Case Number: 18STCV09276 Hearing Date: November 22, 2019 Dept: 5

Superior Court of California
County of Los Angeles
Department 5

monique mimms, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

Rex zheng,

Defendant.

Case No.: 18STCV09276

Hearing Date: November 22, 2019

[TENTATIVE] order RE:

motions to compel discovery responses

Defendant Rex Zheng (“Defendant”) moves to compel responses from Plaintiffs Monique Mims, Jonecia Butler, and Lewis Amacker (“Plaintiffs”) to: (1) Request for Production of Documents, Set One (“RPD”); (2) Form Interrogatories, Set One (“FROG”); and (3) Special Interrogatories, Set One (“SROG”). Defendant moves to deem admitted specified in Requests for Admissions, Set One (“RFAs”). The motions are granted.

Defendant served the discovery at issue on Plaintiffs by mail on July 17, 2019. Plaintiffs’ responses were thus due no later than August 21, 2019. As of the filing date of these motions, Defendant has not received responses from Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs have not opposed the motions, and there is nothing in the record suggesting they have complied with their discovery obligations. Accordingly, the motions to compel responses to the RPD, FROG, and SROG are granted per Code of Civil Procedure sections 2030.290 and 2031.300. Plaintiffs are ordered to serve responses to Defendant’s RPD, FROG, and SROG, without objections, within 30 days of service of this order.

Defendant also moves to deem the matters specified in the RFAs. Where a party fails to respond to requests for admissions, the propounding party may move for an order that the genuineness of any documents and the truth of any matters specified in the requests be deemed admitted, as well as for a monetary sanction. (Code of Civ. Proc., § 2033.280, subd. (b).) The Court “shall” grant a motion to deem admitted the matters specified in the requests for admissions, “unless it finds that the party to whom the requests for admission have been directed has served, before the hearing on the motion, a proposed response to the requests for admission that is in substantial compliance with Section 2033.220.” (Code of Civ. Proc., § 2033.280, subd. (c).) As Plaintiffs have failed to respond to Defendant’s RFAs, the Court grants Defendant’s motion against each plaintiff.

Defendant seeks sanctions against each plaintiff and Plaintiffs’ counsel-of-record. The Court concludes that Plaintiffs’ failure to respond to the discovery is an abuse of the discovery process, warranting sanctions. Therefore, the Court orders the following sanctions:

1. Sanctions in the amount of $990 against Plaintiff Monique Mims and counsel-of-record, Sergei N. Gladkov, Esq., jointly and severally, based upon three hours of attorney time at a rate of $250 per hour plus four filing fees of $60 each.

2. Sanctions in the amount of $990 against Plaintiff Jonecia Butler and counsel-of-record, Sergei N. Gladkov, Esq., jointly and severally, based upon three hours of attorney time at a rate of $250 per hour plus four filing fees of $60 each.

3. Sanctions in the amount of $990 against Plaintiff Lewis Amacker and counsel-of-record, Sergei N. Gladkov, Esq., jointly and severally, based upon three hours of attorney time at a rate of $250 per hour plus four filing fees of $60 each.

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

Defendant’s motions to compel responses to the RPD, FROG, and SROG are granted per Code of Civil Procedure sections 2030.290 and 2031.300. Plaintiffs are ordered to serve verified responses, without objections, within 30 days of notice of this order.

Plaintiffs are deemed to have admitted the truth of all matters specified in the RFAs as of this date.

The Court orders the following sanctions paid to Defendant, by and through counsel:

1. Sanctions in the amount of $990 against Plaintiff Monique Mims and counsel-of-record, Sergei N. Gladkov, Esq., jointly and severally, within thirty (30) days of notice of this order.

2. Sanctions in the amount of $990 against Plaintiff Jonecia Butler and counsel-of-record, Sergei N. Gladkov, Esq., jointly and severally, within thirty (30) days of notice of this order.

3. Sanctions in the amount of $990 against Plaintiff Lewis Amacker and counsel-of-record, Sergei N. Gladkov, Esq., jointly and severally, within thirty (30) days of notice of this order.

Defendant is ordered to provide notice of this order and file proof of service of such.

DATED: November 22, 2019 ___________________________

Stephen I. Goorvitch

Judge of the Superior Court