) violation of FGC Section 2125 for violations of FGC Section 2218 and 14 CCR 671(a); (5) violation of FGC Section 2125 for violations of 14 CCR 671.1(a).

Plaintiff has fulfilled its obligations to meet and confer with all parties against whom the motions were filed.

If a party to whom requests for admission are directed fails to serve a timely response, the following rules apply:

(a) The party to whom the requests for admission are directed waives any objection to the requests, including one based on privilege or on the protection for work product under Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 2018.010). The court, on motion, may relieve that party from this waiver on its determination that both of the following conditions are satisfied:

(1) The party has subsequently served a response that is in substantial compliance with Sections 2033.210, 2033.220, and 2033.230.

(2) The party's failure to serve a timely response was the result of mistake, inadvertence, or excusable neglect.

(b) The requesting party may move for an order that the genuineness of any documents and the truth of any matters specified in the requests be deemed admitted, as well as for a monetary sanction under Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 2023.010).

(c) The court shall make this order, unless it finds that the party to whom the requests for admission have been directed has served, before the hearing on the motion, a proposed response to the requests for admission that is in substantial compliance with Section 2033.220. It is mandatory that the court impose a monetary sanction under Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 2023.010) on the party or attorney, or both, whose failure to serve a timely response to requests for admission necessitated this motion.

Plaintiff is entitled to an order deeming RFAs (Set One) Admitted as to Defendant Pak with sanctions.

Plaintiff served Defendant Pak with Requests for Admissions (Set One) (the “RFAs”) on September 19, 2023. (Motion, Ex. A, Soto Dec., ¶3.) Defendant Pak failed to serve any responses to the RFAs. (Id. at ¶¶18-19.) Defendant Pak did not file an opposition to this motion, nor has he served substantially compliant responses. Plaintiff is therefore entitled to an order deeming the RFAs admitted against Pak.

Plaintiff requests sanctions in the amount of $3,740 (11 hours @ $340/hr) against Defendant Pak or his counsel on the RFA Motion. Plaintiff’s request for sanctions in the reasonable amount of $1,020 (3 hours @ $340/hr) is granted against Defendant Pak alone (as the Notice of Motion referred to Pak or his counsel) on the RFA Motion, to be paid to Plaintiff within 20 days of the date of this order.

Plaintiff’s RFA Motion is GRANTED. The RFAs are deemed admitted as to Defendant Pak absent service of substantially compliant responses under Section 2033.220 prior to the hearing date. Pak is ordered to pay sanctions on the RFA Motion in the amount of $1,020 to Plaintiff within 20 days.

If a party to whom interrogatories are directed fails to serve a timely response, the following rules apply:

(a) The party to whom the interrogatories are directed waives any right to exercise the option to produce writings under Section 2030.230, as well as any objection to the interrogatories, including one based on privilege or on the protection for work product under Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 2018.010). The court, on motion, may relieve that party from this waiver on its determination that both of the following conditions are satisfied:

(1) The party has subsequently served a response that is in substantial compliance with Sections 2030.210, 2030.220, 2030.230, and 2030.240.

(2) The party's failure to serve a timely response was the result of mistake, inadvertence, or excusable neglect.

(b) The party propounding the interrogatories may move for an order compelling response to the interrogatories.

(c) The court shall impose a monetary sanction under Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 2023.010) against any party, person, or attorney who unsuccessfully makes or opposes a motion to compel a response to interrogatories, unless it finds that the one subject to the sanction acted with substantial justification or that other circumstances make the imposition of the sanction unjust. If a party then fails to obey an order compelling answers, the court may make those orders that are just, including the imposition of an issue sanction, an evidence sanction, or a terminating sanction under Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 2023.010). In lieu of or in addition to that sanction, the court may impose a monetary sanction under Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 2023.010).

Plaintiff is entitled to responses to Special Interrogatories (Set One) and Form Interrogatories (Set One) without objection and sanctions.

