arrow left
arrow right
  • Leyva, Yesenia et al vs. General Motors, LLCCivil-Roseville document preview
  • Leyva, Yesenia et al vs. General Motors, LLCCivil-Roseville document preview
  • Leyva, Yesenia et al vs. General Motors, LLCCivil-Roseville document preview
  • Leyva, Yesenia et al vs. General Motors, LLCCivil-Roseville document preview
  • Leyva, Yesenia et al vs. General Motors, LLCCivil-Roseville document preview
  • Leyva, Yesenia et al vs. General Motors, LLCCivil-Roseville document preview
  • Leyva, Yesenia et al vs. General Motors, LLCCivil-Roseville document preview
  • Leyva, Yesenia et al vs. General Motors, LLCCivil-Roseville document preview
						
                                

Preview

Mary Lynn Arens, Bar No.: 282459 Mitchel Brim, Bar No.: 239341 ERSKINE LAW GROUP, PC SUPERIOR COU COUNTY OF PLAGE OFNIA 3995 East La Palma Avenue Lo Anaheim, California 92807 SEP 03 2019 Tel: (949) 777-6032 JAKE CHATTERS Fax: (714) 844-9035 EXECUTIVE OFFICER & CLERK By: C. Henderson, Deputy Nn marens@erskinelaw.com mbrim@erskinelaw.com ND Attorneys for Defendant GENERAL MOTORS LLC Oo ODO SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA Go FOR THE COUNTY OF PLACER 11 YESENIA LEYVA, an individual, and Case No.: S-CV-0041782 WS 12 JUAN C. LEYVA, an individual, US Honorable Alan V. Pineschi 13 GS Plaintiffs, Dept.: 42 SG 14 HS VS. GENERAL MOTORS LLC'S EX PARTE BS 15 APPLICATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL 120 SS GENERAL MOTORS LLC; a Limited DAYS AND ALL-RELATED DATES; 16 SS Liability Company, and DOES 1 through 50, ALTERNATIVELY, ADVANCE THE inclusive, HEARING DATE FOR ITS MOTION TO 17 SS COMPEL PLAINTIFFS’ DEPOSITION; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND 18 Defendants. AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT THEREOF; DECLARATION OF MITCHEL BRIM IN 19 SUPPORT THEREOF TOTS 20 Hearing Date: September 3, 2019 21 Hearing Time: 8:00 a.m. Department: 42 22 Date Filed: September 12, 2018 23 Trial Date: September 23, 2019 24 Filed concurrently with: 25 1. Proposed Order 26 27 28 1 GENERAL MOTORS LLC'S EX PARTE APPLICATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL 120 DAYS AND ALL-RELATED DATES; ALTERNATIVELY, ADVANCE THE HEARING DATE FOR ITS MOTION TO COMPEL PLAINTI FFS’ DEPOSITION; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT THEREOF; DECLARATION OF MITCHEL BRIM IN SUPPORT THEREOF TO THE PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD: PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on September 3, 2019, at 8:00 a.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard in Department 42 of the above-entitled court located at 10820 Justice Roseville, CA 95678, Defendant, General Motors LLC (“GM”) will move this Center Drive, 120 Court via ex parte application to continue the original trial date of September 3, 2019 for days, or to a date as soon thereafter as this Court’s calendar may permit. Alternatively, GM seeks ND the hearing date for its Motion to Compel Plaintiffs’ Deposition and an Order advancing at Deposition. The Motion to Compel Plaintiffs’ Deposition is Production of Documents Oo 26, 2019. California Rules of Court, rule 3.1300, and Code of Civil scheduled for September oo 10 Procedure, sections 128 and 1005(b), which taken together provide authority for the Court to set a hearing date, and ll shorten the time for notice of motions, advance a hearing date, or specially 12 to control the proceedings in accordance with law and justice the hearing date for its 13 GM is seeking ex parte relief to continue the trial date and advance es that will result in 14 motion to compel plaintiff's deposition based on exigent circumstanc deposition, concerning the alleged 15 irreparable harm. First, GM has been unable to take plaintiffs’ of her claims. After plaintiffs’ 16 defects of the subject vehicle, factual allegations, and basis 17 deposition is taken, GM needs to take plaintiff's expert’s deposition. Brim’’) who is taking care of 18 GM recently obtained new trial counsel, Mitchel Brim (““Mr. requiring dialysis several times a week. 19 his father who suffers from a serious health condition September 3, 