Judge: Serena R. Murillo, Case: 20STCV15913, Date: 2023-04-18 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 20STCV15913    Hearing Date: April 18, 2023    Dept: 29

TENTATIVE

Plaintiff Leticia Hamamoto’s motion to compel responses to request for production of documents (set four) is CONTINUED.

Legal Standard

Compel RPDs 

Where there has been no timely response to a demand for the production of documents, the demanding party may seek an order compelling a response.  (Code Civ. Proc. § 2031.300(b).)  Failure to timely respond waives all objections, including privilege and work product.  (Code Civ. Proc. § 2031.300(a).)  Thus, unless the party to whom the demand was directed obtains relief from waiver, he or she cannot raise objections to the documents demanded.  There is no deadline for a motion to compel responses.  Likewise, for failure to respond, the moving party need not attempt to resolve the matter outside court before filing the motion. 

Sanctions

Sanctions are mandatory in connection with a motion to compel responses to requests for production of documents against any party, person, or attorney who unsuccessfully makes or opposes a motion to compel unless the court “finds that the one subject to the sanction acted with substantial justification or that other circumstances make the imposition of the sanction unjust.”  (Code Civ. Proc. § 2031.300(c).) 

Under CCP section 2023.030(a), “[t]he court may impose a monetary sanction ordering that one engaging in the misuse of the discovery process, or any attorney advising that conduct, or both pay the reasonable expenses, including attorney’s fees, incurred by anyone as a result of that conduct. . . . If a monetary sanction is authorized by any provision of this title, the court shall impose that sanction unless it finds that the one subject to the sanction acted with substantial justification or that other circumstances make the imposition of the sanction unjust.”  Failing to respond or to submit to an authorized method of discovery is a misuse of the discovery process.  (Code Civ. Proc. § 2023.010.) 

Discussion

On July 27, 2021, Plaintiff served Requests for Production of Documents, Set Four, on Plaintiff. (Poulter Decl., Exh. A.) As of the filing of the motion, no responses have been received. (Id., ¶ 4.)

In opposition, Defendant argues that Plaintiff has propounded multiple sets of discovery to Defendant. Plaintiff seeks to compel responses to production requests that were served in July of 2021. Since that time, defendant has responded to similar requests for production and indicated that the defendant does not possession, custody or control of the several categories of items previously sought in the fourth set of production requests. Defendant states it will provide responses within 30 days of the hearing, which will likely reiterate that it does not have possession, custody or control of requested documents.

As Defendant has agreed to provide responses to the discovery requests, but Defendant has not yet provided responses, the motion to compel Defendant’s responses is CONTINUED to allow Defendant time to answer.

Sanctions were not requested, and thus, will not be imposed.

Conclusion

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion to compel responses to request for production of documents (set four) is CONTINUED until May 17, 2023 at 1:30 p.m.

Moving party is ordered to give notice.