DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CGC25626112·sf·Civil·Product Liability
Hearing about 2 months agoGRANTED

ARTURO ROJAS ZAMUDIO ET AL VS. AMERICAN HONDA MOTOR CO., INC. ET AL

Notice Of Motion To Compel Further Responses To Requests For Production Of Documents, Set Two, Against Defendant American Honda Motor Co., Inc., And Request For Sanctions In The Amount Of $3,250

Hearing date
Jul 14, 2026
Department
302
Prevailing
Plaintiff

Motion type

Browse all Motion to Compel Further Responses rulings statewide →

Monetary amounts referenced

$3,250

Parties

PlaintiffArturo Rojas Zamudio
PlaintiffJesus Rojas Robledo
DefendantAmerican Honda Motor Co., Inc.
DefendantManly Honda

Ruling

Matter on calendar for Tuesday, July 14, 2026, Line 6, PLAINTIFF ARTURO ZAMUDIO, JESUS ROJAS ROBLEDO's Motion To Compel Further Responses To Requests For Production Of Documents, Set Two, Against Defendant American Honda Motor Co., Inc., And Request For Sanctions In The Amount Of $3,250.

3 - Plaintiffs' motion to compel further responses to their set two requests for production of documents is granted. The document requests are reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence and defendant Manly Honda's boilerplate objections (e.g., vague, overbroad) lack merit. Plaintiffs' "other vehicle" requests regarding the same alleged defects are proper. (See Donlen v. Ford Motor Co. (2013) 217 Cal.App.4th 138, 154 [explaining probative value of "other vehicle" evidence]; Santana v. FCA US, LLC (2020) 56 Cal.App.5th 334, 346-347 [noting intentionally inadequate "repair" of fuel pump based on defendant's prior knowledge].)

Defendant admits that AB 1755 does not apply to this action. Defendant did not act with substantial justification. Defendant shall serve further code-compliant responses and pay $3,250 as reasonable sanctions within 14 days of notice of entry of this order.

For the 9:00 a.m. calendar, all attorneys and parties may appear in Department 302 remotely or in person. Remote hearings will be conducted by videoconference using Zoom. (Dept. 302 Zoom ID 160 409 7690; Passcode 516287.) To appear remotely at the hearing, go to the court's website at sfsuperiorcourt.org under "Online Services," navigate to "Tentative Rulings," and click on the appropriate link, or dial the corresponding phone number.

Any party who contests a tentative ruling must send an email to contestdept302tr@sftc.org with a copy to all other parties by 4pm stating, without argument, the portion(s) of the tentative ruling that the party contests. The subject line of the email shall include the line number, case name and case number. The text of the email shall include the name and contact information, including email address, of the attorney or party who will appear at the hearing.

Counsel for the prevailing party is required to prepare a proposed order which repeats verbatim the substantive portion of the tentative ruling and must email it to contestdept302tr@sftc.org prior to the hearing even if the tentative ruling is not contested.

The court no longer provides a court reporter in the Law & Motion Department. Parties may retain their own reporter, who may appear in the courtroom or remotely. A retained reporter must be a California certified court reporter (CSR), for only a CSR's transcript may be used in California courts. If a CSR is being retained, include in your email all of the following: their name, CSR and telephone numbers, and their individual work email address. =(302/HEK). | |

Cited authorities

Extracting citations from the ruling text…
Verify against the source PDF — LLM extraction may miss or mis-normalize citations.

Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities

Ask about this ruling

Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”

Answers reference only this ruling's text. Not legal advice — always verify against the source PDF.

Find similar rulings

Source

Share