Preview
2015-1-CV-278059
Santa Clara — Civil
M Reynoso
Peyman H. Rad, Esq. (SBN 184190)
RAD LAW GROUP, APLC Electronically Filed
940 Saratoga Ave, Ste. 260
by Superior Court of CA,
San Jose, CA 95129
Telephone: (408) 241-5300 County of Santa Clara,
Facsimile: (408) 241-5301 on 7/7/2020 5:17 PM
Reviewed By: M Reynoso
Attomeys for Plaintiffs, Case #2015-1-CV-278059
KAMRAN GHIASSI, et al. Envelope: 4563495
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA
KAMRAN GHIASSI, SANAM JIRBANDEI Case No.: 2015-1-CV-278059
dba RAZI FARSI SCHOOL AND ART
10 ACADEMY,
PLAINTIFF’S NOTICE OF MOTION
11 Plaintiffs, AND MOTION FOR ORDER DEEMING
ADMITTED TRUTH OF FACTS AND
12 GENUINENESS OF DOCUMENTS
PROPOUNDED TO DEFENDANT
MEHDI BAGHERI, AND REQUEST
13
MEHDI BAGHERI, FOR MONETARY SANCTIONS;
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND
14 Defendant. AUTHORITES; AND DECLARATION
OF PEYMAN H. RAD, ESQ.
15
Date: 10/01/2020
16 Time: 9:00 am
Dept: €& 21
Judge: Hon. Mesreer’-Feten Thang Barrett
17
18
19
TO ALL DEFENDANTS AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:
20
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on October 01, 2020 ,at_9:00 am _m., in
21 21
Department of the above entitled Court, located 191 N. First Street, San Jose, CA 95113,
22
Plaintiff KAMRAN GHIASSI, et al. (collectively referred to as “Plaintiffs”), by and through their
23
attorney of record, will move for an order pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure Sections
24
2023.030 et seq. and 2033.280 that the truth of all matters specified and the genuineness of all
RAD LAW
SuessGROUP,
ae Sule APL(
50 1
‘ants as
PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE OF MOTION, MOTION, MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES, AND DECLARATION
OF PEYMAN H. RAD, ESQ
specified documents in Plaintiff's Request for Admissions, Set No. 1, served on Defendant and
Responding Party MEHDI BAGHERI (“Defendant”) on May 4, 2015 be deemed admitted, and for
monetary sanctions against Defendant and his attorney of record in the amount of $5,850.00.
The motion is made on the grounds that Defendant failed to serve timely responses to
Plaintiffs’ above-described Request for Admissions. This motion is based on the provisions of
California Code of Civil Procedure (C.C.P.) §§ 2023.030 et seq. and 2033.280, this Notice of
Motion, the attached Memorandum of Points and Authorities, the Declaration of Peyman H Rad.
Esq., the copies of the Request for Admissions attached hereto as Exhibit A, the complete files and
records of this action, and upon any such oral and documentary evidence as may be presented at
10 the hearing of the motion.
tn rj
11
12 Dated: July
_'
F, 2020
Peyman Rad, Esq.
13 Attorney for Plaintiffs
KAMRAN GHIASSI, et al
14
15
16
Li,
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
RAD LAWGROUP,
So APL 2
Seine
‘aa
PLAINTIFF'S NOTICEOF MOTION, MOTION, MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES, AND DECLARATION OF PEYMAN H. RAD, ESQ
TABLE OF CONTENTS
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES
I BACKGROUND ..........
0 PROCEDURAL HISTORY.
Ml. LEGAL ARGUMENT.
Pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure (C.C.P.) §§ 2033.280(b), the
Court Must order that the Genuineness of Documents and/or Truth of all
Matter Specified in Moving Party's Request for Admissions, Set No. 1 be
Deemed Admitted
Pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure (C.C.P.) § 2023.030, the Court
Must Impose a Monetary Sanction on the Party Whose Failure to Serve a
Timely Response Necessitated the Motion for Deemed Admissions 10
10 Iv. CONCLUSION: 10
DECLARATION 12
li
12
13
14
15)
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
RAD LAWGROUP, APL 3
‘Hosni 80
soe
PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE OF MOTION, MOTION, MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES, AND DECLARATION OF PEYMAN H. RAD, ESQ
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
STATUTES
California Code of Civil Procedure § 2023.030 sisson 1, 2, 10
California Code of Civil Procedure § 2033.210
California Code of Civil Procedure § 2033.220
California Code of Civil Procedure § 2033.230
California Code of Civil Procedure § 2033.280 seme L, 2,9, 10
10
i
12
13)
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
RAD LAW GROUP. APL 4
‘om, ona,
SeeStn 200
PLAINTIFF’S NOTICE OF MOTION, MOTION, MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES, AND DECLARATION OF PEYMAN H. RAD, ESQ
Memorandum of Points and Authorities
I. BACKGROUND
Plaintiffs Kamran Ghiassi and Sanam Jirbandei are husband and wife. In June 2014, Plaintiffs
founded Razi Academy for the purpose of promoting Persian culture, language, and to serve the
Iranian-American community in Northern California. Within a year of opening, Razi Academy had
earned a high degree of success, reputation, and respect from members of the Iranian-American
community in Northern California.
On or about January 12, 2015, Plaintiffs, on behalf of Razi Academy, entered into a written
contract with Defendant Mehdi Bagheri, who is a musician, for him to perform a musical
10 performance for a Persian New Year celebration and fundraiser at Razi Academy on March 28,
dT 2015. Pursuant to the terms of the contract, Defendant was obligated to give Plaintiffs written
12 notice of any change in the schedule or cancellation of the performance at least forty-five (45) days
13 in advance. The contract stipulated that in the event Defendant cancels the contract, he is required
14 to refund Razi Academy all sums received and compensate Plaintiffs for all damages and
15 associated expenses they incur as a result of Defendant’s cancellation. The contract also stated that
16 Defendant agreed to publicize the event on his personal social media page, and Plaintiffs agreed to
7 publicize the event on their website.
18 On or about January 21, 2015, Defendant contacted Plaintiff Jirbandei by phone. Jirbandei was
19 driving in her car with three other people. Because Jirbandei answered Defendant’s call using the
20 car’s Bluetooth Derndant 3 voice came over the speakers and the three other passengers could
24 hear Defendant speak, ‘Jirbandei specifically informed Defendant that she was driving with friends
22 in the car who could hear him. Despite this, Defendant told Jirbandei over the phone with the other
23 three passengers in the car that he would not cooperate and publish the event on his social media
24 page even though it was a term in the contract. Defendant also addressed Jirbandei in a loud and
RAD LAWGROUP, APL. 5
Saastooa
‘Savona Chve 26120
Sula 260
PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE OF MOTION, MOTION, MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES, AND DECLARATION OF PEYMAN H, RAD, ESQ
insulting tone, calling her a “lowlife” and a “vulgar” person and stating that he had been “warned”
by other people not to engage in any type of business relationship with Plaintiffs. This call, which
took place in front of Jirbandei’s three friends, caused her extreme emotional distress and
embarrassment.
On or about January 29, 2015, Plaintiff Ghiassi contacted Defendant by email and provided
Defendant with certain facts related to Razi Academy’s strong business success and Plaintiffs’
good reputation in the community. Plaintiff Ghiassi urged Defendant not to engage in any “cheap
talk” against Plaintiffs, and not talk to Plaintiffs in an insulting manner. Plaintiff Ghiassi then
suggested to Defendant that they put the phone incident behind them and act like “professionals”
10 and as “good role models” for others in the Persian community. Plaintiff hoped the parties could
11 continue with their contract in order to make the musical event “an amazing journey.”
