Excusable neglect? That's a good one. If there is such a thing as unexcusable neglect, I wonder how it differs from the excusable kind. Opty

Case Name: DANIEL LECKRONE, et al v PHIL MARCOUX, et al

Case No: 1-09 CV 159593

Date: August 5, 2011

Time: 9:00 a.m.

Dept: 7

Plaintiffs Daniel Leckrone and Technology Properties Limited (“Plaintiffs”)’ motion for relief from waiver of their objections to defendants Chipscale Incorporated’s shareholders and Phil Marcoux (individually and as shareholder’s representative) (“Defendants”)’ Request for Production of Documents (“RPD”) is GRANTED as Plaintiffs have provided a response to the RPD that is in substantial compliance with Code of Civil Procedure section 2031.210, et seq., and have established that their failure to timely serve their initial response to the RPD was the result of inadvertence, mistake, or excusable neglect.

Defendants’ request for monetary sanctions for successfully opposing Plaintiffs’ motion for relief from waiver is DENIED as there is no statutory authority for this request and Defendants did not successfully oppose Plaintiffs’ motion.

Defendants’ request for monetary sanctions in connection with their initial motion to compel Plaintiffs to provide initial responses to the RPD is DENIED. Defendants previously requested sanctions in connection with their motion to compel and the court denied that request on March 11, 2011.

Plaintiffs to prepare written order.