Plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel R. Chio to Provide Further Responses to Request to Produce; Plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel T. Chio to Provide Further Responses to Request to Produce; Plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel R. Chio to Provide Further Responses to Special Interrogatories; Plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel T. Chio to Provide Further Responses to Special Interrogatories
Browse all Motion to Compel Further Responses rulings statewide →
TENTATIVE RULING(S) FOR May 22, 2026 Department S14 – Judge Winston Keh This court follows California Rules of Court, rule 3.1308(b) for tentative rulings. (See San Bernardino Superior Court Local Emergency Rule 8.) Tentative rulings for each law & motion will be posted on the internet (https://www.sb-court.org) by 3:00 p.m. on the court day immediately before the hearing.
You may appear in person at the hearing although remote appearance by CourtCall is preferred. (See www.sb-court.org/general-information/remote-access).
If you do not have Internet access or if you experience difficulty with the posted tentative ruling, you may obtain the tentative ruling by calling the department (S-14) at (909) 521-3495 or the Administrative Assistant (909) 708-8756, who prepared the ruling.
If you (or both parties) wish to submit on the Tentative, notify the other party and call the department by 4:00 pm the day before and your appearance may be excused unless the Court orders you to appear.
You must appear at the hearing if you are so directed by the court in the tentative ruling. Be prepared to address those issues set forth by the court in its ruling.
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, THE PREVAILING PARTY IS TO GIVE NOTICE OF THE
RULING.
Ishikawa v. Choi et al
__________________________________________________________________________
TENTATIVE RULING(S):
Motion:
(1) Plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel R. Chio to Provide Further Responses to Request to Produce
(2) Plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel T. Chio to Provide Further Responses to Request to Produce
(3) Plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel R. Chio to Provide Further Responses to Special Interrogatories
(4) Plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel T. Chio to Provide Further Responses to Special Interrogatories
Movant:
(1) Plaintiffs Fuji Merchandise Corp., Terumi Ishikawa, Yoko Ishikawa and Fuji Merchandise
Inc
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”
(2) Plaintiffs Fuji Merchandise Corp., Terumi Ishikawa, Yoko Ishikawa and Fuji Merchandise Inc
(3) Plaintiffs Fuji Merchandise Corp., Terumi Ishikawa, Yoko Ishikawa and Fuji Merchandise Inc
(4) Plaintiffs Fuji Merchandise Corp., Terumi Ishikawa, Yoko Ishikawa and Fuji Merchandise Inc
Respondent: (1) Defendant Raymond Hockshien Chio
(2) Defendant Tamami Ishikawa Chio
(3) Defendant Raymond Hockshien Chio
(4) Defendant Tamami Ishikawa Chio
Having considered all the moving papers submitted by both sides, the Court rules as
follows:
1. Grants Plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel R. Chio to Provide Further Responses to Request to
Produce in its entirety. All objections on the grounds of relevance, vagueness, ambiguity,
overly broad and/or “equally available” are without merit and overruled. Grants Plaintiffs’
request for sanctions against R. Chio and his attorneys of record, but at a reduced
amount of $2,000, joint and several.
2. Grants Plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel T. Chio to Provide Further Responses to Request to
Produce in its entirety. All objections on the grounds of relevance, vagueness, ambiguity,
overly broad and/or “equally available” are without merit and overruled. Grants Plaintiffs’
request for sanctions against T. Chio and her attorneys of record, but at a reduced
amount of $2,000, joint and several.
3. Grants Plaintiffs’ request to compel R. Chio for further responses to Special
Interrogatories in its entirety. All objections on the grounds of relevance, vagueness,
ambiguity, overly broad and/or “equally available” are without merit and overruled. Grants
Plaintiffs’ request for sanctions against R. Chio and his attorneys of record, but at a
reduced amount of $2,000, joint and several.
4. Grants Plaintiffs’ request to compel T. Chio for further responses to Special
Interrogatories in its entirety. All objections on the grounds of relevance, vagueness,
ambiguity, overly broad and/or “equally available” are without merit and overruled. Grants
Plaintiffs’ request for sanctions against T. Chio and her attorneys of record, but at a
reduced amount of $2,000, joint and several.
5. Defendants R. Chio and T. Chio shall provide further code-compliant further responses
on or before June 22, 2026. Counsels are ordered to read that applicable statute in
preparing their responses, and before filing their motions. To the extent Defendants are
asserting certain privileges, the code requires a privilege log to be provided.
6. Monetary sanctions described above shall be due to Plaintiffs’ counsel of record on or
before June 5, 2026.