Sahagian v. Beaver Medical Group, P.C., et al

16. Sahagian v. Beaver Medical Group, P.C., et al, Case No. CIVSB2430006 Motion to be Relieved as Attorney of Record for Plaintiffs 7/15/26, 9:00 a.m., S-17 The Court would CONTINUE or seek in camera discussion of the facts in support. Here, the Ray & Seb LLP firm seeks to be relieved as counsel for Plaintiff. The declaration submitted in support only sets forth the conclusion that the relationship has broken down such that the motion is necessary. While the Court is cognizant of the protections related to attorney-client relationship, the Court will need some sort of averment establishing good cause pursuant to rule 1.16(b) of the Rules of Court. As currently worded, the submitted declaration is insufficient. *** *** ***

17. Meggs v. FCA US, LLC, et al, Case No. CIVSB2401106 Defendants’ Motion to Compel Initial Responses to Requests for Production, Set One 7/15/26, 8:30 a.m., S-17 The Court would GRANT this unopposed motion. Both objection-free responses to Requests for Production, Set One, and sanctions in the amount of $608 will be due within twenty days. A failure to oppose a motion may be deemed consent to the granting of the motion. (Rules of Court, rule 8.54(c); also Giles v. Horn (2002) 100 Cal.App.4th 206,228 [challenge to judicial notice motion forfeited by failure to file opposition].) Here, it appears Plaintiff has conceded the validity of the arguments. *** *** ***

18. Robertson v. City of Rialto, et al, Case No. CIVSB2325118 Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Further Responses from City to Requests for Production, Set Two Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Further Responses from City to Special Interrogatories, Set Two 7/15/26, 9:00 a.m., Dept. S-17

Tentative Rulings As to the Motion to Compel Further Responses to RFP2: The Court would DENY as untimely and because movant failed to supply an appropriate separate statement. The Court would impose sanctions against Plaintiff in the amount of $1,500, due within thirty days. As to the Motion to Compel Further Responses to SROG2: The Court would likewise DENY as untimely and because movant failed to supply an appropriate separate statement. The Court would impose sanctions against Plaintiff in the amount of $1,500, likewise due within thirty days.

2