Dilani vs. Guaranteed Property Inspections, LLC

4 Dilani vs. Guaranteed TENTATIVE RULING: Property Inspections, LLC Motion to Compel Further Responses to RFPs

Plaintiff Dorsaye Dilani moves to compel further responses from Defendant Joseph Gutierrez to RFPs (Set One). For the following reasons, the motion is DENIED.

Code of Civil Procedure section 2031.310(c) provides that notice of a motion to compel further responses must be served within 45 days after service of a verified response, or “on or before any specific later date to which the propounding party and the responding party have agreed in writing, the propounding party waives any right to compel a further response to the interrogatories.” The 45-day deadline is mandatory and “jurisdictional,” such that it renders the court with no authority to grant a late-filed motion. (See Sexton v. Superior Court (1997) 58 Cal.App.4th 1403, 1410; Vidal Sassoon, Inc. v. Superior Court (1983) 147 Cal.App.3d 681, 685.)

Here, the court record shows this motion to be late-filed. Defendant served verified responses to RFPs (Set One) on 03/06/2026. (See ROA # 168 [Proof of Serv. of Discov. Resps.].) The deadline to file a motion to compel further responses fell on 04/27/2026. Plaintiff submits no evidence the parties agreed in writing to extend that deadline. Plaintiff filed this motion after the 45-day deadline passed, on 05/01/2026. Therefore, the court must DENY the motion.

Clerk to give notice.

5 Dinh vs. The M TENTATIVE RULING: General Construction Motion 1. Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel of Record Company Counsel Robert A. von Esch, IV, moves to be relieved as counsel of record for Defendant Miguel Mendez (“Client”). For the following reasons, the motion is GRANTED.

“The attorney in an action or special proceeding may be changed at any time before or after judgment or final determination . . . [u]pon the order of the court, upon the application of either client or attorney, after notice from one to the other.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 284.)