DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
26CV162809·alameda·Civil·Discovery Dispute
Hearing about 2 months agoGRANTED

MENOR, et al. vs CHANEL, INC., et al.

Ex Parte Application for an order advancing the hearing date on Plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel

Hearing date
Jul 23, 2026
Department
18
Prevailing
Moving Party
Next hearing
Aug 13, 2026

Motion type

Browse all Ex Parte Application rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffJovy Menor
DefendantChanel, Inc.
DefendantMerck & Co., Inc.

Ruling

26CV162809: MENOR, et al. vs CHANEL, INC., et al. 07/23/2026 Hearing on Ex Parte Application for an order advancing the hearing date on Plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel Defendant Merck & Co., Inc.’s Further Responses to Plaintiffs’ Special Interrogatories, Set One, and Requests for Production of Documents CRS# A-162809-011 in Department 18

Tentative Ruling - 07/22/2026 Patrick McKinney

Plaintiffs' ex parte application to advance hearing date on Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel Defendant Merck & Co.'s Further Responses to Plaintiffs' Form Interrogatories (Set One) and Requests for Production of Documents (Set Two) is GRANTED.

The Hearing on Motion to Compel Merck's response to Special Interrogatories (Set one) and Requests for Production (set two); filed by JOVY MENOR (Plaintiff) + CRS# 215767463704 scheduled for 10/20/2026 is reset to 08/13/2026 at 01:30 PM in Department 18 at Rene C. Davidson Courthouse.

Any opposition papers shall be filed and served no later than August 3, 2026 and any reply papers shall be filed and served no later than August 7, 2026.

Plaintiffs' counsel must forthwith serve a copy of this order on all counsel of record and selfrepresented parties. The Court orders counsel to obtain a copy of this order from the eCourt portal.

CONTESTING THE TENTATIVE RULING: If the parties do not contest the tentative ruling, it will be adopted. Any party wishing to contest the tentative ruling must notify the court by email at Dept18@alameda.courts.ca.gov, and notify all opposing counsel or unrepresented parties by 12:00 pm the day of the hearing.

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