12 Shortly thereafter, despite Ghiassi’s good faith attempt to remedy the situation and despite
13 Plaintiffs having already paid Defendant his upfront cost for the performance, Defendant replied to
14 Ghiassi’s email of January 29, 2015 by repeating his insulting language and calling Plaintiff
1S Jirbandei a “lowlife” and “vulgar” person. Defendant sent defamatory emails written in both
16 English and Farsi to Plaintiffs’ business email address which was accessible by many volunteers
17 and teachers associated with Razi Academy.
18 On February 4, 2015 at 11:27 a.m., Defendant wrote to Plaintiffs’ business email and
19 stated: “It is not [about] the money, the purpose is to teach you and people like you who are law
20 breakers, dishonest and are total crooks a lesson. [sic] I spend more money for my dogs visits to the
21 veterinarians than the money in question...” Defendant demanded full payment per the contract
22 for Razi Academy’s alleged breach when, however, the check had already been sent to Defendant.
23 To Plaintiff's immense embarrassment, Defendant’s email was sent to the common.
24 business email info@raziacademy.com and was seen by multiple people associated with the
RAD LAWGROUP. APL( 6
san
Seca at 20
PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE OF MOTION, MOTION, MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES, AND DECLARATION OF PEYMAN H. RAD, ESQ
Academy, including teachers and volunteers, all of whom use this email address to communicate
with parents, students, musicians and others. Defendant’s words and insinuations tarnished
Plaintiffs’ good reputation by implying that Plaintiffs were doing something dishonest, were
crooks, and were “law breakers.” Plaintiffs were rightfully concerned that anyone who saw
Defendant’s email would have second thoughts about associating with them.
Plaintiffs demanded an apology from Defendant for his rude and offensive remarks.
Plaintiffs told Defendant that they would proceed with their obligations under the contract and “put
everything behind” them if Defendant apologized. Instead of an apology, Defendant continued
insulting Plaintiffs. On or about February 4, 2015, Defendant sent Plaintiffs another email calling
10 Plaintiffs “law breakers” and “crooks.” Defendant told Plaintiffs that he wanted to “teach”
11 Plaintiffs a “lesson” and that Plaintiffs did not “deserve personal communication.” Defendant
12 wrote that he did not wish to proceed with the contract and that his only communication with
13 Plaintiffs going forward would be “through the court of law.” Defendant refused to perform and
14 refused to refund the deposit that had been paid to him.
15 Despite being paid under the terms of the contract, Defendant refused to fulfill his
16 contractual obligations. Defendant breached the contract on or about February 4, 2015, when he
17 indicated to Plaintiffs that he did not wish to proceed with the contract and stated that he did not
18 want to communicate with Plaintiffs.
19 Plaintiffs attempted to find a replacement musician for the performance scheduled for
20 March 28, 2015. However, no other musicians were willing or available to perform. Beginning on
21 or around January 21, 2015, Defendant contacted other musicians and several members of the
22 Iranian-American community, alleging that nobody should do business with Plaintiffs since they
23 were “crooks”, “law breakers”, and “villains.” Defendant also posted several comments on his
24 social media websites repeating the same accusations and allegations against Plaintiffs.
RAD LAWGROUP. APL( 7
en ‘Sone,
Suaarensve Sal 280
‘weser sone
PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE OF MOTION, MOTION, MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES, AND DECLARATION OF PEYMAN H. RAD, ESQ
II, PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Plaintiffs filed their complaint against Defendant on March 13, 2015. The complaint was
served on March 25, 2015. The complaint alleged claims for Breach of Contract; Breach of
Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing; Fraud and Intentional Misrepresentation; Unjust
Enrichment (restitution); Libel and Slander. Defendant filed his answer on April 13, 2015.
This motion arises from Plaintiffs’ Request for Admissions, Set No. 1, propounded to
Defendant on May 4, 2015 by service by mail. (Plaintiff's Decl., { 3.) The deadline to serve timely
responses was June 3, 2015, plus five days allotted for mailing. (Plaintiff’s Decl., § 4.) On May 20,
2015, Defendant filed a motion to strike Plaintiff's complaint under the anti-SLAPP statute.
10 (Plaintiff's Decl., 9 5.) On July 16, 2015, the Superior Court entered an order denying Defendant’s
11 anti-SLAPP motion. /d. Defendant timely filed a notice of appeal to the Sixth District Court of
12 Appeal. /d. On July 17, 2019, the Sixth District Court of Appeal affirmed the decision of the
13 Superior Court and denied Defendant’s motion to strike under the anti-SLAPP statute. (Plaintiff's
14 Decl., ¢ 6.) Since the Sixth District affirmed the denial of Defendant’s motion to strike, Plaintiffs
15 have been diligently waiting for Defendant’s response to the Requests for Admission. It has now
16 been over eleven months since the Sixth District’s decision, and Plaintiffs’ Requests for
17 Admissions remains unanswered. The deadline for Defendant to timely serve responses to
18 Plaintiffs’ Request for Admissions has now expired. (Plaintiff’s Decl., § 7.)
19 Plaintiff respectfully requests for this Court to order that the truth of any matters and the
20 genuineness of any documents specified in Plaintiffs’ Request for Admissions be deemed admitted,
21 and for the Defendant and her attorney to pay monetary sanctions in the amount of $5,850.00.
22 MW
23 i
24 it
RAD LAW GROUP, APL‘ 8
rca
‘Sone
Seis2 —
PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE OF MOTION, MOTION, MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES, AND DECLARATION OF PEYMAN H. RAD, ESQ
IILLEGAL ARGUMENT
a. Pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure (CCP) § 2033.280(b), the Court
Must order that the Genuineness of Documents and/or Truth of All Matter
Specified in Moving Party’s Request for Admissions Set No. 1 Be Deemed
Admitted,
If a party who has been served requests for admissions fails to serve a timely response, the
propounding party may move for an order that the genuineness of any documents and the truth of
any matters specified in the requests be deemed admitted. (Code Civ. Proc. § 2033.280(b) ). The
Court shall make the requested order for deemed admissions unless it finds that, before the hearing
on the motion, the party to whom the requests for admissions have been directed has served a
10 proposed response to the requests for admission that is in substantial compliance with CCP §§
1 2033.210-2033.230. (Code Civ. Proc. § 2033.280(c) ).
12 Here, Defendant failed to serve a timely response and instead filed an anti-SLAPP motion.
13 Plaintiff served Defendant with Request for Admissions, Set No. 1 on May 4, 2015. The expiration
14 date to serve timely responses was June 3, 2015. Defendant filed its anti-SLAPP motion on May
15 20, 2015. Defendant’s motion was denied, but Defendant filed a notice of appeal and forced
16 Plaintiffs to defend against the motion in the Sixth District Court of Appeal. Defendant was
17 ultimately defeated when the Sixth District affirmed the Superior Court’s decision to deny
18 Defendant’s anti-SLAPP motion. Plaintiffs’ complaint against Defendant remains undefeated.
19 The discovery process can resume now that the appeals process has completed, but
20 Plaintiffs’ Request for Admissions, Set One has remained unanswered over the past eleven months.
21 The discovery response deadline has now passed and Plaintiffs still have not received any response
22 or communication from Defendants. As a result, this Court must make the requested order that the
23 truth of any matters and the genuineness of any documents specified in the Request for Admissions
24 be deemed admitted.
RAD LAWGROUP, APL 9
SorSasnrocaave.
intec 68 Sule
—_——_
PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE OF MOTION, MOTION, MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES, AND DECLARATION OF PEYMAN H. RAD, ESQ
b. Pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure (C.C.P.) § 2023.030, the Court
Must Impose a Monetary Sanction on the Party Whose Failure to Serve a
Timely Response Necessitated the Motion for Deemed Admissions.
