Plaintiff's Motion to deem the truth of all matters specified in RFAs admitted by Defendant
Browse all Motion to Compel Further Responses rulings statewide →
9:00 24CV433813 Georgii Kliukovkin Order on Defendant’s Motion to 1 v. Strike Portions of Plaintiff’s First uDevs Inc., et al. Amended Complaint
See Line 1 below for complete tentative ruling.
After the hearing, the Court will prepare and file the formal Order.
9:00 24CV444270 Chad Hutson Order on Defendant’s Motion for 2 v. Summary Judgment or, in the Sam Anderson alternative, Summary Adjudication
See Line 2 below for complete tentative ruling.
After the hearing, the Court will prepare and file the formal Order.
9:00 24CV454356 Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Order on Plaintiff’s Motion to deem 3 v. the truth of all matters specified in Saeed Alampaykar RFAs admitted by Defendant
See Line 3 below for complete tentative ruling.
After the hearing, the Court will prepare and file the formal Order.
9:00 25CV473892 Keep America Safe Order on Plaintiff’s Motion to 4 and Beautiful Approve Settlement and enter v. Judgment under the terms of General Printing & Design, Inc., Proposition 65 Settlement and et al. Consent Judgment
See Line 4 below for complete tentative ruling.
After the hearing, the Court will prepare and file the formal Order.
Line 3 Case Name: Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Saeed Alampaykar Case No.: 24CV454356 Plaintiff Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (“Plaintiff”) moves under Code of Civil Procedure Sections 2033.010, 2033.020, 2033.250, 2033.280, and 2033.430 to deem the truth of all matters specified in the Requests for Admissions, Set One, served on September 17, 2025, to be admitted by Defendant Saeed Alampaykar (“Defendant”). Notice of Motion (the “Motion”) at 1:21-24 (filed Dec. 12, 2025).
The Motion came on for hearing on July 10, 2026, at 9:00 AM in Department 16. After reviewing all the papers and the record, and giving counsel for all parties the full and fair opportunity to be heard, the Court finds and rules as follows.
Plaintiff served the Requests for Admissions, Set One, on Defendant on September 17, 2025. Declaration of attorney Pearse F. Early In Support of Motion (“Early Decl.”) at ¶ 1 & Exhibit A thereto.
Defendant never responded to the Requests for Admissions, Set One, despite his obligation to respond under Code of Civil Procedure Section 2033.240. Early Decl. at ¶ 2.
Because Defendant failed to respond, Plaintiff now moves for an Order under Code of Civil Procedure Section 2033.280 deeming admitted by Defendant the truth of all matters specified in Plaintiff’s Requests for Admissions, Set One. C.C.P. 2033.280 (b). Plaintiff’s Memorandum of Points & Authorities in Support of Motion at 1:23-2:7.
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”
The Motion is well supported by the law, well supported by the facts set forth in the Early Declaration, and reasonable in all respects.
Moreover, Defendant has failed to oppose the Motion, which the Court views as Defendant conceding the Motion. D.I. Chadbourne, Inc. v. Super. Ct. (1964) 60 Cal.2d 723, 728, fn. 4.; California Practice Guide: Civil Procedure Before Trial ¶ 9:105.10, Ch. 9 at pp. 94-95 (failure to file opposition papers to motion is treated “as an admission that the motion is meritorious”) (Weil & Brown, The Rutter Group, 2025 Ed.); see also Rule of Court 8.54(c): “A failure to oppose a motion may be deemed a consent to the granting of the motion.” CRC Rule 8.54(c).)
Accordingly, the Court GRANTS the Motion in all respects. Specifically, it is hereby ORDERED that the truth of all matters specified in Plaintiff’s Requests for Admissions, Set One, served on Defendant on September 17, 2025, is deemed admitted by Defendant Saeed Alampaykar.
SO ORDERED.
Date: July 10, 2026 Hon. Vincent I. Parrett Superior Court of the State of California, County of Santa Clara
18