Motion To Compel Plaintiff And Cross-Defendant Aumet, Inc.'S Further Reponses To Requests For Admission, Set One, Special Interrogatories, Set One, And Requests For Production Of Douments, Set One
Browse all Motion to Compel Further Responses rulings statewide →
SF Superior Court - Law & Motion / Discovery Dept 302 - CGC23604156 - September 15, 2025 Hearing date: September 15, 2025 Case number: CGC23604156 Case title: AUMET, INC. VS. MOUSTAFA ASHRAF ABDELGHANI MOHAMMED SHAABAN Case Number: | | CGC23604156 | Case Title: | | AUMET, INC. VS. MOUSTAFA ASHRAF ABDELGHANI MOHAMMED SHAABAN | Court Date: | | 2025-09-15 09:00 AM | Calendar Matter: | | Motion To Compel Plaintiff And Cross-Defendant Aumet, Inc.'S Further Reponses To Requests For Admission, Set One, Special Interrogatories, Set One, And Requests For Production Of Douments, Set One | Rulings: | | On the Law & Motion/Discovery calendar for September 15, 2025, line 8. DEFENDANT MOUSTAFA SHAABAN'S Motion To Compel Plaintiff And Cross-Defendant Aumet, Inc.'s Further Reponses To Requests For Admission, Set One, Special Interrogatories, Set One, And Requests For Production Of Douments, Set One.
Defendant's Motion to Compel Plaintiff and Cross-Defendant Aumet, Inc.'s Further Reponses is DENIED. First, defendant filed an improper stacked discovery motion. The single motion seeks further responses to the requests for admissions, special interrogatories, and requests for production of documents. Movant should have filed three motions. (See CRC 3.112(a), (c) [format of motions].)
Second, movant's separate statements do not comply with CRC 3.1345(c) ["A separate statement is a separate document filed and served with the discovery motion that provides all the information necessary to understand each discovery request and all the responses to it that are at issue."] Here, plaintiff objected to the preface, definitions, and instructions in defendant's discovery requests. The separate statements do not include that information. Moreover, defendant failed to provide copies of the discovery requests so the court has no way to even evaluate the merits of these objections. The request for sanctions is denied.
For the 9:00 a.m. calendar, all attorneys and parties may appear in Department 302 remotely or in person. Remote hearings will be conducted by videoconference using Zoom. (Dept. 302 Zoom ID 160 409 7690; Passcode 516287.) To appear remotely at the hearing, go to the court's website at sfsuperiorcourt.org under "Online Services," navigate to "Tentative Rulings," and click on the appropriate link, or dial the corresponding phone number.
Any party who contests a tentative ruling must send an email to contestdept302tr@sftc.org with a copy to all other parties by 4pm stating, without argument, the portion(s) of the tentative ruling that the party contests. The subject line of the email shall include the line number, case name and case number. The text of the email shall include the name and contact information, including email address, of the attorney or party who will appear at the hearing.
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”
Counsel for the prevailing party is required to prepare a proposed order which repeats verbatim the substantive portion of the tentative ruling and must email it to contestdept302tr@sftc.org prior to the hearing even if the tentative ruling is not contested.
The court no longer provides a court reporter in the Law & Motion Department. Parties may retain their own reporter, who may appear in the courtroom or remotely. A retained reporter must be a California certified court reporter (CSR), for only a CSR's transcript may be used in California courts. If a CSR is being retained, include in your email all of the following: their name, CSR and telephone numbers, and their individual work email address. =(302/JMT) | |