SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA  

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT 

 

 

I. Motions to Compel 

Defendant/Cross-Complainant Rigoberto G. Perez Figueroa (“Figueroa”) propounded form interrogatories, set one, and request for production of documents (“RPDs”), set one, on Cross-Defendant Artem Kazaryan (“Kazaryan”) on March 13, 2023. Additionally, Figueroa propounded interrogatories, set two, on Kazaryan on July 5, 2023. On July 24, 2023, Kazaryan served unverified responses to the propounded discovery. After sending meet and confer correspondence to Kazaryan’s counsel, there has been no response nor any verifications provided. Figueroa therefore seeks an order compelling Plaintiff to serve verified responses to the propounded discovery and pay monetary sanctions. 

As of November 28, 2023, the motions are unopposed. 

For a motion to compel discovery responses, all a propounding party must show is that it properly served its discovery requests, that the time to respond has expired, and that the party to whom the requests were directed failed to provide a timely response. (See Leach v. Superior Court (1980) 111 Cal.App.3d 902, 905 906.) Where a party fails to serve timely responses to discovery requests, the court may make an order compelling responses.  (Code Civ. Proc. §2030.290; 2031.300; Sinaiko Healthcare Consulting, Inc. v. Pacific Healthcare Consultants (2007) 148 Cal.App.4th 390, 403.)  A party that fails to serve timely responses waives any objections to the request, including ones based on privilege or the protection of attorney work product.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.290, subd. (a), § 2031.300, subd. (a).)   

Therefore, because the evidence shows Kazaryan was properly served with discovery and failed to provide any verifications, Figueroa’s unopposed motions are GRANTED.  

Cross-Defendant Kazaryan is ordered to serve verifications/verified responses to the Figueroa’s (1) form interrogatories, set one, (2) form interrogatories, set two, and (3) RPDs, set one, within twenty (20) days. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.290 (a),(b); 2031.300(a),(b).) 

 

II. Motion To Deem Admitted 

Under Code of Civil Procedure 2033.280(b), failure to respond to requests for admission in a timely manner allows the requesting party to “move for an order that…the truth of any matters specified in the requests be deemed admitted” by the party that failed to respond.  The requesting party’s motion must be granted by the court, “unless [the court] finds that the party to whom the requests for admission have been directed has served, before the hearing on the motion, a proposed response to the requests for admission that is in substantial compliance with Section 2033.220.”  (Code Civ. Proc. § 2033.280(c).)   

Figueroa propounded requests for admissions (“RFAs”), set one, on Kazaryan on July 5, 2023. On July 24, 2023, Kazaryan served unverified responses to Figueroa’s RFAs, set one. To date, there has been no response by Kazaryan’s counsel regarding verifications. Although Kazaryan submitted responses to the RFAs, the responses are unverified and an unverified response is tantamount to no response at all.  (Melendrez v. Superior Court (2013) 215 Cal.App.4th 1343, 1348.) Therefore, because there is no evidence Kazaryan has served verified responses on Figueroa prior to the hearing, Figueroa’s unopposed motion to deem RFAs, set one, admitted against Kazaryan is GRANTED.  (CCP §2033.280(b).) 

 

III. Sanctions 

Sanctions are mandatory against any party, person, or attorney who unsuccessfully makes or opposes a motion to compel a responses, unless a court makes certain findings.¿ (Code Civ. Proc., 2031.300(c).)¿ Plaintiff did not file any opposition. However, sanctions may be awarded, even though no opposition is filed pursuant to CRC 3.1348(a). Further, “It is mandatory that the court impose a monetary sanction under Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 2023.010) on the party or attorney, or both, whose failure to serve a timely response to requests for admission necessitated this motion.”  (CCP §§ 2030.290(c) , 2033.280(c).)   

Figueroa is awarded the half hour for the motion to compel form interrogatories set two, and one hour for the other motions to compel and motion to deem RFAs admitted at the requested rate of $230 per hour, for a total of $805 in attorney’s fees. Further, Figueroa is awarded four motion filing fees of $60, for a total of $240 as costs.      

Sanctions are imposed against Kazaryan and Kazaryan’s counsel, jointly and severally. Kazaryan and/or Kazaryan’s counsel are ordered to pay sanctions to Figueroa, by and through counsel of record, in the total amount of $1,045, within twenty (20) days. 

 

Moving party is ordered to give notice.   

 

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE: 

Dated this 8th day of December 2023