Judge Robert B. Broadbelt, Case Number: 22STCV30321, Date: 2024-05-31 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Robert B. Broadbelt, Case: 22STCV30321, Date: 2024-05-31 Tentative Ruling

Motion to Compel Further Responses to Form Interrogatories, Employment, Set Two

The court considered the moving papers filed on March 20, 2024,[1] and the opposition and reply papers filed in connection with this motion.

Plaintiff Kofoworola Folashade Olatunde (“Plaintiff”) moves the court for an order (1) compelling defendant Eyanu Health Services, LLC (“Defendant”) to serve further responses to Plaintiff’s Form Interrogatories, Employment, number 216.1, as to Defendant’s affirmative defenses numbered 1-4, 36-40, 42, and 43, and (2) awarding monetary sanctions in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendant in the amount of $4,560.

As a threshold matter, the court notes that, in opposition, Defendant asserts that Plaintiff’s motion was not filed within the time required by Code of Civil Procedure section 2030.300. Based on the court’s review of the correspondence between counsel for Plaintiff and Defendant, the court agrees and finds that Plaintiff’s motion is untimely.

“Unless notice of [a] motion [to compel further responses to interrogatories] is given within 45 days of the service of the verified response, or any supplemental verified response, or on or before any specific later date to which the propounding party and the responding party have agreed in writing, the propounding party waives any right to compel a further response to the interrogatories.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.300, subd. (c).) This deadline is jurisdictional. (Sexton v. Superior Court (1997) 58 Cal.App.4th 1403, 1410 [“the time within which to make a motion to compel production of documents is mandatory and jurisdictional just as it is for motions to compel further answers to interrogatories”].)

Defendant served the amended responses that are the subject of Plaintiff’s motion on July 12, 2023. (Obiamiwe Decl., ¶ 8 [“On July 12, 2023, Defendant served Amended Response . . . . These responses are the bases of the instant motion”].) On August 7, 2023, Plaintiff’s counsel sent a meet and confer letter regarding Defendant’s July 12, 2023 responses to, inter alia, the discovery that is the subject of this motion, i.e., Plaintiff’s Employment Interrogatories, number 216.1. (Obiamaiwe Decl., Ex. F, p. 1; Mot., pp. 7:4-9:4 [requesting a further response to number 216.1].) This letter does not request an extension of Plaintiff’s deadline to file a motion to compel further responses. (Obiamaiwe Decl., Ex. F.) On August 21, 2023, counsel for Defendant responded to Plaintiff’s counsel’s meet and confer letter, in which counsel “offer[ed] to extend [Plaintiff’s] motion to compel deadline for the specific requests identified in [Plaintiff’s counsel’s] last meet and confer letter, to 2 weeks after the IDC can take place.” (Obiamiwe Decl., Ex. G, pp. 1 [noting receipt of meet and confer letter regarding Defendant’s responses to Plaintiff’s employment interrogatories], 2.)

Although the parties appear to assert that counsel therefore agreed to extend Plaintiff’s deadline to file a motion to compel further responses, the court disagrees. First, Plaintiff did not submit evidence establishing that Plaintiff’s counsel accepted Defendant’s offer of this extension. For example, Plaintiff’s September 6, 2023 letter does not accept that extension. (Obiamiwe Decl., Ex. H.) Thus, there does not appear to have been an agreement “in writing” to extend Plaintiff’s deadline at this time. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.300, subd. (c).) Second, even if Plaintiff had produced such evidence, the parties did not comply with section 2030.300 by failing to extend the deadline to a “specific later date[.]” As set forth above, a motion to compel further responses to interrogatories must be filed within 45 days of service of the verified response, “or on or before any specific later date to which the propounding party and the responding party have agreed in writing[.]” (Ibid. [emphasis added].) To the extent that the parties attempted to extend Plaintiff’s deadline to file a motion to compel further to “2 weeks after” an informal discovery conference, such an agreement is insufficient and does not satisfy Code of Civil Procedure section 2030.300. (Ibid.; Obiamiwe Decl., Ex. G, p. 2.)

Thus, the court finds that Plaintiff was required to file this motion no later than 45 days after July 12, 2023, i.e., the date on which Defendant served its verified responses. (Obiamiwe Decl., ¶ 8; Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.300, subd. (c).) Plaintiff filed this motion on March 20, 2024, i.e., later than 45 days after July 12, 2023, and therefore is untimely.[2]

The court therefore finds that it does not have jurisdiction to rule on Plaintiff’s motion other than to deny it. (Sexton, supra, 58 Cal.App.4th at p. 1410 [the deadline is jurisdictional “in the sense that it renders the court without authority to rule on motions to compel other than to deny them”].)

The court denies Defendant’s request for monetary sanctions against Plaintiff, made in its opposition.

The court denies plaintiff Kofoworola Folashade Olatunde’s motion to compel further responses to form interrogatories, employment.

The court orders defendant Eyanu Health Services, LLC to give notice of this ruling.

[1] Plaintiff appears to have filed two sets of moving papers, first on March 18, 2024, and second, on March 20, 2024.

[2] Moreover, even if the parties could agree to extend the deadline without stating a date certain, it appears that Plaintiff’s deadline would have expired two weeks after the December 14, 2023 informal discovery conference. Plaintiff filed, on October 31, 2023, a request for an informal discovery conference, in which Plaintiff stated that she “would like further responses to Form Interrogatories:” and noted that Plaintiff propounded employment interrogatories on Defendant. (Oct. 31, 2023, p. 1, ¶ 1.) This request (1) notes the informal discovery conference date to be “12/14/23, [at] 10:00 am[,]” and (2) lists the reservation ID number to be 547974241288, which is associated with the December 14, 2023 informal discovery conference on the court’s case management system. (Id., pp. 1-2.) Defendant’s offer to extend the deadline “to 2 weeks after the IDC can take place” would therefore appear to have applied to December 14, 2023, because that is the date on which the informal discovery conference could have taken place, had Plaintiff’s counsel appeared. (Obiamiwe Decl., Ex. G, p. 2 [emphasis added]; Dec. 14, 2023 Minute Order, p. 1 [noting that Plaintiff (moving party) is not present and therefore ordering the matter off-calendar on the court’s own motion].)

kofoworola folashade olatunde ; Plaintiff, vs. eyanu health services, llc , et al.; Defendants.	Case No.:	22STCV30321

	Hearing Date:	May 31, 2024

	Time:	10:00 a.m.

	[tentative] Order RE: plaintiff’s motion to compel further responses to form interrogatories, employment, set two