Case Number: VC066156 Hearing Date: June 12, 2018 Dept: SEC

ABS-CBN INTERNATIONAL v. G STAR TV BROADCASTING, INC.

CASE NO.: VC066156

HEARING: 06/12/18

JUDGE: LORI ANN FOURNIER

#2

TENTATIVE ORDER

Plaintiff’s unopposed motion to compel Defendant G STAR BROADCASTING’s INC’s responses to form interrogatories (set one) is GRANTED. CCP §2030.290.

Plaintiff’s unopposed motion to compel Defendant G STAR BROADCASTING’s INC’s responses to special interrogatories (set one) is GRANTED. CCP §2030.290.

Plaintiff’s unopposed motion to compel Defendant G STAR BROADCASTING’s INC’s responses and production to request for production of documents (set one) is GRANTED. CCP § 2031.300

Plaintiff’s unopposed motion to compel Defendant PHENJA WAN PANAY KHIEWDOUNDEN’s responses to form interrogatories (set one) is GRANTED. CCP §2030.290.

Plaintiff’s unopposed motion to compel Defendant PHENJA WAN PANAY KHIEWDOUNDEN’s responses to special interrogatories (set one) is GRANTED. CCP §2030.290.

Plaintiff’s unopposed motion to compel Defendant PHENJA WAN PANAY KHIEWDOUNDEN’s responses and production to request for production of documents (set one) is GRANTED. CCP § 2031.300

Defendants G STAR BROADCASTING’s INC and PHENJA WAN PANAY KHIEWDOUNDEN, and their attorney of record are ORDERED to pay Plaintiff and its counsel of record, sanctions in the total amount of $960.00 ($300/hr. x 2 hrs.) + ($360 costs) no later than 15 days from the Court’s issuance of this Order.

Defendant G STAR BROADCASTING’s INC is ORDERED to provide verified responses and documents to Form Interrogatories (Set One); Special Interrogatories (Set One); and Request for Production of Documents (Set One) without objection no later than 15 days from the Court’s issuance of this Order. This date may be extended pursuant to agreement of the parties.

Defendant PHENJA WAN PANAY KHIEWDOUNDEN is ORDERED to provide verified responses and documents to Form Interrogatories (Set One); Special Interrogatories (Set One); and Request for Production of Documents (Set One) without objection no later than 15 days from the Court’s issuance of this Order. This date may be extended pursuant to agreement of the parties.

Plaintiff paid only one filing fee in connection with these motions. However, Plaintiff seeks six separate orders. A separate filing fee is required for each. (Gov. Code §70617(a)(4).) No later than June 12, 2018, Plaintiff is ORDERED to make payment of an additional $300.00 to the Court clerk in Dept. SE-C.

Moving Party to give Notice.

No Opposition filed as of June 7, 2018.

If a party to whom interrogatories and document demands are directed fails to respond at all, the propounding party’s remedy is to seek a court order compelling answers thereto. (CCP §§ 2030.290, 2031.300.) All that needs to be shown is that the discovery was properly served on the opposing party, that the time to respond has expired, and that no response of any kind has been served. The moving party is not required to show a reasonable and good faith attempt to resolve the matter informally before filing this motion. A motion to compel initial discovery responses need not show good cause, meeting and conferring, or timely filing, and need not be accompanied by a separate statement. (See Sinaiko Healthcare Consulting, Inc. v. Pac. Healthcare Consultants (2007) 148 Cal.App.4th 390, 404.) The failure to timely respond also waives all objections.

Here, Plaintiff has shown that Form Interrogatories (set one), Special Interrogatories (set one), and Requests for Production of Documents (set one) were properly served on Defendant G STAR BROADCASTING, INC. and Defendant PHENJA WAN PANAY KHIEWDOUNDEN (collectively “Defendants”) on January 17, 2018 and January 25, 2018. The deadline to respond has expired, and no responses of any kind have been provided. Plaintiff filed these motions on April 13, 2018, approximately three months after service of the discovery. As of June 7, 2018, Defendants have not filed an Opposition to Plaintiff’s motions. Therefore, the Motions to Compel are granted, and Defendants are ordered to provide verified responses and documents without objection. If any objections are asserted, it will be tantamount to no response at all and will be deemed a violation of this Court’s order.

“The court may award sanctions under the Discovery Act in favor of a party who files a motion to compel discovery, even though no opposition to the motion was filed, or opposition to the motion was withdrawn, or the requested discovery was provided to the moving party after the motion was filed.” (C.R.C. Rule 3.1348(a).)

Defendants do not oppose the instant motions to compel. As such, there is nothing to show that Defendants acted with substantial justification and the Court knows of no other circumstances which would make the imposition of sanctions unjust. Therefore, Plaintiffs’ request for monetary sanctions is granted as set forth above.