Motion to compel further discovery responses to Request for Production of Documents, Set Three
Browse all Motion to Compel Further Responses rulings statewide →
reflects Deponent was never served with the deposition notice or any subpoena. Additionally, there is no proof of personal service of this motion on Deponent, as required under California Rules of Court rule 3.1346. Neither the initial deposition nor this motion have been properly served upon Deponent.
b. Sanctions The Court declines to impose sanctions on either Plaintiff or Defendants at this time. Plaintiff filed this motion under the belief Deponent was still an employee or agent of Defendants, pursuant to the most-recent, publicly available documents. Defend ants provided substantial justification for their lack of compliance with the deposition notice, as well as proof of Deponent’s non-affiliation. In the future, the court expects that more robust effort s at meeting and con ferring will resolve issues like this one.
IV. CONCLUSION Plaintiff’s motion to compel the deposition of deponent Yehia Zakaria is therefore DENI ED. Plaintiff’s request for sanctions is DENIED. Opposing party is ordered to give notice. DATED: May 18, 2026 __________________________ Hon. Alexander C.D. Giza Judge of the Superior Court
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE: ? Parties are encouraged to meet and confer after reading this tentative ruling to see if they can reach an agreement. ? If a party intends to submit on this tentative ruling, the party must send an email to the court at [email protected] with the Subject line “SUBMIT’ followed by the case number. The body of the email must include the hearing date and time, counsel’s contact information, and the identity of the party submitting. ? Unless all parties submit by email to this tentative ruling, the parties should arrange to appear remotely (encouraged) or in person for oral argument.
You should assume that others may appear at the hearing to argue. ? If the parties neither submit nor appear at hearing, the Court may take the motion off calendar or adopt the tentative ruling as the order of the Court. After the Court has issued a tentative ruling, the Court may prohibit the withdrawal of the subject motion without leave.
County of Los Angeles Department 7 30 ¿ LUIS ANTONIO ORTIZ, Plaintiff, vs. ELEVANCE HEALTH, INC., et al., Defendant s Case No.:
Hearing Date: May 18, 2026 [TENTATIVE] ORDER CONTINUING MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER DISCOVERY RESPONSES TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS, SET THREE
Luis Ortiz (? Plaintiff ”) moves for orders compelling Elevance Health (? Defendant ”) to produce further responses to numerous requests in Plaintiff’s Request for Production, Set Three, in addition to paying $16,500.00 in sanctions to Plaintiff. Plaintiff’s motion will be continued to a new date as set forth below. NO HEARING WILL TAKE PLACE ON MAY 18, 2026.
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?”
Pursuant to the Court’s power to “amend and control its process and orders so as to make them conform to law and justice? (Code Civ. Proc., § 128, subd. (a)(8)), the Court orders the parties in this case to participate in a n Informal Discovery Conference (“IDC”) with the Court. Lead or other designated counsel for the parties with full authority are ordered to participate in person in an IDC. After consulting with opposing counsel regarding available dates, Plaintiff must make a prompt reservation for the IDC using the Court’s online reservation system. The parties must meet and confer and then file a joint statement (five pages or less) in the department three days prior to the IDC.¿
Once Plaintiff has confirmed an IDC date, Plaintiff must use the Court’s online reservation system to continue the motion to a post-IDC discovery hearing date. The parties are ordered to come prepared with all necessary materials to make the IDC hearing successful. Prior to the IDC date, lead or other designated counsel for the parties, with full authority, are to meet and confer, in person or via telephone in a further attempt to resolve as many of the issues as possible before the IDC. (See C al. Rule of Court Rule 3.670, subd. (f)(2).) If the parties resolve their discovery disputes before the IDC date, Plaintiff is ordered to take both the IDC and the motion off calendar as soon as possible.¿ Plaintiff is ordered to provide notice of this Order.¿ DATED: May 18, 2026 __________________________ Hon. Alexander C.D. Giza Judge of the Superior Court
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE: ? Parties are encouraged to meet and confer after reading this tentative ruling to see if they can reach an agreement. ? If a party intends to submit on this tentative ruling, the party must send an email to the court at [email protected] with the Subject line “SUBMIT’ followed by the case number. The body of the email must include the hearing date and time, counsel’s contact information, and the identity of the party submitting. ? Unless all parties submit by email to this tentative ruling, the parties should arrange to appear remotely or in person for oral argument.
You should assume that others may appear at the hearing to argue. ? If the parties neither submit nor appear at hearing, the Court may take the motion off calendar or adopt the tentative ruling as the order of the Court. After the Court has issued a tentative ruling, the Court may prohibit the withdrawal of the subject motion without leave. Home -->)" -->