IN THE MATTER OF: ONWURAH

26CV183413: IN THE MATTER OF: ONWURAH 08/24/2026 Hearing on Motion to Compel Discovery (not "Further Discovery") filed by Ikechukwu Onwurah (Petitioner) CRS# 198857910867 in Department 15

Tentative Ruling - 08/24/2026 Peter Borkon

The Motion to Compel Discovery (Not Further Discovery) filed by Ikechukwu Onwurah on 04/30/2026 is Denied.

On 4/23/2026, Ikechukwu Onwurah (“Petitioner”) commenced this action by filing a Petition to Compel Records related to a criminal investigation and related administrative review conducted by Oakland Police Department and other public agencies named in the petition. Petitioner alleges that Respondents Oakland Police Department (“OPD”), Alameda County District Attorney’s Office (“ACDA”), and California Department of Social Services (“DSS”) failed to respond, or failed to adequately respond, to various records requests that Petitioner submitted in 2025. The Court construes the filing as a petition for a writ of mandate compelling the production of records pursuant to the California Public Records Act (“CPRA”).

On 4/30/2026, Petitioner filed this motion to compel all Respondents to produce “complete and unredacted records relating to the investigation described herein.” Although presented as a motion to compel discovery responses, this motion seeks the ultimate relief requested in the petition, i.e., the production of records maintained by the respondent agencies. Petitioner did not serve new requests for discovery pursuant to the California Civil Discovery Act. (Code Civ. Proc. § 2010.010 et seq.)

OPD, DSS, and ACDA independently opposed the motion. Respondents’ oppositions describe the respective agencies’ responses to Petitioner’s records requests (see Declarations of Alisha Banda, Lizette Chan, and Catherine Kobal.)

The Court is unaware of relevant legal authority that would permit it, by this motion to compel, to grant the relief requested by Petitioner. The information and evidence presented in Respondents’ oppositions, if presented in a motion for summary judgment or some other evidentiary format, may provide a more appropriate mechanism to address the merits of the petition.

For the foregoing reasons, the motion is DENIED.