Motion to compel further responses to form interrogatories
Browse all Motion to Compel Further Responses rulings statewide →
25CV022511: JACOBS vs AMEEN, et al. 03/05/2026 Hearing on Motion to Compel Form in Department 54
Tentative Ruling
Pro per Plaintiff Adam Jacobs (Plaintiff) motion to compel Defendants Muna Fahmis (Fahmi) further responses to form interrogatories (set one) is DROPPED for defective service.
On December 26, 2025, the Honorable Steven Gervercer granted Plaintiffs ex-parte application for an order shortening time on the motion, and set the motion for todays date. The order specifically stated that Plaintiff shall file and file all moving papers per CCP 1005(b). (Order on Ex Parte Application Advancing 4 Motions from 5/26/26 to 3/5/26, December 26, 2025.)
Code of Civil Procedure 1005(b) provides, in pertinent part, that written notice of motion shall be served and filed at least 16 court days before the hearing. The required 16-day notice period is also increased based on the manner of service.
Here, Plaintiff did not serve co-defendants Anwar Ameen, Mustafa Zahid or Niran Ameen with the motion. Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1014, [a]fter appearance, a defendant or the defendants attorney is entitled to notice of all subsequent proceedings of which notice is required to be given.
With regards to Fahmi, Plaintiff electronically-served the motion on her[1] on February 15, 2026. Counting backward from the date of hearing pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure §12c, such service was only 12 court days prior to hearing.
Defective service deprives the court of jurisdiction to act. (Lee v. Placer Title Co. (1994) 28 Cal.App.4th 503, 509.)
The Court notes that Zahid and Fahmi are also appearing in pro per. Neither have consented to
electronic service per Code of Civil Procedure section 1010.6(c) and Cal. Rules of Court Rule. 2.551. As a result, to the extent Plaintiff has electronically served Zahid and Fahmi, such service may be defective. The Court need not reach this issue since the Court is dropping the motion due to defective service.
NOTICE:
Consistent with Local Rule 1.06(B), any party requesting oral argument on any matter on this calendar must comply with the following procedure:
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?”
To request limited oral argument, on any matter on this calendar, you must call the Law and Motion Oral Argument Request Line at (916) 874-2615 by 4:00 p.m. the Court day before the hearing and advise opposing counsel. At the time of requesting oral argument, the requesting
25CV022511: JACOBS vs AMEEN, et al. 03/05/2026 Hearing on Motion to Compel Form in Department 54
party shall leave a voice mail message: a) identifying themselves as the party requesting oral argument; b) indicating the specific matter/motion for which they are requesting oral argument; and c) confirming that it has notified the opposing party of its intention to appear and that opposing party may appear via Zoom using the Zoom link and Meeting ID indicated below. If no request for oral argument is made, the tentative ruling becomes the final order of the Court.
Unless ordered to appear in person by the Court, parties may appear remotely either telephonically or by video conference via the Zoom video/audio conference platform with notice to the Court and all other parties in accordance with Code of Civil Procedure §367.75. Although remote participation is not required, the Court will presume all parties are appearing remotely for non-evidentiary civil hearings.
The Department 54 Zoom Link is https://saccourt-ca-gov.zoomgov.com/my/sscdept53.54 and the Zoom Meeting ID is 161 4650 6749. To appear on Zoom telephonically, call (833) 568-8864 and enter the Zoom Meeting ID referenced above. NO COURTCALL APPEARANCES WILL BE ACCEPTED.
Parties requesting services of a court reporter will need to arrange for private court reporter services at their own expense, pursuant to Government code §68086 and California Rules of Court, Rule 2.956. Requirements for requesting a court reporter are listed in the Policy for Official Reporter Pro Tempore available on the Sacramento Superior Court website at https://www.saccourt.ca.gov/court-reporters/docs/crtrp-6a.pdf.
Parties may contact Court-Approved Official Reporters Pro Tempore by utilizing the list of Court Approved Official Reporters Pro Tempore available at https://www.saccourt.ca.gov/courtreporters/docs/crtrp-13.pdf.
A Stipulation and Appointment of Official Reporter Pro Tempore (CV/E-206) is required to be signed by each party, the private court reporter, and the Judge prior to the hearing, if not using a reporter from the Courts Approved Official Reporter Pro Tempore list.
Once the form is signed it must be filed with the clerk. If a litigant has been granted a fee waiver and requests a court reporter, the party must submit a Request for Court Reporter by a Party with a Fee Waiver (CV/E-211) and it must be filed with the clerk at least 10 days prior to the hearing or at the time the proceeding is scheduled if less than 10 days away. Once approved, the clerk will forward the form to the Court Reporters Office and an official reporter will be provided.