Judge: Mark E. Windham, Case: 22STLC08068, Date: 2023-10-26 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STLC08068    Hearing Date: October 26, 2023    Dept: 26

Naous v. Tang, et al.

MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS AND REQUEST FOR MONETARY SANCTIONS

 (CCP §§ 2030.290, 2031.300, 2023.030)

TENTATIVE RULING:  

Defendant Xuehao Tang’s (1) Motion to Compel Responses to Form Interrogatories, Set One, and Request for Sanctions; and (2) Motion to Compel Responses to Request for Production of Documents, Set One, and Request for Sanctions, are GRANTED. PLAINTIFF SAMIA NAOUS IS TO SERVE VERIFIED RESPONSES TO THE DISCOVERY REQUESTS WITHOUT OBJECTIONS WITHIN 20 DAYS’ SERVICE OF THIS ORDER. PLAINTIFF AND COUNSEL OF RECORD ARE JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY ORDERED TO PAY SANCTIONS OF $510.00 TO DEFENSE COUNSEL WITHIN 20 DAYS’ SERVICE OF THIS ORDER.

ANALYSIS:

On June 5, 2023, Defendant Xuehao Tang (“Defendant Tang”) served Form Interrogatories, Set One and Request for Production of Documents, Set One, on Plaintiff Samia Naous (“Plaintiff”) (Motions, Romans Decl., Exh. C.) Despite a meet and confer effort extending the deadline to serve verified responses without objections, Plaintiff has not done so. (Id. at ¶¶7-8 and Exh. D.) Defendant Tang filed the instant (1) Motion to Compel Responses to Form Interrogatories, Set One, and Request for Sanctions; and (1) Motion to Compel Responses to Request for Production of Documents, Set One, and Request for Sanctions, on September 15, 2023. No oppositions have been filed to date.

Discussion

There is no requirement for a prior meet and confer effort before a motion to compel initial responses can be filed. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.300.) Further, the motion can be brought any time after the responding party fails to provide the responses.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.300.) Based on Plaintiff’s failure to timely respond to the propounded discovery, Defendant Tang is entitled to an order compelling service of verified responses to the discovery requests without objections.

Plaintiff’s failure to timely respond constitutes a misuse of the discovery process. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2023.010, subd. (d).) Sanctions are appropriate under Code of Civil Procedure sections 2023.010 and 2023.030 and have been properly noticed. However, the amount sought is excessive. Under a lodestar calculation, sanctions are awarded in the amount of $510.00 based on two hours of attorney time billed at $195.00 per hour and filing fees of $60.00 each. (Motions, Romans Decl., ¶9.)

Conclusion

Defendant Xuehao Tang’s (1) Motion to Compel Responses to Form Interrogatories, Set One, and Request for Sanctions; and (2) Motion to Compel Responses to Request for Production of Documents, Set One, and Request for Sanctions, are GRANTED. PLAINTIFF SAMIA NAMOUS IS TO SERVE VERIFIED RESPONSES TO THE DISCOVERY REQUESTS WITHOUT OBJECTIONS WITHIN 20 DAYS’ SERVICE OF THIS ORDER. PLAINTIFF AND COUNSEL OF RECORD ARE JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY ORDERED TO PAY SANCTIONS OF $510.00 TO DEFENSE COUNSEL WITHIN 20 DAYS’ SERVICE OF THIS ORDER.

Moving party to give notice.