Judge: Theresa M. Traber, Case: 24STCV11832, Date: 2024-09-09 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24STCV11832    Hearing Date: September 9, 2024    Dept: 47

Tentative Ruling

Judge Theresa M. Traber, Department 47

HEARING DATE:     September 9, 2024                 TRIAL DATE: NOT SET

CASE:                         Dylan Scott Perry v. Board of Trustees of California Physicians’ Service, et al.

CASE NO.:                 24STCV11832           

MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSES TO REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION

MOVING PARTY:               Plaintiff Dylan Scott Perry, in pro per

RESPONDING PARTY(S): Defendant California Physicians’ Service, d/b/a Blue Shield of California

STATEMENT OF MATERIAL FACTS AND/OR PROCEEDINGS:

In his Complaint filed on May 10, 2024, Plaintiff alleges that Defendants cancelled his health insurance without adequate justification.

Plaintiff moves to compel further responses to Requests for Production propounded to Defendant California Physicians’ Service.

TENTATIVE RULING:

Plaintiff moves to compel further responses to Requests for Production propounded to Defendant California Physicians’ Service.

Although Plaintiff seeks to compel further responses to requests for production to which Defendant has objected, Plaintiff has not included a declaration describing his efforts to informally resolve this dispute, as required by Code of Civil Procedure section 2031.310. Nor has Plaintiff provided a Separate Statement in support of the motion, as required by California Rule of Court 3.1345(c) describing each request, each response, and the factual and legal reasons why a further response is required. Plaintiff has also not provided any evidence indicating that this motion was made within 45 days of receipt of the responses, such that the Court has jurisdiction to hear the motion. (See Code Civ. Proc. § 2031.310(c).) Finally, Plaintiff has offered no explanation of why good cause exists for these requests, as required by section 2031.310 subdivision (b)(1) beyond a single statement in his reply that “I need that stuff because those are my doe Defendants.” For these reasons, Plaintiff’s motion is procedurally and substantively deficient.

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Further Responses to Requests for Production is DENIED.

Moving Party is ordered to give notice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated:  September 9, 2024                             ___________________________________

                                                                                    Theresa M. Traber

                                                                                    Judge of the Superior Court

            Any party may submit on the tentative ruling by contacting the courtroom via email at Smcdept47@lacourt.org by no later than 4:00 p.m. the day before the hearing. All interested parties must be copied on the email. It should be noted that if you submit on a tentative ruling the court will still conduct a hearing if any party appears. By submitting on the tentative you have, in essence, waived your right to be present at the hearing, and you should be aware that the court may not adopt the tentative, and may issue an order which modifies the tentative ruling in whole or in part.