2019. GM’s expert is 20 Moreover, Mr. Brim has trial in another matter on On September 5, 2019, plaintiffs 21 unavailable on September 93" due to a calendar conflict. be heard in which plaintiff is requesting 22 Motion to Compel Further Production of Documents will owners of vehicles regarding alleged 23 thousands of documents concerning complaints of other established are even nonconformities. It will 24 defects of the Subject Vehicle which have not been such a request. Due to the outstanding 25 take GM at least 45 days to be able to comply with close proximity to trial, GM respectfully 26 discovery issues, unforeseen circumstances, and the trial for a period of at least 120 days, or 27 requests that this Court continue the September 23, 2019, may permit. In addition, GM requests that the 28 to a date as soon thereafter as this Court’s calendar 2 ALL-RELATED DATES; ALTERNATIVELY, ATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL 120 DAYS AND GENERAL MOTORS LLC'S EX PARTE APPLIC PLAINTI FFS’ DEPOSI TION; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES TO COMPEL ADVANCE THE HEARING DATE FOR ITS MOTION L BRIM IN SUPPORT THEREOF IN SUPPORT THEREOF; DECLARATION OF MITCHE Court continue all trial related deadline s, including discovery deadlines, to trail with the continued trial date. GM is available to conduct trial on January 13 & 20, 2020. Ex Parte notice was provided to Plaintiffs ’ counsel on August 30, 2019 at approxim ately 8:10 a.m. and 9:23 a.m. (Declaration Bp of Mitchel Brim, § 10, Exh. A). Plaintiffs counsel indicated that she will oppose the application. WH (/d.) ND This Motion is based upon this Notice, the good cause shown for granting the relief requested as set forth in the attached Memorand um, the Declaration of Mitchel Brim (“Brim COCO Decl.”), as well as such evidence, oral and docum entary, as may be presented at the hearing. SoS Dated: August 30, 2019 ERSKINE LAWGROUP, 10 PC ; 11 12 MITCHEIYBRI 13 ATTORXMEYS’FOR DEFENDANT 14 GENE OTORS LLC 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3 GENERAL MOTORS LLC'S EX PARTE APPLICATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL 120 DAYS AND ALL-RELATED - DATES; : ALTER NATIVELY ADVANCE THE HEARING DATE FOR ITS MOTION TO COMPEL PLAINTIFFS’ DEPOSITION; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT THEREOF; DECLARATION OF MITCHEL BRIM IN SUPPORT THEREOF MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES 1 INTRODUCTION NYO Exigent circumstances dictate that trial be continued at least 120 days and/or GM’s Motion WY to Compel Plaintiff's Deposition scheduled for September 26, 2019, be advanced or irreparable fF harm will result if this application is not granted. GM has not been able to depose plaintiffs An concerning the alleged defects of the subject vehicle, the factual allegations, the basis of their WB claims and its defenses. (Brim Decl. § 7) As a result, GM is unable to prepare for trial, ascertain NIN the basis of plaintiffs’ claims, and/or establish a defense in this matter. A Motion to Compel Oo Plaintiffs’ Deposition has been filed with the earliest hearing date of September 26, 2019. (/d. at § Co 8) Second, Mr. Brim is unable to conduct a three to five-day jury trial because he is taking care of O&O hl his father who has a serious medical condition and is undergoing dialysis several times a week. KF (Id. at § 9) Moreover, Mr. Brim is scheduled for another trial on September 23, 2019. (/d. at 4 5) NY PF Third, GM’s expert is unavailable for trial due to a calendar conflict. (/d. at § 6) Fourth, expert YW FF discovery needs to be conducted once plaintiffs’ depositions are completed. (/d. at § 8). Fifth, FSF FF Plaintiff has a Motion to Compel Further Responses to Request for Production of Documents set nA FF for September 5, 2019. Plaintiff seeks thousands of documents related to complaints of other DBD FF consumers concerning alleged defects without establishing that they are a nonconformity that will NY FF take GM at least 45 days to be able to produce after reviewing for confidentiality and trade secret OHA FY information. (/d.) Plaintiff needs to take GM’s Person Most Knowledgeable (““PMK’) deposition OO FY as well who is unavailable until October 2019. (/d.) TD NO This Court has broad powers to control the conduct of judicial proceedings in furtherance NN K of justice. (Code Civ. Proc., § 128 (a)(5)). Continuing the trial in the instant matter for 120 days NYO NN would be in the furtherance of justice to allow GM the opportunity to complete the requisite WD NV discovery and prepare this matter for trial. Ff NO Il. