Judge: Walter P. Schwarm, Case: 30-2021-01182070, Date: 2022-10-25 Tentative Ruling

Defendants’ (Jeff Alan Groover and Katherine A. McKinney) unopposed Motion to Compel Deposition of Plaintiff (Motion), filed on 6-8-22 under ROA No. 51, is DENIED without prejudice.

Code of Civil Procedure section 2025.450 states in part, “(a) If, after service of a deposition notice, a party to the action or an officer, director, managing agent, or employee of a party, or a person designated by an organization that is a party under Section 2025.230, without having served a valid objection under Section 2025.410, fails to appear for examination, or to proceed with it, or to produce for inspection any document, electronically stored information, or tangible thing described in the deposition notice, the party giving the notice may move for an order compelling the deponent’s attendance and testimony, and the production for inspection of any document, electronically stored information, or tangible thing described in the deposition notice. [¶] (b) A motion under subdivision (a) shall comply with both of the following: [¶] (1) The motion must set forth specific facts showing good cause justifying the production for inspection of any document, electronically stored information, or tangible thing described in the deposition notice. [¶] (2) The motion shall be accompanied by a meet and confer declaration under Section 2016.040, or when the deponent fails to attend the deposition and produce the documents, electronically stored information, or things described in the deposition notice, by a declaration stating that the petitioner has contacted the deponent to inquire about the nonappearance. . . .”

On 2-15-22, Defendants served Plaintiff (Alexandru Marinel Parlog) with “Notice of Taking Continued Deposition of Plaintiff Alexandru Marinel Parlog.” (Motion; 4:1-4 and Exhibit D.)

Here, the declaration in support of the Motion does not show compliance with Code of Civil Procedure section 2025.450, subdivision (b)(2). (Kandarian-Stein Decl.)  The declaration does not describe any meet and confer efforts, or that Defendants contacted Plaintiff to inquire about Plaintiff’s nonappearance. (Kandarian-Stein Decl.)

Based on the above, the court DENIES Defendants’ (Jeff Alan Groover and Katherine A. McKinney) unopposed Motion to Compel Deposition of Plaintiff filed on 6-8-22 under ROA No. 51, without prejudice.

Court Clerk is to give notice.