Motion to Compel Further Discovery Responses
Browse all Motion to Compel Further Responses rulings statewide →
25CV141395: CARVALHO vs EDGE BUSINESS SERVICES CORP., et al. 08/06/2026 Hearing on Motion to Compel Further Discovery Responses filed by RAIMUNDO CARVALHO (Plaintiff) CRS# 771720610076 in Department 520
Tentative Ruling - 08/05/2026 Jamilah A. Jefferson
The Motion to Compel Further Discovery Responses filed by RAIMUNDO CARVALHO on 04/01/2026 is Granted.
The Motion of Plaintiff Raimundo Carvalho (Plaintiff) to Compel Further as to Defendant LMDE, LLC. (Defendant) and for Monetary Sanctions is GRANTED.
The Court notes that this is one of four Motions to Compel Further as to Defendant. The subject discovery requests consist of RPDs, Set One Nos. 1-24, to which Defendant responded with objections only. (Separate Statement; Burton Decl., ¶ 4, Ex. C; ¶ 5, Ex. D.) As the responses were served on February 12, 2026 prior to the Courts July 9, 2026 ruling on Defendants Motion to Quash, Defendant objected claiming that the discovery requests were premature and overbroad temporally such that they were not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence.
The Court disagrees and does not find that the cases Defendant cites in support of its argument reflect that Defendant was substantially justified in opposing this Motion. Indeed, as Plaintiff points out, [a] plaintiff attempting to assert jurisdiction over a nonresident defendant is entitled to an opportunity to conduct discovery of the jurisdictional facts necessary to sustain its burden of proof. [Citation.] (In re Automobile Antitrust Cases I & II (2005) 135 Cal.App.4th 100, 127.)
Thus, Plaintiffs Motion is GRANTED. Defendant is ordered to serve Plaintiff with code-compliant responses without objections to Plaintiffs Requests for Production of Documents (Set One) without objection within thirty (30) days of the date of this Order. Monetary sanctions in the amount requested of $710 are awarded in their entirety against Defendant, payable to Plaintiff forthwith. (Burton Decl. ¶ 8.)
NOTICE TO DEFENDANT: Defendant is advised that failure to comply with this Order may result in the imposition of future sanctions, including evidentiary, monetary, or terminating sanctions.
NOTICE: This tentative ruling will automatically become the courts final order on August 6, 2026 unless, by no later than 4:00 P.M. on August 5, 2026, a party to the action notifies BOTH: 1) the court by emailing Dept520@alameda.courts.ca.gov; AND 2) all opposing counsel or selfrepresented parties (by telephone or email) that the party is contesting this tentative ruling. 25CV141395: CARVALHO vs EDGE BUSINESS SERVICES CORP., et al. 08/06/2026 Hearing on Motion to Compel Further Discovery Responses filed by RAIMUNDO CARVALHO (Plaintiff) CRS# 771720610076 in Department 520
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?”
The subject line (RE:) of the email must state: Request for CONTESTED HEARING: [the case name], [number]. When a party emails to contest a tentative ruling, the party must identify the specific holding(s) within the ruling they wish to contest via oral argument.
The court does not provide court reporters for hearings in civil departments. A party who wants a record of the proceedings must engage a private court reporter. (Local Rule 3.95.) Any privately retained court reporter must also participate via video conference. Their email must be provided to the court at the time the Notice of Contest is emailed.
ALL CONTESTED LAW AND MOTION HEARINGS ARE CONDUCTED VIA REMOTE VIDEO unless an in person appearance is required by the court. Invitations to participate in the video proceeding will be sent by the court upon receipt of timely notice of contest. A party may give email notice that they will appear in court in person for the hearing, however all other counsel/parties and the JUDGE MAY APPEAR REMOTELY.