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY WN NH Plaintiff filed suit against GM alleging violations of the Song-Beverly Consumer OO NO Warranty Act (“Song-Beverly) arising out of Plaintiff's purchase of a 2017 Chevrolet Traverse NO oN VIN 1GNKRGKD4HJ113664 (“Subject Vehicle”). Plaintiff alleges “serious defects and wo 4 GENERAL MOTORS LLC'S EX PARTE APPLICATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL 120 DAYS AND ALL-RELATED DATES; ALTERNATIVELY, ADVANCE THE HEARING DATE FOR ITS MOTION TO COMPEL PLAINTIFFS’ DEPOSITION; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT THEREOF; DECLARATION OF MITCHEL BRIM IN SUPPORT THEREOF nonconformities” that allegedly substantially impair the use, value or safety of the Subject Vehicle. Plaintiff seeks civil penalties pursuant to section 1794 (e) in the amount of two times his actual damages. Through written discovery, GM discovered that plaintiff alleges defects WW pertaining to the Subject Vehicle’s steering, chassis and suspension. (Brim Decl., § 9). The _ Subject Vehicle presented twice for a clicking noise in which different repairs were made which include replacing gaskets, sway bar bushings, and a recall relating to the steering. (/d.) It has not BD presented to a GM authorized repair facility since July 14, 2018. Ud.) NIN On or about October 31, 2018, GM properly noticed Plaintiff's deposition to occur on Oo December 19, 2018. (/d. at § 7). Plaintiffs objected to their deposition. A Motion to Compel Co 10 Plaintiffs Deposition has been filed with a hearing date of September 26, 2019. (Ud) After 11 plaintiffs’ depositions are completed, GM needs to conduct expert discovery including taking the 2 deposition of Plaintiffs’ expert. (/d. at 8). 13 GM respectfully requests that this Court continue trial so that said motion may be heard so 14 that it can conduct the imperative discovery to prepare for trial. Alternatively, GM respectfully 15 requests that the hearing date for its Motion to Compel Plaintiff's Deposition be advanced so that 16 it may be heard prior to trial. 17 GM will be severely prejudiced without the sought relief in order to conduct and obtain 18 crucial discovery to prepare for and have its counsel and expert available for trial. 19 il. ARGUMENT 20 A. IRREPERABLE HARM WILL RESULT IF GM’S' EX PARTE 21 APPLICATION IS NOT GRANTED 22 A showing of irreparable harm, immediate danger or any other statutory basis is required 23 for granting ex parte relief. California Rules of Court (“CRC”), rule 3.1202(c). The court has 24 broad discretion to determine whether good cause exists for granting a motion for a trial 29 continuance; its decision will be reversed on appeal only when there is a clear abuse of discretion 26 resulting in prejudice. (Forthmann v Boyer (2002) 97 CA4th 977; Eastwood v Froehlich (1976) 27 60 CA3d 523, 529). A court has broad powers to control the conduct of judicial proceedings in 28 furtherance of justice. (Code Civ. Proc., § 128 (a)(5)). The Court may grant a continuance upon 5 GENERAL MOTORS LLC'S EX PARTE APPLICATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL 120 DAYS AND ALL-RELATED DATES; ALTERNATIVELY, ADVANCE THE HEARING DATE FOR ITS MOTION TO COMPEL PLAINTIFFS’ DEPOSITION; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT THEREOF; DECLARATION OF MITCHEL BRIM IN SUPPORT THEREOF an affirmative showing of good cause which includes a significant unanticipated change in the status of the case as a result of which the case is not ready for trial. CRC, rule 3.1332(c)(7). Other factors include the length of the continuance requested, the prejudice that parties or witnesses will suffer as a result of the continuance, whether the interests of justice are best served - by the continuance, and any other fact or circumstance relevant to the fair determination of the NN ND application. Pursuant to CRC, rule 3.1332, based on the facts, circumstances, good cause exists to continue the trial in the instant matter. CRC, rule 3.1332, subsection (c)(6), articulates good cause for a trial continuance in this precise instance: “A party's excused inability to obtain Oe essential testimony, documents, or other material evidence despite diligent efforts.” Co 10 GM has been unable to depose the plaintiffs to obtain sworn testimony pertaining to the 11 alleged defects, the basis of their lemon law claims, or facts that support its defenses. (Brim Decl., 12 {| 7). GM’s counsel and expert witness are unavailable - the precise scenario contemplated by 13 California Rule of Court, rule 3.1332, subsection (c)(1) as constituting good cause to continue 14 trial. (Brim Decl. at {§] 5-6, 9) The record explicitly indicates that GM’s efforts were more than 15 diligent in attempting to obtain the aforementioned discovery. (/d. at §§ 7-8). The earliest 16 hearing date for GM’s Motion to Compel Plaintiffs’ Deposition is September 26, 2019. (/d. at § 17 8) After Plaintiffs’ deposition has been completed, expert discovery needs to be conducted to 18 ascertain the alleged defects and the basis for plaintiffs’ experts’ opinions. (/d.) On September 5, 19 2019, Plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel Further Responses to Request for Production will be heard. 20 (/d.) Plaintiffs’ seek numerous documents concerning alleged defects of other consumer vehicles 21 that will require GM at least 45 days to produce if ordered to do so. (/d.)(emphasis added) 22 Moreover, GM’s PMK is unavailable until October 2019. (/d.) 23 B. THE INTERESTS OF JUSTICE SUPPORT THE GRANTING OF THE EX 24 PARTE APPLICATION 25 Judges have broad powers and responsibilities to determine what measures and procedures 26 are appropriate in varying circumstances. (See, e.g., Gov. Code, § 68607 [judge has responsibility 27 to manage litigation]; Code Civ. Proc., § 128, subd. (a)(5) [judge has power to control conduct of 28 judicial proceeding in furtherance of justice].) According to Code of Civil Procedure, section 128, 6 GENERAL MOTORS LLC'S EX PARTE APPLICATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL 120 DAYS AND ALL-RELATED DATES; ALTERNATIVELY, ADVANCE THE HEARING DATE FOR ITS MOTION TO COMPEL PLAINTIFFS’ DEPOSITION; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT THEREOF; DECLARATION OF MITCHEL BRIM IN SUPPORT THEREOF subdivision (a)(8), every court shall have the power to “amend and control its process and orders so as to make them conform to law and justice.” Code of Civil Procedure, section 187 provides NO “When jurisdiction is, by the Constitution or this Code, or by any other statute, conferred on a WO Court or judicial officer, all the means necessary to carry it into effect are also given; and in the Fe exercise of this jurisdiction, if the course of proceeding be not specifically pointed out by this nn Code or the statute, any suitable process or mode of proceeding may be adopted which may DB appear most conformable to the spirit of this Code.” Government Code, section 68070 provides NY that: “Every court may make rules for its own government ... not inconsistent with law or with the wea rules adopted and prescribed by the Judicial Council.” oOo The interests of justice is served by continuing trial and all related dates 120 days and/pr O&O advancing the hearing date for GM’s Motion to Compel Plaintiff's Deposition. GM has no means FF Ree to defend itself when plaintiff's counsel engages in improper gamesmanship and refuses to NY produce either plaintiff for deposition. GM is entitled to take plaintiffs’ deposition and engage in WY Rr expert discovery. Moreover, GM’s counsel and its expert are unavailable on the date of trial. Fe Rr Continuing the trial date, which has yet to be continued, would serve the ends of justice by mr DH enabling GM to obtain imperative discovery so that it can prepare for trial. IV. CONCLUSION mmm Oo NY For the foregoing reasons, GM seeks an Order continuing