Ge v. Wu

Case: Ge v. Wu Case No. CV2025-2807 Hearing Date: May 19, 2026 Department Eleven 9:00 a.m.

Plaintiffs William W. Ge, Helen H. Wu, Wei Li, Jiaoming Chen, Ken Cong Wu, and Zhen Dai’s motion to compel further responses to special interrogatories and requests for admission (set one) is DENIED. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.300, 2033.290.) Plaintiffs failed to show “a reasonable and good faith attempt, either in person, by telephone, or by videoconference, to informally resolve each issue presented by the motion.” (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2016.040, subd. (a), 2030.300, subd. (b)(1), 2033.290, subd. (b)(1).)

Specifically, plaintiffs sent one meet and confer letter and failed to respond to defendants Zhong Wu and Nancy He Wu’s meet and confer letter until the day that they filed this motion. (Townsend v. Superior Court (1998) 61 Cal.App.4th 1431, 1434-1435 & 1439 [“the law requires that counsel attempt to talk the matter over, compare their views, consult, and deliberate”]; Tan decl., ¶¶ 6-8, Exhibit 4; Flaxman decl., ¶¶ 6-8, Exhibit B.)

The notice of motion does not provide notice of this Court’s tentative ruling system as required by Local Rule 11.2(b). Counsel for moving party, or the moving party if unrepresented by counsel, is ordered to notify the opposing party or parties immediately of the tentative ruling system.

If no hearing is requested, and no party appears at the hearing, this tentative ruling is effective immediately. No formal order pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 3.1312 or further notice is required.

4 of 7