The Court must impose a CCP § 2023.030(a) monetary sanction on the party, attorney, or
both, whose failure to serve a timely response to requests for admission necessitated the motion for
deemed admissions. (Code Civ. Proc. § 2033.280(c) ), Here, the Defendant’s failure to serve any
responses (timely or otherwise) to Plaintiff's Request for Admission is a result of Defendant’s
denied motion to strike and subsequently burdensome appeal. As a result of Defendant’s failure to
respond to the Request for Admissions described above, and for misusing the Court system to bring
an appeal that was designed to cause Plaintiff great burden and financial hardship, Plaintiff has
10 necessarily incurred reasonable expenses in the amount of $5,850.00.
11 IV. CONCLUSION
12 The actions of Defendant and his attorney were brought in bad faith in an attempt to burden
13 Plaintiff with litigation costs in the hope that Plaintiff will cease pursuing the case due to the
14 financial and time burdens placed on Plaintiff and her attorney. This motion is warranted not only
15 because Defendant failed to serve timely responses to Plaintiffs’ request for admissions, but also
16 because Defendant caused undue delay of the case and caused Plaintiffs to incur unnecessary
17 expenses for (1) preparing and litigating in front of the Sixth District Court of Appeal for why
18 Defendant’s motion to strike should be denied, and (2) having to bring the current motion to admit
19 the truth of statements and genuineness of documents in Plaintiffs’ Request for Production, Set
20 One, that was served on Defendant over five years ago. Plaintiff therefore requests that the Court
21 order (1) for the genuineness of any documents and the truth of any matter specified in the
22 Requests for Admissions be deemed admitted, and (2) for Defendant, his attorney, or both, to pay
23 Plaintiff monetary sanctions in the amount of $5,850.00 for having to bring this motion.
24 i
RADLAWGROUP, APL 10.
Sine 08 1 280
a
PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE OF MOTION, MOTION, MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES, AND DECLARATION OF PEYMAN H. RAD, ESQ
Dated: July +, 2020 Any Peyman H.
Attorney
Rad, Esq.
Plaintiffs
+
KAMRAN GHIASSI, et al
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
RAD LAW
SanatconGROUP,
de ui APL‘
200 1L.
mae
PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE OF MOTION, MOTION, MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES, AND DECLARATION OF PEYMAN H. RAD, ESQ
DECLARATION
J, PEYMAN H. RAD, ESQ., declare as follows:
1 1am an attomey authorized to practice law before the Courts of this State, including this
Court.
Jam the attorney representing Plaintiffs in this matter. I have personal knowledge of the facts
to which I attest to herein, and if called to testify 1 could and would do so competently.
On May 4, 2015, I served Requests for Admissions Set No. 1 on Defendant by mail. A copy
of those Requests for Admissions, including Proof of Service, is attached as Exhibit A and
incorporated by reference.
10 The deadline to respond to the Requests for Admission was June 3, 2015, plus five days to
11 allow for mailing.
12 On May 20, 2015, Defendant filed a motion to strike Plaintiffs complaint under the anti-
13 SLAPP statute. On July 16, 2015, the Superior Court denied Defendant’s motion. Defendant
14 timely appealed the decision. Discovery was tolled while Defendant’s motion was heard on
15 appeal.
16 On July 17, 2019, the Sixth District Court of Appeal affirmed the decision ofthe Superior
17 Court to deny Defendant’s motion.
18 Since the Sixth District’s decision, discovery has resumed. Nearly eleven months have
19 passed since the Sixth District’s decision and the Defendant has yet to provide responses to
20 Plaintiffs’ Request for Admissions, Set One. The time for the Defendant to serve timely
21 responses to the Requests for Admissions has expired. As of the date of writing the instant
22 motion, Plaintiff has not received any responses to the Requests for Admissions. Plaintiff,
23 therefore, brings this motion.
24 I have been in practice since December, 1996 and the primary area of my practice has been
W GROUP,APL 12.
‘senSn‘aeca ie 38Sole
PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE OF MOTION, MOTION, MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES, AND DECLARATION OF PEYMAN H. RAD, ESQ
civil litigation. Based on my experience of the area of law, and given the nature of the case, I
am billed out at $585.00 per hour, which is below the rates that the Bay Area market sustains
with an attorney with my level of practice and background. That is the rate based on which I
request compensation for my client for having to bring this motion.
Plaintiff has incurred attorney’s fees and costs in preparing and filing this motion. My
customary billing rate is $585.00 per hour. I have spent a total number of 5 hours preparing
this motion
(5 hours x $585.00 = $2,925.00). If Defendant opposes the motion, I anticipate spending
9 another 3 hours reviewing the opposition and preparing my reply (3 hours x $585.00 =
10 $1,755.00). Additionally, if the matter is heard, I anticipate spending an additional 2 hours at
11 the hearing (2 hours x $585.00 = $1,170.00). This would bring the total amount to $5,850.00
12 ($2,925.00 + $1,755.00 + $1,170.00 = $5,850.00).
13 10. I declare under penalty of perjury, under the laws of the State of California, that the
JA
14 foregoing is true and correct.
‘
| |
15
16 Dated: July + , 2020 By:
17 Peyman H. Rad, 5 q.
Attorney for Plaintiffs
18 KAMRAN GHIASSI, et al
19
20
21
22
23
24
map ‘Snawry JieP, APL
one C4 08139 260 13.
‘ease
PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE OF MOTION, MOTION, MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES, AND DECLARATION OF PEYMAN H. RAD, ESQ
PROOF OF SERVICE
I am a resident of the State of California, over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to
the within action. My business address is 940 Saratoga Ave, Ste. 260, San Jose, California 95129
On date below, I served the within document:
PLAINTIFF’S NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR ORDER DEEMING
ADMITTED, MEMORADUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES; and
DECLARATION OF PEYMAN H. RAD IN SUPPORT OF MOTION AND
MONETARY SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANT.
BY PERSONAL DELIVERY: I caused each such envelope to be delivered by hand to the
offices of each addressee below
[ ] BY MAIL: I deposited such envelope, with postage thereon fully prepaid, to be placed in
the United States mail at Pleasanton, California to each addressee below.
10 VIA FACSIMILE: J faxed said document to be transmitted by facsimile transmission to
each addressee below. The transmitting facsimile machine reported the transmission
11 complete and without error.
12 [xX] BY ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION: I transmitted this document by electronic mail to
each addressee below
13
[ ] BY OVERNIGHT DELIVERY: I deposited such envelope for collection and delivery by
Federal Express with delivery fees paid or provided for in accordance with ordinary
14 business.
15 Service was made on the parties involved addressed as follows
16 Christopher McElwain
Knowmad Law
17 484 Washington St., B-313
Monterey, CA 93940
18
19 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the above
is true and correct. Executed on July _/7 _,. 2020 at San Jose, California.
bya fa
20
21
Benjémin Abbott
22
23
24
RAD LAWGROUP, APL( 14,
HOS
SandoSul 20
—
PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE OF MOTION, MOTION, MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES, AND DECLARATION OF PEYMAN H. RAD, ESQ
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
Exhibit A
24
RAD LAWGROUP, APL 15.
‘e0 SantoncheSula 20
PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE OF MOTION, MOTION, MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES, AND DECLARATION OF PEYMAN H. RAD, ESQ
PEYMAN KH. RAD, ESQ., State Bar No. 184190
RAD LAW GROUP
A Professional Law Corporation
4900 Hopyard Road, Suite 100
Pleasanton, CA 94588
Telephone: (925) 600-1041
Facsimile: (925) 600-1042
Attorneys for PLAINTIFFS
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA
9
KAMRAN GHIASSI and SANAM Case No. 115-CV-278059
10 JIRBANDEI dba RAZI FARSI SCHOOL
AND ART ACADEMY, PLAINTIFFS' REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS
11 PROPOUNDED TO MEHDI BAGHERI
PLAINTIFFS,
12
vs.