the September 23, 2019, trial Oo date for a period of at least 120 days, or to a date as soon thereafter as the Court’s calendar may DOD NO permit. Alternatively, GM seeks an Order advancing the hearing date for its Motion to Compel KF& RO Plaintiffs’ Deposition and Production of Documents at Deposition. NY KN Respectfully Submitted, WY KN Dated: August 30, 2019 ERSKINE LAW/GROUP, ek KN NW NY MITCHEL NHN NO Attorneys fér Defendant pO GENE LORS LLC Co NO 7 GENERAL MOTORS LLC'S EX PARTE APPLICATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL 120 DAYS AND ALL-RELATED DATES; ALTERNATIVELY, ADVANCE THE HEARING DATE FOR ITS MOTION TO COMPEL PLAINTIFFS’ DEPOSITION; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT THEREOF; DECLARATION OF MITCHEL BRIM IN SUPPORT THEREOF DECLARATION OF MITCHEL BRIM IN SUPPPORT OF DEFENDANT GENERAL MOTORS LLC’S EX PARTE APPLICATION TO CONTINUE THE TRIAL DATE WW I, Mitchel Brim, declare as follows: Ww 1. I am an attorney duly admitted to practice before all courts in the State of California. I am - an attorney with the law firm Erskine Law Group, counsel to Defendant General Motors LLC WN (“GM LLC”). I recently joined the firm in April 2019 and have been assigned over 100 active DW litigation matters. I have personal knowledge of the facts set forth herein and, if called to testify, NN could and would competently testify thereto. Oo 2. This Declaration is submitted in support of GM LLC’s Ex Parte Application to Continue Co 10 the Trial Date 120 days and all related dates to conform to the new trial date. 11 3. There is currently a five-day trial set to begin on September 23, 2019. 12 4. GM LLC has designated Steve Franklin as its expert witness in the present case. 13 5. On September 23, 2019, I am scheduled to be in trial in Jose Ramos Jr. v. General 14 Motors, LLC, LASC Case No. BC710024; 15 6. Mr. Franklin is an essential expert witness without which GM LLC cannot adequately 16 present its case before a jury. I have spoken with Mr. Franklin and he has advised me that he is 17 unavailable on September 23, 2019 due to a calendar conflict. If a continuance is not granted, 18 GM LLC will be greatly prejudiced and suffer irreparable harm in that it will be forced to undergo 19 trial without its essential expert witness. 20 7. On or about October 31, 2018, GM properly noticed Plaintiffs’ deposition to occur on 21 December 19, 2018. I have met and conferred with plaintiff's counsel beginning on July 8" who 22 has refused to provide available dates. 23 8. I filed a Motion to Compel Plaintiff's Deposition with the earliest hearing date of 24 September 26, 2019. After plaintiffs’ deposition is taken, I will need to complete expert 25 discovery including taking plaintiffs’ expert’s deposition. Plaintiffs need to take GM’s Person 26 Most Knowledgeable deposition as well who is unavailable until October 2019. Plaintiff has a 27 Motion to Compel Further Responses to Request for Production of Documents set for September 28 GENERAL MOTORS LLC'S EX PARTE APPLICATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL 120 DAYS AND ALL-RELATED DATES; ALTERNATIVELY, ADVANCE THE HEARING DATE FOR ITS MOTION TO COMPEL PLAINTIFFS’ DEPOSITION; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT THEREOF; DECLARATION OF MITCHEL BRIM IN SUPPORT THEREOF 5, 2019. Plaintiff seeks numerous, if not thousands of documents, related to complaints of other consumers concerning alleged defects without establishing that they are a nonconformity that will take GM at least 45 days to be able to produce. If granted, I will have to sort through all of the Lo documents to ascertain confidentiality and trade secret information prior to said production. 9. My father has a serious medical condition and is undergoing dialysis multiple times a week. I am his only caretaker and will not be able to conduct a three to five-day jury trial in this ND matter on September 23. Through written discovery, GM LLC discovered that plaintiff alleges defects pertaining to the Subject Vehicle’s steering, chassis and suspension. The Subject Vehicle Oo presented twice for a clicking noise in which different repairs were made which include replacing Co 10 gaskets, sway bar bushings, and a recall relating to the steering. Based on the warranty history, 11 the Subject Vehicle has not presented to a GM authorized repair facility since July 14, 2018 in 12 which a seat buckle was replaced. 