INDONG ADVANCED MATERIALS, INC vs GREEN ENERGY GLOBAL, INC, AN ARIZONA CORPORATION, et al.

23CV005172: INDONG ADVANCED MATERIALS, INC vs GREEN ENERGY GLOBAL, INC, AN ARIZONA CORPORATION, et al. 08/19/2026 Hearing on Motion to Compel Responses to Special Interrogatories to Indong Advanced Materials, Inc., Set One in Department 8D

Tentative Ruling

NOTICE:

Consistent with Local Rule 1.06(B), any party requesting oral argument on any matter on this calendar must comply with the following procedure:

To request limited oral argument, on any matter on this calendar, you must call the Department 8D Oral Argument Request Line at (916) 874-7719 by 4:00 p.m. the Court day before the hearing and advise opposing counsel. At the time of requesting oral argument, the requesting party shall leave a voice mail message: a) identifying themselves as the party requesting oral argument; b) indicating the specific matter/motion for which they are requesting oral argument; and c) confirming that it has notified the opposing party of its intention to appear and that opposing party may appear via Zoom using the Zoom link and Meeting ID indicated below. If no request for oral argument is made, the tentative ruling becomes the final order of the Court.

Unless ordered to appear in person by the Court, parties may appear remotely either telephonically or by video conference via the Zoom video/audio conference platform with notice to the Court and all other parties in accordance with Code of Civil Procedure §367.75. Although remote participation is not required, the Court will presume all parties are appearing remotely for non-evidentiary civil hearings.

The Department 8D Zoom Link is https://saccourt-ca-gov.zoomgov.com/j/16113421868 and the Zoom Meeting ID is 161 1342 1868. To appear on Zoom telephonically, call (833) 568-8864 and enter the Zoom Meeting ID referenced above. NO COURTCALL APPEARANCES WILL BE ACCEPTED.

Parties requesting services of a court reporter will need to arrange for private court reporter services at their own expense, pursuant to Government code §68086 and California Rules of Court, Rule 2.956. Requirements for requesting a court reporter are listed on the Court Reporter Services webpage available on the Sacramento Superior Court website at https://saccourt.ca.gov/general-information/court-reporter-services-transcripts. Parties may contact Court- Approved Official Reporters Pro Tempore by utilizing the list of Court Approved Official Reporters Pro Tempore available at https://saccourt.ca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/227/639084034465370000.

A Stipulation and Appointment of Official Reporter Pro Tempore (CV/E-206) is required to be signed by each party, the private court reporter, and the Judge prior to the hearing, if not using a

23CV005172: INDONG ADVANCED MATERIALS, INC vs GREEN ENERGY GLOBAL, INC, AN ARIZONA CORPORATION, et al. 08/19/2026 Hearing on Motion to Compel Responses to Special Interrogatories to Indong Advanced Materials, Inc., Set One in Department 8D

reporter from the Court’s Approved Official Reporter Pro Tempore list.

Once the form is signed it must be filed with the clerk. If a litigant has been granted a fee waiver and requests a court reporter, the party must submit a Request for Court Reporter by a Party with a Fee Waiver (CV/E-211) and it must be filed with the clerk at least 10 days prior to the hearing or at the time the proceeding is scheduled if less than 10 days away. Once approved, the clerk will forward the form to the Court Reporter’s Office and an official reporter will be provided.

TENTATIVE RULING:

Defendant Rollie Peterson’s (“Defendant”) motion for an order compelling responses to Special Interrogatories, set one, propounded on Plaintiff Indong Advanced Materials, Inc. and request for sanctions is ruled upon as follows.

Plaintiff commenced this action by filing its Complaint on July 21, 2023, alleging five causes of action: (1) breach of contract; (2) fraud; (3) unjust enrichment; (4) professional negligence; and (5) declaratory relief. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant Green Energy Global, Inc. (“GEGI”) was to assign Plaintiff mining rights to 900,000 metric tons of lithium in Bolivia. (Compl. ¶¶ 45, 55.) Plaintiff alleges that GEGI never had the mining rights, fraudulently induced the subject contracts and stole $10 million from Plaintiff. (Compl. ¶¶ 33, 37.) In addition to GEGI, Plaintiff named GEC Exploration, Inc. (“GEC”), and Donald Demery as Trustee of Quantum Trust (“Quantum”), Muhammed Khan, Defendant Victoria Choi’s and Jeffrey Thoreson, Lucia Kim, Defendant Peterson, Tae Joo Yi, Kwon Do Kang, and Bae, Kim & Lee, LLC (“BKL”) as defendants.