13
MEHDI BAGHERI, and DOES ONE
14 THROUGH TEN, inclusive
15 DEFENDANTS.
16
7 PROPOUNDING PARTY: KAMRAN GHIASSI and SANAM JIRBANDEI
18 RESPONDING PARTY: MEHDI BAGHERI
19 SET NO.: ONE
20 Plaintiffs KAMRAN GHIASSI and SANAM JIRBANDEI (hereinafter referred to as
21 "Plaintiffs") request that Defendant MEHDI BAGHERI answer under oath, within thirty (30) days of
22 receipt, the request for admissions set forth below.
23 If responses are not served timely, the propounding party may move to have the matters
24 deemed admitted.
25 Your answers to these requests must be verified, dated and signed.
26
27 REQUEST NO. 1: Admit that on or about January 12,2015 YOU (the terms “YOU”, “YOUR” and
28 “YOURSELF” as used herein shall mean Defendant MEHDI BAGHERY) entered into a written
RAD LAW GROUP, APO|
"0 Hopsons aa OD
"season
PLAINTIFFS' REQUESTS FOR ADMISSIONS - SET ONE TO MEHDI BAGHERI
agreement (hereinafter the “Agreement”) with Razi Farsi School and Art Academy (hereinafter
“Razi Academy”) to perform music at Razi Academy’s premises on March 28, 2015.
REQUEST NO. 2: Admit that pursuant to the Agreement, YOU became obligated to give Razi
Academy written notice of any change in the schedule or cancellation of the music performance at
least forty five (45) days in advance.
REQUEST NO. 3: Admit that the Agreement requires you to compensate Razi Academy for all
damages resulting from your cancellation of the Agreement.
10
11 REQUEST NO. 4: Admit that on or about January 21, 2015 YOU spoke with Plaintiff JIRBANDEI
12 on the phone, calling her a “lowlife” and “vulgar” person in Farsi.
13
14 REQUEST NO. $: Admit that in YOUR phone conversation of January 21, 2015 with Plaintiff
15 JIRBANDEI, YOU told Plaintiff JIRBANDEI that YOU had been “warned” by other people not to
16 engage in any kind of business relationship with Plaintiffs.
17
18 REQUEST NO. 6: Admit that on or about January 29, 2015, Plaintiff GHIASSI contacted YOU via
19 email, urging that YOU not engage in any “cheap talk” against Plaintiffs and Razi Academy or talk
20 to Plaintiffs in an insulting manner.
21
22 REQUEST NO. 7: Admit that YOU replied to Plaintiff Ghiassi’s email of January 29, 2015
23 referring to Plaintiff JIRBANDEI as a “lowlife” and “vulgar” person.
24
25 REQUEST NO. 8: Admit that PLAINTIFFS told YOU that they would proceed with the
26 Agreement and would “put everything behind” them if YOU apologized for YOUR conduct.
27
28
RAD apres
LAW GROUP
Ros.Ca Best
Su 2.
‘aes‘haioon
PLAINTIFFS' REQUESTS FOR ADMISSIONS - SET ONE TO MEHDI BAGHERI
REQUEST NO. 9: Admit that on February 4, 2015 YOU sent Plaintiffs an email, calling them “law
breakers,” and “crooks.”
REQUEST NO. 10: Admit that in YOUR email of February 4, 2015 to Plaintiffs YOU mentioned
that YOU desired to “teach” Plaintiffs a “lesson.”
REQUEST NO. 11; Admit that in YOUR email of February 4, 2015 to Plaintiffs YOU mentioned
that Plaintiffs did not “deserve personal communication.”
10 REQUEST NO. 12: Admit that on February 4, 2015 YOU told Plaintiffs that YOU did not wish tol
1] proceed with the Agreement.
12
13 REQUEST NO. 13: Admit that YOU received from Plaintiffs the sum of $1,500.00 as called for
14 under the Agreement.
15
16 REQUEST NO. 14: Admit that YOU did not fulfill YOUR obligation under the Agreement to
17 perform music at Razi Academy on March 28, 2015.
18
19 REQUEST NO. 15: Admit that YOU have posted several negative comments on social media
20 websites against Razi Academy and Plaintiffs.
21
22 REQUEST NO. 16: Admit that YOU have contacted musicians, Plaintiffs’ business contacts,
23 friends, and several members of the Iranian-American community, telling them that Plaintiffs are
24 “crool ” and “villains”
25
26 REQUEST NO. 17: Admit that YOU have contacted musicians, Plaintiffs’ business contacts,
27 friends, and several members of the Iranian-American community, telling them they should not do
28 business with Plaintiffs.
RADLAWGROUP,
“croneonra
ted Sata 3
‘raasest
PLAINTIFFS' REQUESTS FOR ADMISSIONS - SET ONE TO MEHDI BAGHERI
REQUEST NO. 18: Admit that YOU have contacted musicians, Plaintiffs’ business contacts, and
friends via electronic mail and/or text message, accusing Plaintiffs of unethical and illegal business
conducts and overall immoral activity.
REQUEST NO. 19: Admit that YOU have made knowingly false statements by calling Plaintiffs
“crooks,” “law breakers” and “villains” and accusing Plaintiffs of unethical and illegal business
conducts and overall immoral activity.
REQUEST NO. 20: Admit that YOU purposefully chose to spread the false statements that
10 Plaintiffs are “crooks,” “law breakers,” to the widest possible array of Plaintiffs’ business contacts,
il customers, and friends in order to do maximum damage to Plaintiffs’ reputation and standing.
12
13 REQUEST NO. 21; Admit that YOU did not intend to live up to YOUR obligations under the
14 Agreement to perform on March 28, 2015.
15
16 REQUEST NO. 22: Admit that YOUR residence address is 1376 Parker court, Redlands, CA
17 92373.
18 REQUEST NO. 23: Admit that YOUR residence address on or about March 21, 2015 was 1376
19 Parker court, Redlands, CA 92373.
20
21 REQUEST NO. 24: Admit that YOUR residence address on or about March of 2015 was 1376
22 Parker court, Redlands, CA 92373.
23
24 REQUEST NO. 25: Admit that YOUR residence address on or about March of 2015 was 1376
25 Parker court, Redlands, CA 92373 and YOU avoided service of process of this lawsuit.
26
27
28
T
RAD LAW GROUP,
“200 eps Poaea ‘ba 4.
"9 00 1048
PLAINTIFFS' REQUESTS FOR ADMISSIONS - SET ONE TO MEHDI BAGHERI
REQUEST NO. 26: Admit that YOUR residence address on or about March of 2015 was 1376
Parker court, Redlands, CA 92373 and YOUR wife sated that she does not know YOU to avoid
service of process of this lawsuit
Dated: April 21, 2015
”
Va
Attoi
H. RAD, ESQ.
for Plaintiffs
ht
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
25
26
27
28
RAO LAWGROUP, bo C 5.
vasecaron
PLAINTIFFS' REQUESTS FOR ADMISSIONS - SET ONE TO MEHDI BAGHERI
PROOF OF SERVICE
I am a resident of the State of California, over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to
the within action. On date below, I served the foregoing document on all interested parties in this
action by placing a true copy thereof enclosed in sealed envelope.
PLAINTIFFS' REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS PROPOUNDED TO MEHDI BAGHERI —
[SET ONE}
[ ] BY PERSONAL DELIVERY: I caused each such envelope to be delivered by hand to the
offices of each addressee below.
[X] BY MAIL: I deposited such envelope, with postage thereon fully prepaid, to be placed in
the United States mail at Pleasanton, California to each addressee below.
{ ] VIA FACSIMILE: I faxed said document to be transmitted by facsimile transmission to
10 each addressee below. The transmitting facsimile machine reported the transmission
complete and without error.
1k
12 [ ] BY ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION: I transmitted this document by electronic mail to
each addressee below.