13 10. On August 30, 2019, at approximately 8:10 a.m., I emailed Plaintiff's counsel and 14 informed her of the time, date and location of the filing of an Ex Parte Application to Continue 15 Trial and all Related Dates, alternatively have the hearing for its Motion to Compel Plaintiffs’ 16 Deposition advanced. At approximately 9:23 a.m., I advised plaintiff's counsel of the correct 17 time for the hearing for the Ex Parte Application. A true and correct copy of both emails are 18 attached hereto as Exhibit A. I also called and informed plaintiff's counsel of the aforementioned 19 and to ascertain if they were opposing. Plaintiff's counsel emailed me indicating that she intends 20 to oppose the Motion. 21 // 22 /// 23 // 24 // 25 /I/ 26 /II 27 M1 28 GENERAL MOTORS LLC'S EX PARTE APPLICATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL 120 DAYS AND ALL-RELATED DATES; ALTERNATIVELY, ADVANCE THE HEARING DATE FOR ITS MOTION TO COMPEL PLAINTIFFS’ DEPOSITION; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT THEREOF; DECLARATION OF MITCHEL BRIM IN SUPPORT THEREOF 11. GM LLC is respectfully requesting that this Court continue the trial date in the present matter 120 days from the date at which it is currently set so that GM can conduct the imperative WV discovery to prepare for and have its expert available to testify at trial. GM is available on WwW January 13 & 20, 2020. I attempted to obtain plaintiff's counsel’s availability for trial by ee emailing and leaving plaintiff's counsel Nancy Zhang a message. NN I declare under the penalty of perjury according to the laws in the State of California that DO NIN the foregoing is true and correct. Oo DATED: August 30, 2019 Co 10 11 12 13 Mitchel Brim 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 GENERAL MOTORS LLC'S EX PARTE APPLICATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL 120 DAYS AND ALL-RELATED DATES; ALTERNATIVELY, ADVANCE THE HEARING DATE FOR ITS MOTION TO COMPEL PLAINTIFFS’ DEPOSITION; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT THEREOF; DECLARATION OF MITCHEL BRIM IN SUPPORT THEREOF EXHIBIT A From: Mitchel Brim Sent: Friday, August 30, 2019 8:10 AM To: Nancy Zhang, Esq.; Catalina Yang Ce: Stanley Chan; Jonathan Shugart Subject: RE: Leyva v. GM LLC - Ex Parte Notice to Continue Trial 120 Days and All Related Dates; Alternatively Shorten Time/Advance Hearing Date for Its Motion to Compe! Plaintiffs' Deposition Hi Nancy, Court located on 10820 Justice Center Drive, Roseville, CA 95678, General Motors LLC (“GM LLC”) will move via an ex parte application for an Order to Continue Trial 120 Days and all Related Dates. Alternatively, GM LLC seeks to shorten time/advance hearing date for its Motion to Compel Plaintiffs’ Deposition. Piease advise if you will be opposing and provide available trial dates. Thank you. Best, Mitchel Brim, Esq. & ERSKINELAW Erskine Law Group mbrim kinelaw.com CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The information contained in this electronic e-mail and any accompanying attachment(s) is intended only for the use of the intended recipient and may be confidential and/or privileged. If any reader of this communication is not the intended recipient, unauthorized use, disclosure or copying is strictly prohibited, and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify the sender by return e-mail, and delete the original message and all copies from your system. Nothing in this message is intended to constitute an electronic signature unless a specific statement to the contrary is included in this message. From: Mitchel Brim Sent: Friday, August 30, 2019 9:22 AM To: Nancy Zhang, Esq.; Catalina Yang Ce: Stanley Chan; Jonathan Shugart Subject: RE: Leyva v. GM LLC - Ex Parte Notice to Continue Trial 120 Days; Alternatively Shorten Time to Hear Its Motion to Compel Plaintiffs’ Deposition Hi Nancy, Please be advised that the ex