Barrera vs. Toyota Motor Sales, USA Inc

Further, if service was by email, there is no declaration stating that the electronic service address is the client's current electronic service address as required under rule 3.1362.

Accordingly, Moving Attorney is ordered to provide updated proofs of service to the Court on or before the hearing date showing that Plaintiff was properly served with the moving papers either by mail or email. If service was by email, Moving Attorney shall provide a supplemental declaration stating that the electronic service address is the client’s current electronic service address as required by rule 3.1362(d)(2).

If Moving Attorney provides proof that the moving papers were properly and timely served on the client, the motion to be relieved will be GRANTED. The order relieving counsel will be effective upon counsel filing a proof of service of a copy of the signed order on the client and on all parties that have appeared in the case. (Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 3.1362(e).)

Moving Attorney to give notice.

5. 30-2025-01499688 1. Case Management Conference 2. Demurrer to Complaint Barrera vs. Toyota 3. Motion to Strike Portions of Complaint Motor Sales, USA Inc Defendant, Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc.’s demurrer and motion to strike directed at the Complaint of Plaintiffs David Barrera and Maria Barrera (ROA 33, 37) set for hearing on May 14, 2026, are MOOT.

A First Amended Complaint was filed on May 1, 2026. (ROA 87). When a plaintiff files an amended complaint after a demurrer or motion directed to the original complaint is filed, but before they are decided, the demurrer or motion becomes moot. (JKC3H8 v. Colton (2013) 221 Cal.App.4th 468, 477; State Compensation Ins. Fund v. Superior Court (2010) 184 Cal.App.4th 1124, 1130-1131; Sylmar Air Conditioning v. Pueblo Contracting Services, Inc. (2004) 122 Cal.App.4th 1049, 1054. “[A] plaintiff has a right to amend his or her pleading at any time before a responsive pleading is filed and even after a responsive pleading is filed up to the time of the hearing on the demurrer.” (Barton v.

Khan (2007) 157 Cal.App.4th 1216, 1221 [finding that trial court erred in refusing to accept the amended complaint for filing and explaining that the clerk should have accepted amended complaint filed three days before hearing on a demurrer to complaint, and had clerk done so, the hearing on the demurrer would have been taken off calendar].)

Accordingly, the hearing on May 14, 2026, is VACATED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

The Case Management Conference is CONTINUED to June 11, 2026 in Department C34 at 9:00 a.m.

The Court orders clerk to give notice.

6. 30-2024-01415362 1. Motion to Quash Discovery Subpoena

Vascular Imaging Based on applicable law, and for the reasons set forth herein, Defendants Advanced Cardiology Professionals, Inc vs. Center (“ACC”) and Syed J. Raza’s (“Dr. Raza”) (together, “Defendants”) Motion to Quash Advanced Cardiology Subpoena to Bank of America is GRANTED. Center