Plaintiff served Defendant Pak with Special Interrogatories (Set One) and Form Interrogatories (Set One) (collectively, the “Interrogatories”) on September 19, 2023. (Motion, Ex. A, Soto Dec., ¶5.) Defendant Pak failed to serve any responses thereto. (Id. at ¶¶17-19.) Defendant Pak has waived all objections per CCP §2030.290(a) and is ordered to serve responses to the Interrogatories, without objections, within 20 days.

Plaintiff requests sanctions in the amount of $4,420 (13 hours @ $340/hr) against Defendant Pak or his counsel on the Interrogatory Motion. Plaintiff’s request for sanctions on the Interrogatory Motion is GRANTED in the reasonable amount of $1,020 (3 hours @ $340/hr) against Defendant Pak alone, to be paid to Plaintiff within 20 days of the date of this order.

Plaintiff’s Interrogatory Motion is GRANTED. Defendant Pak is ordered to serve responses to the Interrogatories without objection on Plaintiff within 20 days. Defendant Pak is ordered to pay sanctions to Plaintiff on the Interrogatory Motion in the amount of $1,020 within 20 days.

“If, after service of a deposition notice, a party to the action or an officer, director, managing agent, or employee of a party, or a person designated by an organization that is a party under Section 2025.230, without having served a valid objection under Section 2025.410, fails to appear for examination, or to proceed with it, or to produce for inspection any document, electronically stored information, or tangible thing described in the deposition notice, the party giving the notice may move for an order compelling the deponent's attendance and testimony, and the production for inspection of any document, electronically stored information, or tangible thing described in the deposition notice.” (CCP §2025.450(a).) A motion to compel attendance at deposition “shall set forth specific facts showing good cause justifying the production for inspection of any document, electronically stored information, or tangible thing described in the deposition notice.” (CCP §2025.450(b)(1).)

Plaintiff is entitled to an order compelling attendance of Defendant JJWV’s Person Most Knowledgeable (“PMK”) at a deposition and production of documents in response to Plaintiff’s Requests for Production of Documents (“RFPs”) contained in the Notice of Deposition.

Plaintiff served Defendant JJWV with a Notice of PMK Deposition on October 18, 2023 for a deposition on November 3, 2023. (Motion, Ex. A, Soto Dec., ¶5.) Defendant JJWV did not serve objections to the deposition notice, nor did it offer alternative dates when it claimed it was unavailable for deposition on November 3, 2023. (Id. at ¶¶11, 16-19.) Defendant JJWV did not file an opposition to the Deposition Motion, nor has it offered alternative dates for its PMK deposition since the filing of the Deposition Motion.

Plaintiff also sets forth specific facts demonstrating good cause for production of documents in response to the RFPs contained in the Notice of Deposition, as required under CCP §2025.450(b)(1). (Motion, Ex. A, Soto Dec., ¶9.) The RFPs seek documents relating to Defendants’ alleged violations of FGC sections 2118, 2125 and 8035 and 14 CCR §§671 and 671.1. (Id. at ¶9.)

Plaintiff’s request to compel the deposition of JJWV’s PMK is properly granted. JJWV is ordered to attend deposition as set by Plaintiff within 30 days and to produce documents in response to the RFPs set forth in the Notice of Deposition served on October 18, 2023.

Plaintiff requests sanctions in the amount of $5,440 (16 hours @ $340/hr) against Defendant JJWV or its counsel. Plaintiff’s request for sanctions in the reasonable amount of $1,020 (3 hours @ $340/hr) on the Deposition Motion is granted against Defendant Pak alone, to be paid to Plaintiff within 20 days of the date of this order.

Plaintiff’s Deposition Motion is GRANTED. Defendant JJWV is ordered to attend its deposition as set by Plaintiff within 30 days of the date of this order. Defendant JJWV and counsel are ordered to pay sanctions in the amount of $1,020 to Plaintiff for the Deposition Motion within 20 days of the date of this order.

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.

Hon. Holly J. Fujie

Judge of the Superior Court