13
14
[ ] BY OVERNIGHT DELIVERY: I deposited such envelope for collection and delivery by
Federal Express with delivery fees paid or provided for in accordance with ordinary
business.
15
16 Service was made on the parties involved addressed as follows:
\7
ALI ABTAHI, ESQ. LAUREL M. CHAMPI
Preview
2015-1-CV-278059 Santa Clara — Civil M Reynoso Peyman H. Rad, Esq. (SBN 184190) RAD LAW GROUP, APLC Electronically Filed 940 Saratoga Ave, Ste. 260 by Superior Court of CA, San Jose, CA 95129 Telephone: (408) 241-5300 County of Santa Clara, Facsimile: (408) 241-5301 on 7/7/2020 5:17 PM Reviewed By: M Reynoso Attomeys for Plaintiffs, Case #2015-1-CV-278059 KAMRAN GHIASSI, et al. Envelope: 4563495 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA KAMRAN GHIASSI, SANAM JIRBANDEI Case No.: 2015-1-CV-278059 dba RAZI FARSI SCHOOL AND ART 10 ACADEMY, PLAINTIFF’S NOTICE OF MOTION 11 Plaintiffs, AND MOTION FOR ORDER DEEMING ADMITTED TRUTH OF FACTS AND 12 GENUINENESS OF DOCUMENTS PROPOUNDED TO DEFENDANT MEHDI BAGHERI, AND REQUEST 13 MEHDI BAGHERI, FOR MONETARY SANCTIONS; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND 14 Defendant. AUTHORITES; AND DECLARATION OF PEYMAN H. RAD, ESQ. 15 Date: 10/01/2020 16 Time: 9:00 am Dept: €& 21 Judge: Hon. Mesreer’-Feten Thang Barrett 17 18 19 TO ALL DEFENDANTS AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD: 20 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on October 01, 2020 ,at_9:00 am _m., in 21 21 Department of the above entitled Court, located 191 N. First Street, San Jose, CA 95113, 22 Plaintiff KAMRAN GHIASSI, et al. (collectively referred to as “Plaintiffs”), by and through their 23 attorney of record, will move for an order pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure Sections 24 2023.030 et seq. and 2033.280 that the truth of all matters specified and the genuineness of all RAD LAW SuessGROUP, ae Sule APL( 50 1 ‘ants as PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE OF MOTION, MOTION, MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES, AND DECLARATION OF PEYMAN H. RAD, ESQ specified documents in Plaintiff's Request for Admissions, Set No. 1, served on Defendant and Responding Party MEHDI BAGHERI (“Defendant”) on May 4, 2015 be deemed admitted, and for monetary sanctions against Defendant and his attorney of record in the amount of $5,850.00. The motion is made on the grounds that Defendant failed to serve timely responses to Plaintiffs’ above-described Request for Admissions. This motion is based on the provisions of California Code of Civil Procedure (C.C.P.) §§ 2023.030 et seq. and 2033.280, this Notice of Motion, the attached Memorandum of Points and Authorities, the Declaration of Peyman H Rad. Esq., the copies of the Request for Admissions attached hereto as Exhibit A, the complete files and records of this action, and upon any such oral and documentary evidence as may be presented at 10 the hearing of the motion. tn rj 11 12 Dated: July _' F, 2020 Peyman Rad, Esq. 13 Attorney for Plaintiffs KAMRAN GHIASSI, et al 14 15 16 Li, 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 RAD LAWGROUP, So APL 2 Seine ‘aa PLAINTIFF'S NOTICEOF MOTION, MOTION, MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES, AND DECLARATION OF PEYMAN H. RAD, ESQ TABLE OF CONTENTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES I BACKGROUND .......... 0 PROCEDURAL HISTORY. Ml. LEGAL ARGUMENT. Pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure (C.C.P.) §§ 2033.280(b), the Court Must order that the Genuineness of Documents and/or Truth of all Matter Specified in Moving Party's Request for Admissions, Set No. 1 be Deemed Admitted Pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure (C.C.P.) § 2023.030, the Court Must Impose a Monetary Sanction on the Party Whose Failure to Serve a Timely Response Necessitated the Motion for Deemed Admissions 10 10 Iv. CONCLUSION: 10 DECLARATION 12 li 12 13 14 15) 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 RAD LAWGROUP, APL 3 ‘Hosni 80 soe PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE OF MOTION, MOTION, MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES, AND DECLARATION OF PEYMAN H. RAD, ESQ TABLE OF AUTHORITIES STATUTES California Code of Civil Procedure § 2023.030 sisson 1, 2, 10 California Code of Civil Procedure § 2033.210 California Code of Civil Procedure § 2033.220 California Code of Civil Procedure § 2033.230 California Code of Civil Procedure § 2033.280 seme L, 2,9, 10 10 i 12 13) 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 RAD LAW GROUP. APL 4 ‘om, ona, SeeStn 200 PLAINTIFF’S NOTICE OF MOTION, MOTION, MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES, AND DECLARATION OF PEYMAN H. RAD, ESQ Memorandum of Points and Authorities I. BACKGROUND Plaintiffs Kamran Ghiassi and Sanam Jirbandei are husband and wife. In June 2014, Plaintiffs founded Razi Academy for the purpose of promoting Persian culture, language, and to serve the Iranian-American community in Northern California. Within a year of opening, Razi Academy had earned a high degree of success, reputation, and respect from members of the Iranian-American community in Northern California. On or about January 12, 2015, Plaintiffs, on behalf of Razi Academy, entered into a written contract with Defendant Mehdi Bagheri, who is a musician, for him to perform a musical 10 performance for a Persian New Year celebration and fundraiser at Razi Academy on March 28, dT 2015. Pursuant to the terms of the contract, Defendant was obligated to give Plaintiffs written 12 notice of any change in the schedule or cancellation of the performance at least forty-five (45) days 13 in advance. The contract stipulated that in the event Defendant cancels the contract, he is required 14 to refund Razi Academy all sums received and compensate Plaintiffs for all damages and 15 associated expenses they incur as a result of Defendant’s cancellation. The contract also stated that 16 Defendant agreed to publicize the event on his personal social media page, and Plaintiffs agreed to 7 publicize the event on their website. 18 On or about January 21, 2015, Defendant contacted Plaintiff Jirbandei by phone. Jirbandei was 19 driving in her car with three other people. Because Jirbandei answered Defendant’s call using the 20 car’s Bluetooth Derndant 3 voice came over the speakers and the three other passengers could 24 hear Defendant speak, ‘Jirbandei specifically informed Defendant that she was driving with friends 22 in the car who could hear him. Despite this, Defendant told Jirbandei over the phone with the other 23 three passengers in the car that he would not cooperate and publish the event on his social media 24 page even though it was a term in the contract. Defendant also addressed Jirbandei in a loud and RAD LAWGROUP, APL. 5 Saastooa ‘Savona Chve 26120 Sula 260 PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE OF MOTION, MOTION, MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES, AND DECLARATION OF PEYMAN H, RAD, ESQ insulting tone, calling her a “lowlife” and a “vulgar” person and stating that he had been “warned” by other people not to engage in any type of business relationship with Plaintiffs. This call, which took place in front of Jirbandei’s three friends, caused her extreme emotional distress and embarrassment. On or about January 29, 2015, Plaintiff Ghiassi contacted Defendant by email and provided Defendant with certain facts related to Razi Academy’s strong business success and Plaintiffs’ good reputation in the community. Plaintiff Ghiassi urged Defendant not to engage in any “cheap talk” against Plaintiffs, and not talk to Plaintiffs in an insulting manner. Plaintiff Ghiassi then suggested to Defendant that they put the phone incident behind them and act like “professionals” 10 and as “good role models” for others in the Persian community. Plaintiff hoped the parties could 11 continue with their contract in order to make the musical event “an amazing journey.” 