DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
2015-1-CV-288617·santaclara·Civil·Civil
Hearing 13 days agoParties to appear

Vishal Gobhil et al. v. IDC Technologies, Inc. (“IDC”) et al.

Order of examination

Hearing date
Aug 11, 2026
Department
10
Prevailing
N/A

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffVishal Gobhil
DefendantIDC Technologies, Inc.

Ruling

SUPERIOR COURT, STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA Department 10 Honorable Jeffrey B. El-Hajj Blanca Than, Courtroom Clerk 191 North First Street, San Jose, CA 95113 Telephone: 408-882-2210

DATE: August 11, 2026 TIME: 9:00 A.M. / 9:01 A.M. To contest the ruling, you must call (408) 808-6856 before 4:00 P.M. You must also contact the other side before 4:00 P.M. to inform them that you plan to contest the ruling. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1308(a)(1); Local Rule 8.D.)

**Please specify the issue to be contested when calling the Court and counsel**

GRANTED IN PART: the court awards attorney fees in the amount of $16,406.10 ($21,729 minus $3,500 equals $18,229, and then reduced by 10 percent). Plaintiff is also awarded its costs of $712.94. Defendant forfeited any challenge to costs by not filing a motion to tax costs. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1700(b)(1).) The court will prepare the order. Line 7 25CV457236 Harold Davis et Click LINE 7 or scroll down for ruling. al. v. David Krause et al. Line 8 25CV458303 Jennifer Harris v. Click LINE 8 or scroll down for ruling. FCA US, LLC et al.

- oo0oo - 9:01 A.M. LINE # CASE # CASE TITLE RULING Line 1 2015-1-CV- Vishal Gobhil et al. Order of examination: parties to appear. 288617 v. IDC Technologies, Inc. (“IDC”) et al. Line 2 2015-1-CV- Vishal Gobhil et al. Order of examination: parties to appear. 288617 v. IDC Technologies, Inc. (“IDC”) et al. Line 3 22CV403398 Ha Thanh Nguyen Plaintiff’s counsel’s motion to withdraw as attorney of record: parties to v. Kelly La appear.

- oo0oo -

5

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