Jacqueline Ramirez vs. General Motors, LLC

34-2021-00309302-CU-BC-GDS: Jacqueline Ramirez vs. General Motors, LLC 07/15/2026 Hearing on Motion to Compel Appearance and Testimony at Deposition in Department 8C

Tentative Ruling

NOTICE:

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that in Judge Richard C. Miadich’s absence, any oral arguments regarding this tentative ruling will be heard at 1:30 p.m. in Department 16B in the Tani G. Cantil-Sakauye Courthouse at 500 G Street, Sacramento, CA, the Hon. Shelleyanne W.L. Chang presiding.

Any party who wishes to contest the tentative ruling below must:

(1) request a hearing by calling the Law and Motion Oral Argument Request Line at (916) 874-8380, by 4:00 p.m. the Court day before the noticed hearing date, and leave a voicemail message (a) identifying themselves as the party requesting oral argument; (b) indicating the specific matter/motion for which they are requesting oral argument; and (c) confirming that they have notified the opposing party of their intention to appear; and

(2) advise the opposing party of the location and time of hearing pursuant to Local Rule 1.06.

If a hearing is not requested by 4:00 p.m. on the Court day before the noticed hearing date, the tentative ruling will become the final order of the Court.

If a hearing is requested, the Court prefers in-person attendance by the parties. However, parties may appear by Zoom unless the Court specifically orders in-person attendance. Parties choosing to appear by Zoom are reminded, however, that a Zoom appearance is still a formal appearance before the Court. Parties appearing via Zoom should do so from a quiet location, free from undue distractions, and wear attire suitable for an in-person court appearance.

The parties may join the Zoom session for hearing on the tentative ruling by audio and/or video through the following link:

https://saccourt-ca-gov.zoomgov.com/j/16159979406

SIP Address:

34-2021-00309302-CU-BC-GDS: Jacqueline Ramirez vs. General Motors, LLC 07/15/2026 Hearing on Motion to Compel Appearance and Testimony at Deposition in Department 8C

16159979406@sip.zoomgov.com

(833) 568-8864

ID: 16159979406

Parties requesting services of a court reporter will need to arrange for private court reporter services at their own expense, pursuant to Government code §68086 and California Rules of Court, Rule 2.956. Requirements for requesting a court reporter are listed in the Policy for Official Reporter Pro Tempore available on the Sacramento Superior Court website at https://www.saccourt.ca.gov/court-reporters/docs/crtrp-6a.pdf. Parties may contact Court- Approved Official Reporters Pro Tempore by utilizing the list of Court Approved Official Reporters Pro Tempore available at https://www.saccourt.ca.gov/court-reporters/docs/crtrp- 13.Pdf

A Stipulation and Appointment of Official Reporter Pro Tempore (CV/E-206) is required to be signed by each party, the private court reporter, and the Judge prior to the hearing, if not using a reporter from the Court’s Approved Official Reporter Pro Tempore list.

Once the form is signed it must be filed with the clerk. If a litigant has been granted a fee waiver and requests a court reporter, the party must submit a Request for Court Reporter by a Party with a Fee Waiver (CV/E-211) and it must be filed with the clerk at least 10 days prior to the hearing or at the time the proceeding is scheduled if less than 10 days away. Once approved, the clerk will be forward the form to the Court Reporter’s Office and an official reporter will be provided.

TENTATIVE RULING:

Defendant General Motors LLC’s (“GM”) Motion to Compel Plaintiff’s Appearance and Testimony and Deposition is UNOPPOSED[1] and GRANTED.

This is a Lemon Law action arising out of Plaintiff Jacqueline Ramirez’s (“Plaintiff”) purchase of 2014 Chevrolet Cruze. The operative First Amended Complaint alleges causes of action for violations of the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act and fraudulent inducement-concealment. Trial is scheduled for February 23, 2027.

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO

34-2021-00309302-CU-BC-GDS: Jacqueline Ramirez vs. General Motors, LLC 07/15/2026 Hearing on Motion to Compel Appearance and Testimony at Deposition in Department 8C

GM served Plaintiff with a Notice of Deposition for Plaintiff to be deposed on May 26, 2026, at 9:00 a.m. Plaintiff did not serve an objection, respond, or engage in any correspondence with GM regarding alternative deposition dates. (Decl. of Jonathan Caceres ISO Mot. ¶ 3, Ex. A.) On May 29, 2026, GM’s counsel emailed Plaintiff’s counsel to arrange a deposition date. (Id. at ¶ 3, Ex. B.) Plaintiff did not respond to that correspondence or another email sent by GM’s counsel on June 5, 2026. (Id. at ¶ 3.) To date, no deposition date has been scheduled, and Plaintiff’s counsel has not responded to any attempt from GM to secure a deposition date. (Ibid.)

GM now moves for an order compelling the appearance and testimony of Plaintiff at deposition and for monetary sanctions.

No opposition to the motion was filed. A party’s failure to oppose a motion is construed as a concession on the merits of the motion. (See D.I. Chadbourne, Inc. v. Superior Court (1964) 60 Cal.2d 723, 728, n.4.)

GM’s motion is granted. Plaintiff shall provide GM with available dates for her deposition no later than July 27, 2026, and the deposition shall occur no later than August 14, 2026, unless GM agrees to a later date memorialized in writing.

Monetary sanctions are not awarded since the motion is considered unopposed.

The minute order is effective immediately. No formal order pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 3.1312 or further notice is required.

[1] The Court declines to consider Plaintiff’s untimely opposition, which was filed on July 7, 2026, three court days after oppositions were due to be filed under Code of Civil Procedure section 1005, subdivision (b), i.e., July 1, 2026. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1300(d).)