12 Shortly thereafter, despite Ghiassi’s good faith attempt to remedy the situation and despite 13 Plaintiffs having already paid Defendant his upfront cost for the performance, Defendant replied to 14 Ghiassi’s email of January 29, 2015 by repeating his insulting language and calling Plaintiff 1S Jirbandei a “lowlife” and “vulgar” person. Defendant sent defamatory emails written in both 16 English and Farsi to Plaintiffs’ business email address which was accessible by many volunteers 17 and teachers associated with Razi Academy. 18 On February 4, 2015 at 11:27 a.m., Defendant wrote to Plaintiffs’ business email and 19 stated: “It is not [about] the money, the purpose is to teach you and people like you who are law 20 breakers, dishonest and are total crooks a lesson. [sic] I spend more money for my dogs visits to the 21 veterinarians than the money in question...” Defendant demanded full payment per the contract 22 for Razi Academy’s alleged breach when, however, the check had already been sent to Defendant. 23 To Plaintiff's immense embarrassment, Defendant’s email was sent to the common. 24 business email info@raziacademy.com and was seen by multiple people associated with the RAD LAWGROUP. APL( 6 san Seca at 20 PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE OF MOTION, MOTION, MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES, AND DECLARATION OF PEYMAN H. RAD, ESQ Academy, including teachers and volunteers, all of whom use this email address to communicate with parents, students, musicians and others. Defendant’s words and insinuations tarnished Plaintiffs’ good reputation by implying that Plaintiffs were doing something dishonest, were crooks, and were “law breakers.” Plaintiffs were rightfully concerned that anyone who saw Defendant’s email would have second thoughts about associating with them. Plaintiffs demanded an apology from Defendant for his rude and offensive remarks. Plaintiffs told Defendant that they would proceed with their obligations under the contract and “put everything behind” them if Defendant apologized. Instead of an apology, Defendant continued insulting Plaintiffs. On or about February 4, 2015, Defendant sent Plaintiffs another email calling 10 Plaintiffs “law breakers” and “crooks.” Defendant told Plaintiffs that he wanted to “teach” 11 Plaintiffs a “lesson” and that Plaintiffs did not “deserve personal communication.” Defendant 12 wrote that he did not wish to proceed with the contract and that his only communication with 13 Plaintiffs going forward would be “through the court of law.” Defendant refused to perform and 14 refused to refund the deposit that had been paid to him. 15 Despite being paid under the terms of the contract, Defendant refused to fulfill his 16 contractual obligations. Defendant breached the contract on or about February 4, 2015, when he 17 indicated to Plaintiffs that he did not wish to proceed with the contract and stated that he did not 18 want to communicate with Plaintiffs. 19 Plaintiffs attempted to find a replacement musician for the performance scheduled for 20 March 28, 2015. However, no other musicians were willing or available to perform. Beginning on 21 or around January 21, 2015, Defendant contacted other musicians and several members of the 22 Iranian-American community, alleging that nobody should do business with Plaintiffs since they 23 were “crooks”, “law breakers”, and “villains.” Defendant also posted several comments on his 24 social media websites repeating the same accusations and allegations against Plaintiffs. RAD LAWGROUP. APL( 7 en ‘Sone, Suaarensve Sal 280 ‘weser sone PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE OF MOTION, MOTION, MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES, AND DECLARATION OF PEYMAN H. RAD, ESQ II, PROCEDURAL HISTORY Plaintiffs filed their complaint against Defendant on March 13, 2015. The complaint was served on March 25, 2015. The complaint alleged claims for Breach of Contract; Breach of Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing; Fraud and Intentional Misrepresentation; Unjust Enrichment (restitution); Libel and Slander. Defendant filed his answer on April 13, 2015. This motion arises from Plaintiffs’ Request for Admissions, Set No. 1, propounded to Defendant on May 4, 2015 by service by mail. (Plaintiff's Decl., { 3.) The deadline to serve timely responses was June 3, 2015, plus five days allotted for mailing. (Plaintiff’s Decl., § 4.) On May 20, 2015, Defendant filed a motion to strike Plaintiff's complaint under the anti-SLAPP statute. 10 (Plaintiff's Decl., 9 5.) On July 16, 2015, the Superior Court entered an order denying Defendant’s 11 anti-SLAPP motion. /d. Defendant timely filed a notice of appeal to the Sixth District Court of 12 Appeal. /d. On July 17, 2019, the Sixth District Court of Appeal affirmed the decision of the 13 Superior Court and denied Defendant’s motion to strike under the anti-SLAPP statute. (Plaintiff's 14 Decl., ¢ 6.) Since the Sixth District affirmed the denial of Defendant’s motion to strike, Plaintiffs 15 have been diligently waiting for Defendant’s response to the Requests for Admission. It has now 16 been over eleven months since the Sixth District’s decision, and Plaintiffs’ Requests for 17 Admissions remains unanswered. The deadline for Defendant to timely serve responses to 18 Plaintiffs’ Request for Admissions has now expired. (Plaintiff’s Decl., § 7.) 19 Plaintiff respectfully requests for this Court to order that the truth of any matters and the 20 genuineness of any documents specified in Plaintiffs’ Request for Admissions be deemed admitted, 21 and for the Defendant and her attorney to pay monetary sanctions in the amount of $5,850.00. 22 MW 23 i 24 it RAD LAW GROUP, APL‘ 8 rca ‘Sone Seis2 — PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE OF MOTION, MOTION, MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES, AND DECLARATION OF PEYMAN H. RAD, ESQ IILLEGAL ARGUMENT a. Pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure (CCP) § 2033.280(b), the Court Must order that the Genuineness of Documents and/or Truth of All Matter Specified in Moving Party’s Request for Admissions Set No. 1 Be Deemed Admitted, If a party who has been served requests for admissions fails to serve a timely response, the propounding party may move for an order that the genuineness of any documents and the truth of any matters specified in the requests be deemed admitted. (Code Civ. Proc. § 2033.280(b) ). The Court shall make the requested order for deemed admissions unless it finds that, before the hearing on the motion, the party to whom the requests for admissions have been directed has served a 10 proposed response to the requests for admission that is in substantial compliance with CCP §§ 1 2033.210-2033.230. (Code Civ. Proc. § 2033.280(c) ). 12 Here, Defendant failed to serve a timely response and instead filed an anti-SLAPP motion. 13 Plaintiff served Defendant with Request for Admissions, Set No. 1 on May 4, 2015. The expiration 14 date to serve timely responses was June 3, 2015. Defendant filed its anti-SLAPP motion on May 15 20, 2015. Defendant’s motion was denied, but Defendant filed a notice of appeal and forced 16 Plaintiffs to defend against the motion in the Sixth District Court of Appeal. Defendant was 17 ultimately defeated when the Sixth District affirmed the Superior Court’s decision to deny 18 Defendant’s anti-SLAPP motion. Plaintiffs’ complaint against Defendant remains undefeated. 19 The discovery process can resume now that the appeals process has completed, but 20 Plaintiffs’ Request for Admissions, Set One has remained unanswered over the past eleven months. 