Case Number: EC060781    Hearing Date: October 31, 2014    Dept: B

Motion for:
1. Order compelling Cross-Defendant, Visionshock Entertainment, LLC, to serve responses to the Cross-Complainant’s form interrogatories; order imposing monetary sanctions of $1,540.
2. Order compelling Cross-Defendant, Visionshock Entertainment, LLC, to serve responses to the Cross-Complainant’s special interrogatories; order imposing monetary sanctions of $1,540.
3. Order compelling Cross-Defendant, Visionshock Entertainment, LLC, to serve responses to the Cross-Complainant’s requests for production; order imposing monetary sanctions of $1,540.
Post Mediation Status Conference
Case Management Conference
OSC Re Sanctions

This case arises from claims regarding a limited liability company that the parties formed to provide event promotion services. The company, Visionshock Entertainment, LLC, filed the Complaint to seek damages from the Defendant, Eric Young, on claims that he converted company funds and misused the Plaintiff’s trademarks. Eric Young then filed a Cross-Complaint against Visionshock Entertainment, LLC, Paul Phan, Harry Yu, and Kerry Lam, to claim that he had not been paid amounts due and that the Cross-Defendants had engaged in libel against him.

This hearing concerns the Cross-Complainant’s three motions to compel responses to his form interrogatories, special interrogatories, and requests for production from the Cross-Defendant, Visionshock Entertainment, LLC. The Cross-Complainant’s attorney, Saman Manavi, provides facts in the declarations accompanying the motions to demonstrate that the Cross-Defendant did not serve any responses to the Cross-Complainant’s form interrogatories, special interrogatories, or requests for production.

Under CCP sections 2030.290 and 2031.300, the Court may order a party to serve responses when the party has failed to serve any responses to interrogatories and requests for production. In addition, under CCP sections 2030.290 and 2031.300, when a party fails to serve timely responses, the party waives all objections to the interrogatories and requests for production. Since the motions are unopposed and Cross-Defendant has failed to serve any responses to the Cross-Complainant’s form interrogatories, special interrogatories, and requests for production, the Court grants the Cross-Complainant’s three motions and order the Cross-Defendant to serve responses without objections.

In addition, the Cross-Complainant requests that the Court impose monetary sanctions on the Cross-Defendant for the fees and costs that were incurred in filing the three motions. Under CCP sections 2030.290 and 2031.300 the Court may impose a reasonable amount of monetary sanctions upon the Plaintiff for his failure to comply with discovery. The Cross-Complainant’s attorney, Saman Manavi, provides facts in the declarations accompanying the Cross-Complainant’s motion to demonstrate that he expects to spend a total of 18 hours at $250 per hour on the three motions and that total amount of filing fees are $180. This is an unreasonable amount of time to spend on these very simple unopposed motions. A reasonable amount of time to bill for the preparation, drafting, and appearance on these standard discovery motions is at most 3 hours per motion. Accordingly, the court awards monetary sanctions is $810 per motion (3 hours at $250 per hour + $60 filing fee).