NGUYEN vs NGUYEN BINH KHIEM, LLC, et al.

24CV015755: NGUYEN vs NGUYEN BINH KHIEM, LLC, et al. 01/28/2026 Hearing on Motion to be Relieved as Counsel in Department 25

Tentative Ruling

NOTICE:

Consistent with Local Rule 1.06(B), any party requesting oral argument on any matter on this calendar must comply with the following procedure:

To request limited oral argument, on any matter on this calendar, you must call the Law and Motion Oral Argument Request Line at (916) 874-2615 by 4:00 p.m. the Court day before the hearing and advise opposing counsel. At the time of requesting oral argument, the requesting party shall leave a voice mail 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 it has notified the opposing party of its intention to appear and that opposing party may appear via Zoom using the Zoom link and Meeting ID indicated below. If no request for oral argument is made, the tentative ruling becomes the final order of the Court.

Unless ordered to appear in person by the Court, parties may appear remotely either telephonically or by video conference via the Zoom video/audio conference platform with notice to the Court and all other parties in accordance with Code of Civil Procedure §367.75. Although remote participation is not required, the Court will presume all parties are appearing remotely for non-evidentiary civil hearings.

The Department 25 Zoom Link is https://saccourt-ca-gov.zoomgov.com/my/sscdept25 and the Zoom Meeting ID is 161 1342 1868. To appear on Zoom telephonically, call (833) 568-8864 and enter the Zoom Meeting ID referenced above. NO COURTCALL APPEARANCES WILL BE ACCEPTED.

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

24CV015755: NGUYEN vs NGUYEN BINH KHIEM, LLC, et al. 01/28/2026 Hearing on Motion to be Relieved as Counsel in Department 25

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 forward the form to the Court Reporter’s Office and an official reporter will be provided.

TENTATIVE RULING The motion of Counsel Jonthan Sanders (“Counsel”) to be relieved as counsel for Defendants and Cross-Complainants Nguyen Binh Khiem, LLC, Khiem Binh Nguyen, Thu Ha Thi Nguyen, and Kim Thi Thien Nguyen (“Clients”) is UNOPPOSED and GRANTED. On December 4, 2025, at Counsel’s request, the Court an order to advance the time to hear the instant motion to be relieved as counsel. Counsel filed an amended motion on December 15, 2025, in accordance with the deadline set forth in the Court’s order.

Counsel has filed a declaration in support of the motion stating the following: “Clients are all in longstanding, material breach of several provisions of [Counsel’s] legal services agreement. Clients do not reliably communicate with [Counsel] or meaningfully participate in case handling as required for effective case management and representation. [Counsel] urgently believes ethical and diligent representation of Clients is no longer possible. Clients have by omission and silence undermined legal strategy and objectives.

Clients are aware that [Counsel’s] representation must continue until ordered by the Court and are abusing [Counsel’s] ethical requirement to continue service in the interim. Individual Clients will not voluntarily terminate services. LLC Client cannot self represent and otherwise communicates no intent to replace [Counsel].” Counsel’s supporting declaration and the corresponding proof of service indicate the papers in support of this motion have been served via mail on Clients at their last known addresses.

The Court has received no communication on this matter from Clients. No opposition has been 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, fn.4.) The motion is therefore GRANTED. As a limited liability company may not represent itself, Defendant Nguyen Binh Khiem, LLC should immediately seek legal advice regarding representation. Although the motion is granted, the Court shall not sign the proposed order submitted with the moving papers.

While the proposed order notifies Clients of the hearing on Plaintiff Tam Nguyen’s (“Plaintiff”) Motion to for Leave to Amend Second Amended Complaint on March 11, 2026, the mandatory settlement conference on July 30, 2026, and the trial on September 15, 2026, the proposed order does not inform Clients of the hearings on Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Further Responses to Special Interrogatories and Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Responses to

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO

24CV015755: NGUYEN vs NGUYEN BINH KHIEM, LLC, et al. 01/28/2026 Hearing on Motion to be Relieved as Counsel in Department 25

Request for Production of Documents (Set One) both scheduled for March 4, 2026. (See California Rules of Court, rule 3.1362, subd. (e) [“The order must specify all hearing dates scheduled in the action or proceeding, including the date of trial, if known”].) The Court notes that it appears these motions and hearings were noticed after Counsel filed the instant Motion and proposed Order. Counsel shall file a revised proposed order providing the relevant deadlines. Once the Court signs the revised proposed order, it shall be effective upon the filing of the proof of service of the signed order upon Clients. This minute order is effective immediately. No formal order or other notice is required. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1019.5; Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1312.)