21 The discovery response deadline has now passed and Plaintiffs still have not received any response 22 or communication from Defendants. As a result, this Court must make the requested order that the 23 truth of any matters and the genuineness of any documents specified in the Request for Admissions 24 be deemed admitted. RAD LAWGROUP, APL 9 SorSasnrocaave. intec 68 Sule —_——_ PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE OF MOTION, MOTION, MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES, AND DECLARATION OF PEYMAN H. RAD, ESQ b. Pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure (C.C.P.) § 2023.030, the Court Must Impose a Monetary Sanction on the Party Whose Failure to Serve a Timely Response Necessitated the Motion for Deemed Admissions. The Court must impose a CCP § 2023.030(a) monetary sanction on the party, attorney, or both, whose failure to serve a timely response to requests for admission necessitated the motion for deemed admissions. (Code Civ. Proc. § 2033.280(c) ), Here, the Defendant’s failure to serve any responses (timely or otherwise) to Plaintiff's Request for Admission is a result of Defendant’s denied motion to strike and subsequently burdensome appeal. As a result of Defendant’s failure to respond to the Request for Admissions described above, and for misusing the Court system to bring an appeal that was designed to cause Plaintiff great burden and financial hardship, Plaintiff has 10 necessarily incurred reasonable expenses in the amount of $5,850.00. 11 IV. CONCLUSION 12 The actions of Defendant and his attorney were brought in bad faith in an attempt to burden 13 Plaintiff with litigation costs in the hope that Plaintiff will cease pursuing the case due to the 14 financial and time burdens placed on Plaintiff and her attorney. This motion is warranted not only 15 because Defendant failed to serve timely responses to Plaintiffs’ request for admissions, but also 16 because Defendant caused undue delay of the case and caused Plaintiffs to incur unnecessary 17 expenses for (1) preparing and litigating in front of the Sixth District Court of Appeal for why 18 Defendant’s motion to strike should be denied, and (2) having to bring the current motion to admit 19 the truth of statements and genuineness of documents in Plaintiffs’ Request for Production, Set 20 One, that was served on Defendant over five years ago. Plaintiff therefore requests that the Court 21 order (1) for the genuineness of any documents and the truth of any matter specified in the 22 Requests for Admissions be deemed admitted, and (2) for Defendant, his attorney, or both, to pay 23 Plaintiff monetary sanctions in the amount of $5,850.00 for having to bring this motion. 24 i RADLAWGROUP, APL 10. Sine 08 1 280 a PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE OF MOTION, MOTION, MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES, AND DECLARATION OF PEYMAN H. RAD, ESQ Dated: July +, 2020 Any Peyman H. Attorney Rad, Esq. Plaintiffs + KAMRAN GHIASSI, et al 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 RAD LAW SanatconGROUP, de ui APL‘ 200 1L. mae PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE OF MOTION, MOTION, MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES, AND DECLARATION OF PEYMAN H. RAD, ESQ DECLARATION J, PEYMAN H. RAD, ESQ., declare as follows: 1 1am an attomey authorized to practice law before the Courts of this State, including this Court. Jam the attorney representing Plaintiffs in this matter. I have personal knowledge of the facts to which I attest to herein, and if called to testify 1 could and would do so competently. On May 4, 2015, I served Requests for Admissions Set No. 1 on Defendant by mail. A copy of those Requests for Admissions, including Proof of Service, is attached as Exhibit A and incorporated by reference. 10 The deadline to respond to the Requests for Admission was June 3, 2015, plus five days to 11 allow for mailing. 12 On May 20, 2015, Defendant filed a motion to strike Plaintiffs complaint under the anti- 13 SLAPP statute. On July 16, 2015, the Superior Court denied Defendant’s motion. Defendant 14 timely appealed the decision. Discovery was tolled while Defendant’s motion was heard on 15 appeal. 16 On July 17, 2019, the Sixth District Court of Appeal affirmed the decision ofthe Superior 17 Court to deny Defendant’s motion. 18 Since the Sixth District’s decision, discovery has resumed. Nearly eleven months have 19 passed since the Sixth District’s decision and the Defendant has yet to provide responses to 20 Plaintiffs’ Request for Admissions, Set One. The time for the Defendant to serve timely 21 responses to the Requests for Admissions has expired. As of the date of writing the instant 22 motion, Plaintiff has not received any responses to the Requests for Admissions. Plaintiff, 23 therefore, brings this motion. 24 I have been in practice since December, 1996 and the primary area of my practice has been W GROUP,APL 12. ‘senSn‘aeca ie 38Sole PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE OF MOTION, MOTION, MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES, AND DECLARATION OF PEYMAN H. RAD, ESQ civil litigation. Based on my experience of the area of law, and given the nature of the case, I am billed out at $585.00 per hour, which is below the rates that the Bay Area market sustains with an attorney with my level of practice and background. That is the rate based on which I request compensation for my client for having to bring this motion. Plaintiff has incurred attorney’s fees and costs in preparing and filing this motion. My customary billing rate is $585.00 per hour. I have spent a total number of 5 hours preparing this motion (5 hours x $585.00 = $2,925.00). If Defendant opposes the motion, I anticipate spending 9 another 3 hours reviewing the opposition and preparing my reply (3 hours x $585.00 = 10 $1,755.00). Additionally, if the matter is heard, I anticipate spending an additional 2 hours at 11 the hearing (2 hours x $585.00 = $1,170.00). This would bring the total amount to $5,850.00 12 ($2,925.00 + $1,755.00 + $1,170.00 = $5,850.00). 13 10. I declare under penalty of perjury, under the laws of the State of California, that the JA 14 foregoing is true and correct. ‘ | | 15 16 Dated: July + , 2020 By: 17 Peyman H. Rad, 5 q. Attorney for Plaintiffs 18 KAMRAN GHIASSI, et al 19 20 21 22 23 24 map ‘Snawry JieP, APL one C4 08139 260 13. ‘ease PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE OF MOTION, MOTION, MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES, AND DECLARATION OF PEYMAN H. RAD, ESQ PROOF OF SERVICE I am a resident of the State of California, over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to the within action. My business address is 940 Saratoga Ave, Ste. 260, San Jose, California 95129 On date below, I served the within document: PLAINTIFF’S NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR ORDER DEEMING ADMITTED, MEMORADUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES; and DECLARATION OF PEYMAN H. RAD IN SUPPORT OF MOTION AND MONETARY SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANT. BY PERSONAL DELIVERY: I caused each such envelope to be delivered by hand to the offices of each addressee below [ ] BY MAIL: I deposited such envelope, with postage thereon fully prepaid, to be placed in the United States mail at Pleasanton, California to each addressee below. 10 VIA FACSIMILE: J faxed said document to be transmitted by facsimile transmission to each addressee below. The transmitting facsimile machine reported the transmission 11 complete and without error. 12 [xX] BY ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION: I transmitted this document by electronic mail to each addressee below 13 [ ] BY OVERNIGHT DELIVERY: I deposited such envelope for collection and delivery by Federal Express with delivery fees paid or provided for in accordance with ordinary 14 business. 15 Service was made on the parties involved addressed as follows 16 Christopher McElwain Knowmad Law 17 484 Washington St., B-313 Monterey, CA 93940 18 19 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the above is true and correct. Executed on July _/7 _,. 