Judge: Lee W. Tsao, Case: 21NWCV00671, Date: 2023-05-02 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21NWCV00671    Hearing Date: May 2, 2023    Dept: C

ACCENTIAN, INC. v. HIGH PRECISION GAS, LLC, et al.

CASE NO.:  21NWCV00671

HEARING:  5/2/23 @ 9:30 AM

#2

TENTATIVE RULING

I.             Plaintiff Accentian Inc.’s motion to compel further responses to form interrogatories, set one is GRANTED in part.

II.            Plaintiff Accentian Inc.’s motion to compel further responses to request for production of document, set one GRANTED in part.

III.          Plaintiff Accentian Inc.’s motion to compel further responses to request for admissions, set one is GRANTED in part.

No sanctions to either party.

Moving Party to give NOTICE.

Plaintiff Accentian, Inc. moves to compel further responses to form interrogatories, request for production of documents, and request for admissions pursuant to CCP §§ 2030.300, 2031.310, and 2033.290.

The Fourth Amended Complaint (“4AC”) alleges that Plaintiff Accentian, Inc. is a licensed cannabis manufacturing company specializing in the extraction of butane hash oil.  (4AC, ¶ 1.)  Defendants supplied tainted butane.  Based thereon, the 4AC asserts causes of action for:

1.    Breach of Contract

2.    Breach of Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing

3.    Breach of Express Warranty

4.    Fraud in the Inducement

5.    Fraudulent Concealment

6.    Negligent Misrepresentation

7.    Unfair Competition in Violation of Business and Professions Code Section 17200, et seq.

8.    Unlawful Business Acts and Practices in Violation of Business and Professions Code Section 17200, et seq.

9.    Unfair Business Acts and Practices in Violation of Business and Professions Code Section 17200, et seq.

10.  Fraudulent Business Acts and Practices in Violation of Business and Professions Code Section 17200, et seq.

11.  Untrue Advertising in Violation of Business and Professions Code Section
17500, et seq.

12.  Negligence

CCP §§ 2030.300, 2031.310, and 2033.290 allow a party to file a motion compelling further answers to interrogatories, document requests, and request for admissions if it finds that the response is inadequate, incomplete, or evasive, or an objection in the response is without merit or too general.  The motion shall be accompanied with a meet and confer declaration.  (CCP §§ 2030.300(b); 2031.310(b); 2033.290(b).) 

RPD Nos. 1-37

The court finds Defendants’ responses are incomplete.  If documents do not exist, Defendants must indicate that after a diligent search and a reasonable inquiry the documents “ha[ve] never existed, has been destroyed, has been lost, misplaced, or stolen, or has never been, or is no longer, in the possession, custody, or control of the responding party.”  (CCP § 2031.230.)  If known, Defendant must identify the “name and address of any natural person or organization known or believed by that party to have possession, custody, or control of that item or category of item.”  (Id.)

The court will hear from Accentian regarding how RPD Nos. 1-4, relating to materials other than benzene would lead to the discovery of admissible evidence.

With regard to confidential information, any such document may be subject to a protective order for “Attorneys’ Eyes Only.”

RFA Nos. 10, 13

The court finds Plaintiff did not properly meet and confer regarding Defendants’ queries regarding Nos. 10 and 13.  Plaintiff is ordered to further meet and confer.

RFA Nos. 15-17, 24-31

The court finds that Defendants’ responses are evasive and incomplete.  Defendants’ meet and confer letter stated that is objections are self-explanatory.  If Defendants do not understand a particular request, the meet and confer process should clear up any confusion that Defendants purportedly had.  Defendants are ordered to provide further responses within 15 days.

Accordingly, the motion is GRANTED in part, as delineated above.

Form Interrogatory Nos. 12.1, 12.2, 12.3, and 12.6

Plaintiff has accepted Defendant’s responses.  The court finds the request for a privilege log as to 12.2, 12.3, and 12.6 is reasonable.  Accordingly, Defendants are ordered to serve a privilege log within 15 days.

Form Interrogatory No. 17.1

Defendants concede that it will amend its response to Form 17.1 if it is required to amend its requests for admissions.

Accordingly, the motion is GRANTED in part, as delineated above.

No sanctions because the motions were GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.