GLOBAL NETWORK INVESTMENTS, LLC v. WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.

this action, Palka should be completely exempt from being deposed by Plaintiff. Thus, the Court finds Palka's request to be entirely excused from being deposed by Plaintiff legally unsupported and unpersuasive.

As to Palka's request that the Court issue a protective order limiting the scope of Palka's deposition to just matter relevant to the Complaint in this matter, the Court does not find Palka has shown good cause for a protective order preemptively limiting the scope of Palka's deposition. No deposition of Palka has been held, and the law requires Palka to answer relevant deposition questions to the best of Palka's personal knowledge - there is no need for the Court to impose a protective order to that effect. Palka presents no legal authority mandating the Court find otherwise. Furthermore, the Court is not satisfied that the typical tools afforded deponents and their counsel in depositions - such as objections, including objections as to relevancy - are insufficient to ensure Palka only provides responses to questions relevant to this action.

Given these circumstances, the Court finds that Palka has failed to show good cause for a sweeping protective order prohibiting the deposition of Palka entirely or limiting the scope of questions allowed at the deposition at this time. The Court trusts the parties are able to discuss and work out parameters for the deposition between themselves. Accordingly, the Motion is DENIED.

C. Sanctions

"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 for a protective order, unless it finds that the one subject to the sanction acted with substantial justification or that other circumstances make the imposition of the sanction unjust." (Code Civ. Proc., Sec. 2025.420.) The Court imposes $250.00 in sanctions against defense counsel for bringing the instant unsuccessful motion.

D. Conclusion & Order

Based on the foregoing, Defendant Cory Palka's Motion for Protective Order is DENIED. The Court imposes $250.00 in sanctions against defense counsel for bringing the unsuccessful motion payable to Plaintiff within 30 days of this Court's order. Moving party is ordered to give notice.

CASE NAME: GLOBAL NETWORK INVESTMENTS, LLC v. WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.

PLAINTIFF'S EX PARTE APPLICATION TO CONSOLIDATE THIS ACTION WITH THE UNLAWFUL DETAINER ACTION NO. 25SMUD02170. Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 166 (a)(1), the Court will not entertain oral argument for ex parte application for relief.

Code of Civil Procedure section 1048 states, in pertinent part: "When actions involving a common question of law or fact are pending before the court, it may order a joint hearing or trial of any or all the matters in issue in the actions; it may order all the actions consolidated and it may make such orders concerning proceedings therein as may tend to avoid unnecessary costs or delay." (Code Civ. Proc., Sec. 1048, subd. (a).)

Here, the Court finds Plaintiff has not followed the proper procedure for a motion to consolidate pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1048. Indeed, "[a] motion to consolidate two or more cases may be noticed and heard after the cases, initially filed in different departments, have been related into a single department, or if the cases were already assigned to that department." (L.A. Sup.Ct. Rule 3.3(g).) The Court finds the moving party has failed to establish the cases are related pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 3.3000. As such, the unlawful detainer action is not pending before this Court and the ex parte application is DENIED. Moving party is to give notice.

Case Number: 25STCV23413 Hearing Date: August 21, 2026 Dept: 512

HEARING DATE: Fri., August 21, 2026 JUDGE /DEPT: Mkrtchyan/512 CASE NAME: Clark v. Notting Hill Music (UK), et al. COMPL. FILED: 08-06-25 CASE NUMBER: 25STCV23413 FAC FILED: 03-18-26 NOTICE: OK PROCEEDINGS: MOTION TO QUASH SERVICE OF SUMMONS MOVING PARTY: Specially Appearing Defendant Notting Hill Music Masters, LLC RESP. PARTY: Plaintiff Dominique Lashawn Clark MOTION TO QUASH SERVICE (CCP Sec. 418.10))

TENTATIVE RULING: Specially Appearing Defendant Notting Hill Music Masters, LLC's Motion to Quash Service of Summons for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction is GRANTED as to the request to quash the 5/20/26 Proof of Service filed in this matter. The Proof of Service filed on May 20, 2026, is hereby STRICKEN.