DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
25CV129063·alameda·Civil·Discovery Dispute
Hearing 3 months agoCONTINUED

FATIMA vs LUCID GROUP, INC.

Motion to Compel Further Discovery Responses

Hearing date
Jun 4, 2026
Department
520
Prevailing
N/A
Next hearing
Jun 11, 2026

Motion type

Browse all Motion to Compel Further Responses rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffIraj Fatima
DefendantLUCID GROUP, INC.

Ruling

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ALAMEDA 25CV129063: FATIMA vs LUCID GROUP, INC. 06/04/2026 Hearing on Motion to Compel Further Discovery Responses filed by Iraj Fatima (Plaintiff) CRS# 899453246323 in Department 520 Tentative Ruling - 06/03/2026 Jamilah A. Jefferson Matter is continued to be heard with pending motion on June 11, 2026. The Hearing on Motion to Compel Further Discovery Responses filed by Iraj Fatima (Plaintiff) CRS# 899453246323 scheduled for 06/04/2026 is continued to 06/11/2026 at 10:00 AM in Department 520 at Hayward Hall of Justice.

NOTICE: This tentative ruling will automatically become the court’s final order on June 4, 2026 unless, by no later than 4:00 P.M. on June 3, 2026, a party to the action notifies BOTH: 1) the court by emailing Dept520@alameda.courts.ca.gov; AND 2) all opposing counsel or self- represented parties (by telephone or email) that the party is contesting this tentative ruling. The subject line (RE:) of the email must state: “Request for CONTESTED HEARING: [the case name], [number].” When a party emails to contest a tentative ruling, the party must identify the specific holding(s) within the ruling they wish to contest via oral argument.

The court does not provide court reporters for hearings in civil departments. A party who wants a record of the proceedings must engage a private court reporter. (Local Rule 3.95.) Any privately retained court reporter must also participate via video conference. Their email must be provided to the court at the time the Notice of Contest is emailed. ALL CONTESTED LAW AND MOTION HEARINGS ARE CONDUCTED VIA REMOTE VIDEO unless an in person appearance is required by the court. Invitations to participate in the video proceeding will be sent by the court upon receipt of timely notice of contest.

A party may give email notice that they will appear in court in person for the hearing, however all other counsel/parties and the JUDGE MAY APPEAR REMOTELY.

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