Mezzetti Financial Services vs. New Montrachet

9:00 25CV467015 Dmitri Dolgov,et.al. Plaintiff petitions this court to compel discovery of Defendant Jerry Kwok. Plaintiff 6-8 vs. Jerry Kwok seeks information of co-defendant Daisy Kwok. Daisy Kwok is Defendant Jerry Kwok’s daughter and personal service was accepted on her behalf. Plaintiff’s petition is GRANTED. Plaintiff requested information of defendant Jerry Kwok’s contact information regarding the financial institutions he is associated with. Plaintiff’s petition is GRANTED. Plaintiff requested responses from Defendant Jerry Kwok to be translated into English. Plaintiff’s petition is GRANTED. Therefore, Plaintiff’s petition to compel discovery of Defendant Jerry Kwok of Special Interrogatories Set One, Nos. 8, 21, and 22 and form interrogatories Set One, Nos. 2, 7, and 12.1 are GRANTED. Plaintiff’s motion for $4,200 in monetary damages is GRANTED.

Plaintiff petitions this court to compel discovery of Pinewood Capital. This court finds that identity of financial institutions are not inherently private. Plaintiff’s petition to compel discovery requested in Special Interrogatories Nos. 27 and 37 are GRANTED. Plaintiff requests contact information of all members and employees. This court finds the request to be overbroad—the privacy interests of Pinewood Capital members and employees outweigh the relevant information sought by Plaintiff. Plaintiff’s petition to compel discovery of Special Interrogatories Nos. 18,19, and 21 are DENIED. Plaintiff’s petition to compel management and ownership contact information is relevant and outweighs privacy interests. Plaintiff’s petition to compel discovery of Special Interrogatories Nos. 20, 44, 45, 46, and 47 are GRANTED. Monetary sanctions are DENIED.

Plaintiff petitions this court to compel discovery of Pacific Realty. Plaintiff request contact information related to financial institutions used by Pacific Realty. Such information is not protected by a company’s privacy interests. Plaintiff’s petition to compel discovery of Special Interrogatories Nos. 70, 82, and 103 are GRANTED. This court finds that Defendant Pacific Realty’s responses to Special Interrogatories Nos. 24-27 are sufficient. Plaintiff’s petition to compel discovery of Special Interrogatories Nos. 24-27 are DENIED. Defendant seeks leave to amend answer to change Defendants answer to Form Interrogatory 326.1, Request for Admission No. 8 from DENY to ADMIT. Defendant’s petition is GRANTED. Plaintiff petitions this court to compel further response to Form Interrogatory 326.1, Request for Admission No.

9. Defendant fails to identify documents, provide contact information, or specific facts to support its answer. Plaintiff’s petition to compel further discovery for Form Interrogatory 326.1, RFA No. 9 is GRANTED. Monetary sanctions are DENIED. 9:00 25CV478545 Thien Duong vs. No. Plaintiff moves this court for leave to file a second amended complaint. No 9 11 Tattoo Studio opposition was filed by Defendant. Motion for leave to amend and file a second amended complaint within 30 calendar days of the issuance of order is GRANTED. 9:00 26CV484107 Mezzetti Financial Court will hear oral arguments on the case. Court will take the case under 10-11 Services vs. New submission. Montrachet

4