DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
2023-01343920·orange·Civil·Contract
Hearing 13 days agoDENIED

CINEMATIC CAPITAL CORP. VS. SAID

MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSES TO FORM INTERROGATORIES

Hearing date
Aug 11, 2026
Department
C32
Prevailing
Opposing Party

Motion type

Browse all Motion to Compel Further Responses rulings statewide →

Monetary amounts referenced

$2,500

Parties

PlaintiffCinematic Capital Corp.
DefendantMohamed Said

Ruling

Defendant is ORDERED to provide a response without objections and produce all documents responsive to Request No. 61 within 20 days of notice of this ruling.

Request Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 17, 40, 41, 42, and 43: Defendant responded to these Requests by stating that no responsive documents exist.

Defendant’s responses fail to satisfy the requirements of Code of Civil Procedure section 2031.230, which requires that a representation of inability to comply “affirm that a diligent search and a reasonable inquiry has been made in an effort to comply with that demand,” and “specify whether the inability to comply is because the particular item or category has never existed, has been destroyed, has been lost, misplaced, or stolen, or has never been, or is no longer, in the possession, custody, or control of the responding party.”

Defendant is ORDERED to provide a further response to Request Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 17, 40, 41, 42, and 43 which complies with section 2031.300 within 20 days of notice of this ruling.

Plaintiff’s request for sanctions is granted in the amount of $1,600.00, reflecting four hours of counsel’s time at $400/hour, payable within 30 days.

Plaintiff to give notice.

4. CINEMATIC CAPITAL CORP. MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSES TO FORM VS. SAID INTERROGATORIES

Defendant Mohamed Said’s Motion to Compel Further Responses to Form Interrogatories, set one, is DENIED.

Defendant and his counsel of record, jointly and severally, are ORDERED to pay sanctions in the amount of $2,500.

Defendant seeks to compel further responses to 11 interrogatories which have already been supplemented. The Court finds the issues addressed in the Motion have been resolved through the supplemental responses. Defendant fails to address the supplemental responses in his Motion despite attaching them as an exhibit. Defendant provides no reason why additional information beyond what was provided in the supplemental responses is warranted. Thus, the Court finds Defendant’s Motion is without substantial justification and sanctions are warranted against him and counsel. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.300(d).)

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