Pertinent to this motion, Defendant’s counsel represents that on July 1, 2025 he propounded and served Defendant’s first set of special interrogatories on Plaintiff. (See Declaration of David S. Barrett, ¶ 1, Exhibit 1.) While Defendant’s counsel agreed to provide an extension to September 30, 2025 for Plaintiff to provide responses to the subject discovery, at the time of filing this motion, no responses were provided. (Id., at ¶ 3.) Defendant now moves for an order compelling Plaintiff to serve responses to the subject discovery and for monetary sanctions in the amount of $760.00.

Plaintiff opposes, arguing that it has now (on July 27, 2026) served responses to the subject discovery and thus this motion is moot. (Opposition at 1:23-26; Declaration of James Kim at ¶ 2.) However, service of responses after the motion was filed and prior to

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO

23CV005172: INDONG ADVANCED MATERIALS, INC vs GREEN ENERGY GLOBAL, INC, AN ARIZONA CORPORATION, et al. 08/19/2026 Hearing on Motion to Compel Responses to Special Interrogatories to Indong Advanced Materials, Inc., Set One in Department 8D

the hearing does not moot the motion. Nor do the authorities cited by Plaintiff (i.e., California Rules of Court, rule 3.1348 subdivision (a) and Sinaiko Healthcare Consulting, Inc. v. Pacific Healthcare Consultants (2007) 148 Cal.App.4th 390), provide any support for finding this motion moot. Rather, a motion is “made” when it is filed and served. (Code Civ. Proc. § 1005.5.) Defendant is entitled to an order even if responses are served after the motion was filed. The content of any response served after the motion was filed is not before the Court. Thus, this motion cannot be considered moot within the meaning of section 1005.5 and Plaintiffs argument in this regard is rejected.

The motion to compel responses is GRANTED. Plaintiff shall provide verified responses, without objection, no later than September 2, 2026. If Plaintiff has already served such responses, it is not necessary for them to served again.

Defendant’s request for sanctions is denied as the notice of motion failed to comply with Code of Civil Procedure section 2023.040 which requires that “[a] request for sanctions shall, in the notice of motion, identify every person, party, and attorney against whom the sanction is sought, and specify the type of sanction sought.” (Code Civ. Proc. § 2023.040.) Here, the notice of motion simply states that Defendant will “move this Court for an order compelling responses to Special Interrogatories, Set One, propounded on Plaintiff, as well as a request for monetary sanctions in the amount of $760.00.” (Notice of Motion at 1:27-2:2.)

Thus, Defendant’s notice of motion fails to identify with specificity “every person, party and attorney against whom the sanction is sought.” Further, given that Plaintiff’s “opposition” does not argue that responses are not required to the subject discovery, the Court finds that the motion’s request for an order compelling response is essentially unopposed on the merits and thus, does not warrant sanctions. (See Code of Civil Procedure section 2030.290[1] [“The court shall impose a monetary sanction under Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 2023.010) against any party, person, or attorney who unsuccessfully makes or opposes a motion to compel a response to interrogatories . . . .”] (emphasis added).)

However, further failure to respond to timely respond to discovery may result in the imposition of sanctions for misuse of the discovery process. (Code of Civil Procedure section 2023.010.)

The minute order is effective immediately. No formal order pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 3.1312 or further notice is required.

[1] The Court also notes that the notice of motion is deficient with respect to sanctions

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO

23CV005172: INDONG ADVANCED MATERIALS, INC vs GREEN ENERGY GLOBAL, INC, AN ARIZONA CORPORATION, et al. 08/19/2026 Hearing on Motion to Compel Responses to Special Interrogatories to Indong Advanced Materials, Inc., Set One in Department 8D

under this section, as Defendant cites to Code of Civil Procedure section 2031.300, which governs responses to demands for inspection, which are not before the Court in this motion.