Judge: Lee W. Tsao, Case: 22NWCV00595, Date: 2023-07-20 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22NWCV00595    Hearing Date: January 2, 2024    Dept: C

Gregory Dwayne Shaw vs. General Motors LLC

Case No.: 22NWCV00595

Hearing Date: January 2, 2024 at 10:30 a.m.

#6

Tentative Ruling

Plaintiff Gregory Dwayne Shaw’s Motion to Compel Further Responses to Requests for Production is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part as follows:

I.             Request Nos. 3,4, 8, and 19 is DENIED.

II.            Request Nos. 1, 5-6, is GRANTED, in part.

III.          Request Nos. 2, 7, 9-18 and 20-28 is GRANTED, in part.

Defendant to provide further responses within 30 days.

Moving party to give notice.

Background

This is a lemon case filed by Plaintiff Gregory Dwayne Shaw (“Plaintiff”) regarding a 2020 Chevrolet Traverse (“Subject Vehicle”) manufactured by Defendant General Motors LLC (“Defendant”). 

Plaintiff served his second set of requests for production upon Defendant on June 6, 2023, all of which are at issue. (Valencia Decl. ¶ 3; Terzian Decl., Ex. 3).

Defendant served Plaintiff with full and complete responses on July 6, 2023. (Valencia Decl. ¶ 4; Terzian Decl. Ex. 4).

On July 12, 2023, Plaintiff sent Defendant a purported meet and confer letter regarding Defendant’s discovery responses. (Valencia Decl. ¶ 5; Terzian Decl. Ex. 5)

On August 1, 2023, Plaintiff filed his motion to compel on all 28 Requests for Production, leaving Defendant no choice but to oppose it. (Valencia Decl., at ¶ 7).

Meet and Confer Requirement

A motion¿to compel further responses to requests for production “shall be accompanied by a meet and confer declaration.”¿ (Code Civ. Proc. § 2031.310(b)(2).)¿ The declaration must state facts showing a reasonable and good faith attempt at an informal resolution of each issue presented in the motion.¿ (Code Civ. Proc. § 2016.040.)¿  The Court finds that Plaintiff has fulfilled the meet and confer requirement.

Separate Statement 

A motion to compel further responses requires a separate statement.  (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1345(a).) Plaintiff properly filed separate statements.

Discussion

CCP § 2031.310(a) provides that on receipt of a response to a request for production of documents, the demanding party may move for an order compelling further responses if:¿¿ 

(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.

Request Nos. 3, 4, 8 and 19

·        3: Produce all DOCUMENTS, including live telephone call recordings, audio recordings, tape recordings, voice messaging records, caller message recordings, digital voice recordings, interactive voice response unit (IVR/VRV) recordings, unified messaging files, and computer-based voice mail files between YOU and/or YOUR call center representative(s) and YOUR authorized dealers regarding the SUBJECT VEHICLE

·        4: All DOCUMENTS regarding the SUBJECT VEHICLE that are within YOUR Customer Relations Center.

·        8: All DOCUMENTS, including electronically stored information and electronic mails, concerning, referring, or relating to YOUR decision to issue any notices, letters, campaigns, warranty extensions, technical service bulletins, and recalls concerning the ELECTRICAL DEFECTS in vehicles of the same year, make, and model as the Subject Vehicle.

·        19: All DOCUMENTS, including electronically stored information and electronic mails, concerning, referring, or relating to YOUR decision to issue any notices, letters, campaigns, warranty extensions, technical service bulletins, and recalls concerning the STRUCTURAL DEFECTS in vehicles of the same year, make, and model as the Subject Vehicle.

Defendant argues that it produced the responsive documents within its possession, custody, and control, and as expressly permitted under Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.230.  The court determines Defendant has properly responded to Nos. 3,4, 8, and 19 because it stated that it conducted a diligent search and produced the relevant documents.

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Further Responses is DENIED as to Nos. 3,4, 8, and 19. 

Request Nos. 1 and 5-6

These requests concern documents relating to the Policies and Procedures of Defendant.

·        1: All DOCUMENTS referencing, evidencing, and/or relating to YOUR policies, procedures, or guidelines for determining whether a vehicle is eligible for a vehicle repurchase under the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act

·        5: YOUR recall policy and procedure.

·        6: All DOCUMENTS that YOU use, since 2016, to evaluate consumers’ requests for repurchases pursuant to the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act.

The court determines that these requests are within the proper scope of discovery, but only to the extent that the training materials relate to 2020 Chevrolet Traverse vehicles sold in Caliornia . 

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Further Responses is GRANTED in part as to Nos. 1 and 5-6.  

Request Nos. 2, 7, 9-18 and 20-28

These requests relate to internal analysis, investigations, communications, reports and design-related documents.

·        2: All DOCUMENTS regarding any service, warranty, and other DOCUMENTS that relate to, or may relate to the alleged defect in the SUBJECT VEHICLE, that YOU issued to any dealer, regional or zone offices, fleet purchasers, or other entities.

·        7: All DOCUMENTS, including electronically stored information and electronic mails, concerning, referring, or relating to any field technical reports from YOUR agents, representatives, or employees to YOU which provide YOU with information relating to warranty parts replacement trends relating to the ELECTRICAL DEFECTS in vehicles of the same year, make, and model as the Subject Vehicle.

·        9-17: Discuss documentation related to the electrical defects of the same make and model of the Subject Vehicle.

·        18, 20-28: Request documentation relating to the structural defects of the same make and model of the Subject Vehicle.

These requests are overbroad because they seek documents related to vehicles worldwide. Therefore, these requests are granted to the extent they relate to the internal knowledge, investigations, customer complaints concerning 2020 Chevrolet Traverse vehicles sold in California.

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Further Responses is GRANTED in part as to Nos. 2, 7, 9-18, and 20-28.