parte application will be heard at 8:00 a.m. Thank you. Best, Mitchel Brim, Esq. SF pre shin 38 FP gb ty, aes FOS Tel - 949-777-6032 (Main) Fax - 714-844-9035 mbrim@erskinelaw.com CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The information contained in this electronic e-mail and any accompanying attachment(s) is intended only for the use of the intended recipient and may be confidential and/or privileged. [f any reader of this communication is not the intended recipient, unauthorized use, disclosure or copying is strictly prohibited, and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify the sender by return e-mail, and delete the original message and all copies from your system. Nothing in this message is intended to constitute an electronic signature unless a specific statement to the contrary is included in this message. From: Mitchel Brim Sent: Friday, August 30, 2019 8:04:16 AM Subject: Leyva v. GM LLC - Ex Parte Notice to Continue Trial 120 Days; Alternatively Shorten Time to Hear Its Motion to Compe! Plaintiffs' Deposition Hi Nancy, Court located on 10820 Justice Center Drive, Roseville, CA 95678, General Motors LLC (“GM LLC”) will move via an ex parte application for an Order to Continue Trial 120 Days and all Related Dates. Alternatively, GM LLC seeks to shorten time to have its Motion to Compel Plaintiffs’ Deposition heard. Please advise if you will be opposing and provide available trial dates. Thank you. PROOF OF SERVICE I am employed in the County of Orange and my business address is 3995 E. La Palma Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92807. I am over the age of 18 years and I am not a party to this action. I am readily familiar with the practices of ERSKINE LAW GROUP for the collection and processing of correspondence for mailing with the United States Postal Service. Such correspondence is deposited with the United States Postal Service the same day in the ordinary course of business. On August 30, 2019, I served the foregoing document(s), bearing the title(s): DD GENERAL MOTORS LLC'S EX PARTE APPLICATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL 120 DAYS NN AND ALL-RELATED DATES; ALTERNATIVELY, ADVANCE THE HEARING DATE FOR ITS MOTION TO COMPEL PLAINTIFFS’ DEPOSITION; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND Oe AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT THEREOF; DECLARATION OF MITCHEL BRIM IN SUPPORT THEREOF So 10 on the interested parties in the action as follows: [X] by placing [ ] the original [X] a true copy thereof enclosed in a sealed envelope 11 addressed as follows: 12 CONSUMER LAW EXPERTS, PC 5757 W. Century Blvd., Suite 500 13 Los Angeles, CA 90045 14 [X] | (BY MAIL SERVICE) I placed such envelopes for collection and to be mailed on this date following ordinary business practices. 15 [ ] (BY PERSONAL SERVICE) I caused to be delivered such envelope by hand to the 16 office of the addressee. 17 [ ] (BY FACSIMILE) The document stated herein was transmitted by facsimile transmission and the transmission was reported as complete and without error. A transmission report was 18 properly issued by the transmitting facsimile machine and a copy of said transmission report is attached to the original proof of service indicating the time of transmission. 19 (BY NEXT DAY DELIVERY) I caused to be delivered such envelope by hand to the 20 office of the addressee. 21 [X] (BY E-MAIL) I served the above-mentioned document via electronic transmission per agreement of the parties. 22 [X] (State) I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the 23 foregoing is true and correct. 24 [ ] (Federal) I declare under penalty of perjury that I am employed by a member of the Bar of this Court, at whose direction this service is made. 2 Executed on August 30, 2019, at Anaheim, CA. 26 27 ai Signed: Stanley Chan 28 GENERAL MOTORS LLC'S EX PARTE APPLICATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL 120 DAYS AND ALL-RELATED DATES; ALTERNATIVELY, ADVANCE THE HEARING DATE FOR ITS MOTION TO COMPEL PLAINTIFFS’ DEPOSITION; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT THEREOF; DECLARATION OF MITCHEL BRIM IN SUPPORT THEREOF