Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

PABLITO BUAN;

Plaintiff,

vs.

KIA AMERICA, INC.;

Defendant.

Case No.: 23STCV09247

DEPARTMENT 45

[TENTATIVE] RULING

Action Filed: 04/26/23

Trial Date: 03/17/25

Hearing date: March 8, 2023

Moving Party: Plaintiff Pablito Buan

Responding Party: Defendant Kia America Inc.

Motion to Compel Further to Request for Production, Set One

Plaintiff Pablito Buan seeks to compel further responses to his Request for Production of Documents Nos. 16 through 21. To varying degrees, these requests seek documents and communications concerning the engine defect in vehicles similar to the subject vehicle as well as any internal analysis or investigation conducted by defendant Kia America Inc. (See generally Separate Statement at pp. 3, 11, 20, 28, 37, 45.) The court finds plaintiff Pablito Buan’s discovery requests to be overly broad as it relates to the inclusion of a “catch-all” within the definition of “Engine Defect” as well as burdensome. Thus, the court issues the following discovery order:

1. Defendant Kia America Inc. (“Kia”) shall produce all documents concerning any internal analysis or investigation regarding the subject defects in vehicles for the same year, make, and model of the subject vehicle. These subject defects are limited to symptoms specifically enumerated within the operative pleadings or the definition of “Engine Defect” found within Plaintiff’s Request for Production of Documents.

2. Kia shall produce any customer complaints and warranty claims relating to the subject defects in vehicles for the same year, make, and model of the subject vehicle, for the period of the date of purchase to the present. These subject defects are limited to symptoms specifically enumerated within the operative pleadings or the definition of “Engine Defect” found within Plaintiff’s Request for Production of Documents.

3. All other requests for further production are DENIED.

4. Kia shall provide supplemental responses in compliance with this order within 30 days from the date Plaintiff writes a letter to General Motors for Responses pursuant to the Standing Discovery Order.

5. The court does not find that the conduct of any party here warrants an award of monetary sanctions.

It is so ordered.

Dated: March 8, 2024

_______________________

ROLF M. TREU

Judge of the Superior Court