Judge: James L. Crandall, Case: 21-1223063, Date: 2022-08-04 Tentative Ruling

Motion to Compel Production

Plaintiff Immigrant Rights Defense Council, LLC’s motion to compel defendant Linda Yurdagul to provide further responses, without objection, to the Requests for Production of Documents, Set One, Request Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 6 and 7 is GRANTED.

Code of Civil Procedure section 2031.310 provides: “(a) On receipt of a response to a demand for inspection, copying, testing, or sampling, the demanding party may move for an order compelling further response to the demand if the demanding party deems that any of the following apply: [¶] (1) A statement of compliance with the demand is incomplete. [¶] (2) A representation of inability to comply is inadequate, incomplete, or evasive. [¶] (3) An objection in the response is without merit or too general. [¶] (b) A motion under subdivision (a) shall comply with each of the following: [¶] (1) the motion shall set forth specific facts showing good cause justifying the discovery sought by the demand. [¶] (2) The motion shall be accompanied by a meet and confer declaration under Section 2016.040. . . [¶] (c) Unless notice of this motion is given within 45 days of the service of the verified response, or any supplemental verified response, or on or before any specific later date to which the demanding party and the responding party have agreed in writing, the demanding party waives any right to compel a further response to the demand.”

Code of Civil Procedure section 2031.220 provides: “A statement that the party to whom a demand for inspection, copying, testing, or sampling has been directed will comply with the particular demand shall state that the production, inspection, copying, testing, or sampling, and related activity demanded, will be allowed either in whole or in part, and that all documents or things in the demanded category that are in the possession, custody, or control of that party and to which no objection is being made will be included in the production.”

Plaintiff has demonstrated that Plaintiff served Defendant with the Request for Production of Documents, Set One, on October 22, 2021. (Medvei Decl., ¶ 4.)

Defendant failed to provide responses to the Request for Production, therefore on February 8, 2022, Plaintiff filed its motion to compel responses to the Request for Production. (Medvei Decl., ¶ 4.)

On March 18, 2022, Defendant served responses to the Request for Production. (Medvei Decl., ¶ 4.)

In response to Request Nos. Nos. 1, 2, 4, 6 and 7, Defendant asserts numerous objections.

Defendant waived all objections by failing to timely respond to the Requests. Therefore, Defendant is ORDERED to provide further responses, without objection, to these Requests.

Further, Defendant’s response to Request Nos. 3 and 4 fail to comply with Code of Civil Procedure Section 2031.220. In response to Request No. 3, Defendant states: “See Exhibit A – Surety bond Exhibit A – Business information.”

Similarly, Defendant’s response to Request No. 4 states: “Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Responding Party hereby responds as follows: See Exhibit C – Photographs.”

Defendant’s response to Request Nos. 3 and 4 fail to state whether Defendant will comply “either in whole or in part, and that all documents or things in the demanded category that are in the possession, custody, or control of that party. . . will be included in the production.”

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s request to compel a further response to Request Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 6 and 7 is GRANTED.

Defendant is ORDERED to serve further responses, without objection, to Request Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 6 and 7, within 20 days of the notice of this ruling.

Plaintiff to give notice.

Future hearing events

10/6/22 – Motion to Compel Further Form Interrogs

5/12/23 – MSC

6/12/23 – Jury Trial