DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
22VECV01096·la·Civil·Civil Litigation
Hearing todayGRANTED. Defendant Afsaneh Safaei is dismissed with prejudice from this action.

Gates v Warner Center

Motion for Terminating Sanctions

Hearing date
Sep 3, 2026
Department
W
Judge
Prevailing
Defendant

Motion type

Browse all Motion for Sanctions rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffGates
DefendantWarner Center
DefendantAfsaneh Safaei
DefendantRoss Morgan
DefendantTopa Insurance

Ruling

(Van Nuys Courthouse East: Dept. W) September 3, 2026 DEPARTMENT W LAW AND MOTION RULINGS

22VECV01096 Gates v Warner Center Tentative ruling: Defendant Safaei's Motion for Terminating Sanctions: Grant. Defendant Afsaneh Safaei is dismissed with prejudice from this action. No opposition was filed. Plaintiff has disregarded her discovery obligations. This case has now been pending for nearly four years, yet Plaintiff has repeatedly failed to provide the discovery necessary for Defendant to prepare a meaningful defense. (SC Decl., P.2.) The record reflects a persistent pattern of discovery abuse rather than an isolated discovery dispute.

Id. Plaintiff has failed to produce evidence supporting her alleged damages, failed to produce recordings and other documents she acknowledged existed and supported her claims, required multiple deposition notices and two Court orders before appearing for deposition, refused to answer numerous questions at her court-ordered deposition. The court recently had occasion to, yet again, order her to respond to five discovery requests to which there no response. This is a pattern which is reflected in the other terminating motions by defendants Ross Morgan, Warner Center, and Topa Insurance. | Home -->)" -->

Cited authorities

Extracting citations from the ruling text…
Verify against the source PDF — LLM extraction may miss or mis-normalize citations.

Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities

Ask about this ruling

Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”

Answers reference only this ruling's text. Not legal advice — always verify against the source PDF.

Find similar rulings

Source

Share