2020 at San Jose, California. bya fa 20 21 Benjémin Abbott 22 23 24 RAD LAWGROUP, APL( 14, HOS SandoSul 20 — PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE OF MOTION, MOTION, MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES, AND DECLARATION OF PEYMAN H. RAD, ESQ 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Exhibit A 24 RAD LAWGROUP, APL 15. ‘e0 SantoncheSula 20 PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE OF MOTION, MOTION, MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES, AND DECLARATION OF PEYMAN H. RAD, ESQ PEYMAN KH. RAD, ESQ., State Bar No. 184190 RAD LAW GROUP A Professional Law Corporation 4900 Hopyard Road, Suite 100 Pleasanton, CA 94588 Telephone: (925) 600-1041 Facsimile: (925) 600-1042 Attorneys for PLAINTIFFS SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA 9 KAMRAN GHIASSI and SANAM Case No. 115-CV-278059 10 JIRBANDEI dba RAZI FARSI SCHOOL AND ART ACADEMY, PLAINTIFFS' REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS 11 PROPOUNDED TO MEHDI BAGHERI PLAINTIFFS, 12 vs. 13 MEHDI BAGHERI, and DOES ONE 14 THROUGH TEN, inclusive 15 DEFENDANTS. 16 7 PROPOUNDING PARTY: KAMRAN GHIASSI and SANAM JIRBANDEI 18 RESPONDING PARTY: MEHDI BAGHERI 19 SET NO.: ONE 20 Plaintiffs KAMRAN GHIASSI and SANAM JIRBANDEI (hereinafter referred to as 21 "Plaintiffs") request that Defendant MEHDI BAGHERI answer under oath, within thirty (30) days of 22 receipt, the request for admissions set forth below. 23 If responses are not served timely, the propounding party may move to have the matters 24 deemed admitted. 25 Your answers to these requests must be verified, dated and signed. 26 27 REQUEST NO. 1: Admit that on or about January 12,2015 YOU (the terms “YOU”, “YOUR” and 28 “YOURSELF” as used herein shall mean Defendant MEHDI BAGHERY) entered into a written RAD LAW GROUP, APO| "0 Hopsons aa OD "season PLAINTIFFS' REQUESTS FOR ADMISSIONS - SET ONE TO MEHDI BAGHERI agreement (hereinafter the “Agreement”) with Razi Farsi School and Art Academy (hereinafter “Razi Academy”) to perform music at Razi Academy’s premises on March 28, 2015. REQUEST NO. 2: Admit that pursuant to the Agreement, YOU became obligated to give Razi Academy written notice of any change in the schedule or cancellation of the music performance at least forty five (45) days in advance. REQUEST NO. 3: Admit that the Agreement requires you to compensate Razi Academy for all damages resulting from your cancellation of the Agreement. 10 11 REQUEST NO. 4: Admit that on or about January 21, 2015 YOU spoke with Plaintiff JIRBANDEI 12 on the phone, calling her a “lowlife” and “vulgar” person in Farsi. 13 14 REQUEST NO. $: Admit that in YOUR phone conversation of January 21, 2015 with Plaintiff 15 JIRBANDEI, YOU told Plaintiff JIRBANDEI that YOU had been “warned” by other people not to 16 engage in any kind of business relationship with Plaintiffs. 17 18 REQUEST NO. 6: Admit that on or about January 29, 2015, Plaintiff GHIASSI contacted YOU via 19 email, urging that YOU not engage in any “cheap talk” against Plaintiffs and Razi Academy or talk 20 to Plaintiffs in an insulting manner. 21 22 REQUEST NO. 7: Admit that YOU replied to Plaintiff Ghiassi’s email of January 29, 2015 23 referring to Plaintiff JIRBANDEI as a “lowlife” and “vulgar” person. 24 25 REQUEST NO. 8: Admit that PLAINTIFFS told YOU that they would proceed with the 26 Agreement and would “put everything behind” them if YOU apologized for YOUR conduct. 27 28 RAD apres LAW GROUP Ros.Ca Best Su 2. ‘aes‘haioon PLAINTIFFS' REQUESTS FOR ADMISSIONS - SET ONE TO MEHDI BAGHERI REQUEST NO. 9: Admit that on February 4, 2015 YOU sent Plaintiffs an email, calling them “law breakers,” and “crooks.” REQUEST NO. 10: Admit that in YOUR email of February 4, 2015 to Plaintiffs YOU mentioned that YOU desired to “teach” Plaintiffs a “lesson.” REQUEST NO. 11; Admit that in YOUR email of February 4, 2015 to Plaintiffs YOU mentioned that Plaintiffs did not “deserve personal communication.” 10 REQUEST NO. 12: Admit that on February 4, 2015 YOU told Plaintiffs that YOU did not wish tol 1] proceed with the Agreement. 12 13 REQUEST NO. 13: Admit that YOU received from Plaintiffs the sum of $1,500.00 as called for 14 under the Agreement. 15 16 REQUEST NO. 14: Admit that YOU did not fulfill YOUR obligation under the Agreement to 17 perform music at Razi Academy on March 28, 2015. 18 19 REQUEST NO. 15: Admit that YOU have posted several negative comments on social media 20 websites against Razi Academy and Plaintiffs. 21 22 REQUEST NO. 16: Admit that YOU have contacted musicians, Plaintiffs’ business contacts, 23 friends, and several members of the Iranian-American community, telling them that Plaintiffs are 24 “crool ” and “villains” 25 26 REQUEST NO. 17: Admit that YOU have contacted musicians, Plaintiffs’ business contacts, 27 friends, and several members of the Iranian-American community, telling them they should not do 28 business with Plaintiffs. RADLAWGROUP, “croneonra ted Sata 3 ‘raasest PLAINTIFFS' REQUESTS FOR ADMISSIONS - SET ONE TO MEHDI BAGHERI REQUEST NO. 18: Admit that YOU have contacted musicians, Plaintiffs’ business contacts, and friends via electronic mail and/or text message, accusing Plaintiffs of unethical and illegal business conducts and overall immoral activity. REQUEST NO. 19: Admit that YOU have made knowingly false statements by calling Plaintiffs “crooks,” “law breakers” and “villains” and accusing Plaintiffs of unethical and illegal business conducts and overall immoral activity. REQUEST NO. 20: Admit that YOU purposefully chose to spread the false statements that 10 Plaintiffs are “crooks,” “law breakers,” to the widest possible array of Plaintiffs’ business contacts, il customers, and friends in order to do maximum damage to Plaintiffs’ reputation and standing. 12 13 REQUEST NO. 21; Admit that YOU did not intend to live up to YOUR obligations under the 14 Agreement to perform on March 28, 2015. 15 16 REQUEST NO. 22: Admit that YOUR residence address is 1376 Parker court, Redlands, CA 17 92373. 18 REQUEST NO. 23: Admit that YOUR residence address on or about March 21, 2015 was 1376 19 Parker court, Redlands, CA 92373. 20 21 REQUEST NO. 24: Admit that YOUR residence address on or about March of 2015 was 1376 22 Parker court, Redlands, CA 92373. 23 24 REQUEST NO. 25: Admit that YOUR residence address on or about March of 2015 was 1376 25 Parker court, Redlands, CA 92373 and YOU avoided service of process of this lawsuit. 26 27 28 T RAD LAW GROUP, “200 eps Poaea ‘ba 4. "9 00 1048 PLAINTIFFS' REQUESTS FOR ADMISSIONS - SET ONE TO MEHDI BAGHERI REQUEST NO. 26: Admit that YOUR residence address on or about March of 2015 was 1376 Parker court, Redlands, CA 92373 and YOUR wife sated that she does not know YOU to avoid service of process of this lawsuit Dated: April 21, 2015 ” Va Attoi H. RAD, ESQ. for Plaintiffs ht 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 25 26 27 28 RAO LAWGROUP, bo C 5. vasecaron PLAINTIFFS' REQUESTS FOR ADMISSIONS - SET ONE TO MEHDI BAGHERI PROOF OF SERVICE I am a resident of the State of California, over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to the within action. On date below, I served the foregoing document on all interested parties in this action by placing a true copy thereof enclosed in sealed envelope. PLAINTIFFS' REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS PROPOUNDED TO MEHDI BAGHERI — [SET ONE} [ ] BY PERSONAL DELIVERY: I caused each such envelope to be delivered by hand to the offices of each addressee below. [X] BY MAIL: I deposited such envelope, with postage thereon fully prepaid, to be placed in the United States mail at Pleasanton, California to each addressee below. { ] VIA FACSIMILE: I faxed said document to be transmitted by facsimile transmission to 10 each addressee below. The transmitting facsimile machine reported the transmission complete and without error. 1k 12 [ ] BY ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION: I transmitted this document by electronic mail to each addressee below. 13 14 [ ] BY OVERNIGHT DELIVERY: I deposited such envelope for collection and delivery by Federal Express with delivery fees paid or provided for in accordance with ordinary business. 15 16 Service was made on the parties involved addressed as follows: \7 ALI ABTAHI, ESQ. LAUREL M. CHAMPI