Case Number: BC657973 Hearing Date: March 07, 2018 Dept: 50

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

Department 50

JAROD PARKER,

Plaintiff,

vs.

subaru of america, inc., et al.

Defendants.

Case No.:

BC 657973

Hearing Date:

March 7, 2018

Hearing Time:

8:30 a.m.

[TENTATIVE] ORDER RE:

DEFENDANT SUBARU OF AMERICA, INC.’S MOTION TO COMPEL THE PLAINTIFF’S FURTHER RESPONSES TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES (SET ONE)

Background

Plaintiff Jarod Parker (“Parker”) filed this action on April 14, 2017 against Defendant Subaru of America, Inc. (“Subaru”) alleging violations of the Song Beverly Consumer Warranty Act and Magnuson-Moss Act (the “Complaint”).

Subaru served its first set of written discovery, including Special Interrogatories, on June 27, 2017. (Ruggerello Decl., ¶ 2.) Parker served responses on or about August 1, 2017; the responses were unverified. (Ruggerello Decl., ¶ 3, Ex. E.) On September 7, 2017, counsel for Subaru sent a meet and confer letter to Parker’s counsel outlining perceived deficiencies in the responses. (Ruggerello Decl., ¶ 4.) Although Parker’s counsel indicated that further responses would be forthcoming, Subaru did not receive further responses. (Ruggerello Decl., ¶¶ 5-6.) On September 25, 2017, counsel exchanged emails agreeing to extend deadlines for supplemental responses and the time to bring a motion to compel. (Ruggerello Decl., ¶ 6.) As of October 9, 2017, the agreed-upon deadline for Subaru to bring a motion to compel, counsel for Subaru has yet to receive supplemental responses to the Special Interrogatories. (Ruggerello Decl., ¶ 7.)

On October 10, 2018, Subaru filed its motion to compel further responses from Parker to the Special Interrogatories.[1] On February 27, 2018, Subaru applied ex parte for an order shortening time to hear its motions to compel further responses to Form Interrogatories (Set One) and Requests for Production of Documents (Set One). At the ex parte hearing, the Court ordered the parties to participate in an Informal Discovery Conference (“IDC”) to resolve the issues in the pending motions to compel. The Court further ordered Subaru to continue the motion to compel if necessary to a post-IDC hearing date.

The Court notes that no IDC on this matter has taken place, and no IDC form has been filed by any party. The instant motion to compel also has not been continued as ordered by the Court. Instead, Subaru filed a Reply to Non-Opposition in Support of Its Motion to Compel Plaintiff’s Further Responses to Special Interrogatories (Set One) on February 28, 2018.

Accordingly, the Court continues Subaru’s Motion to Compel the Plaintiff’s Further Responses to Special Interrogatories (Set One) to April 25, 2018. Once the parties have confirmed an IDC date, if the IDC date is after the date that the opposition to the continued motion to compel is due, Subaru must use the Court’s online reservation system to continue all of its motions to compel to a post-IDC hearing date.

The remainder of the Court’s February 27, 2018 Order still applies, including but not limited to the order to meet and confer prior to the IDC.

Subaru is ordered to provide notice of this ruling.

DATED: March 7, 2018 ________________________________

Hon. Teresa A. Beaudet

Judge, Los Angeles Superior Court

[1] The motion originally applied to two other sets of written discovery. Those motions currently are set to be heard on April 25 and 26, 2018.