Notice

Cal. Super. - 6th Dist.July 31, 2018

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Electronically FiledRESHMA KAMATH by Superior Court of CA, C t fS t CI , Reshma Kamath, Cal Bar N0. 333800 0:279yzgzz gr‘og Alara P.O. Box 2792, Yuma, Arizona 85366 Reviewed By;- J_ Viramontes Ph.: (650)-257-07 19 _ Case #1 8cv332500 E.: reshmakamath2021@gma11.com Envelope: 8243309 Counsel for Plaintiff Excellence Timber, Inc. IN AND FOR THE SUPERIOR COURT OF STATE OF CALIFONRIA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA LIMITED CIVIL JURISDICTION Case N0.: 18CV332500 Excellence Timber, Inc. a California corporation, . . NOTICE 0F NON-OPPOSITION T0 Plamtlffi PLAINTIFF’S MOTION T0 RE-OPEN THE CASE VS. HEARING: Chi Kwo Nian, an individual, and Does 1- 10, DATE: FEB. 17, 2022 inclusive, TIME: 9 A.M. P.T. DEP’T: D-19 Defendants vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv TO THE HONORABLE COURT, ALL PARTIES, AND ATTORNEY(S) OF RECORD, HEREIN: _ 1 _ NOTICE OF NON-OPPOSITION 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE the opposition to Plaintiff Excellence Timber, Inc., having been due to be served and filed no later than 02/02/2022, Defendant Chi Kwo Nian did not file its Objection/ Opposition timely to Plaintiff’s Motion t0 Re-open the case. Thus, Plaintiff’s Motion to Re-open the case remains unopposed for all purposes by this Defendant. The failure of the opposing party to serve and file a written opposition may be construed by the court as an admission that the motion is meritorious, and the court may grant the motion without a hearing on the merits. (see, California Rules ofCourt, Rule 8.54 (c): “A failure t0 oppose a motion may be deemed a consent t0 the granting 0f the motion”) (See also, Thatcher v. Lucky Stores (2000) 79 Ca1.App.4th 108 1 , where in Thatcher, the trial court granted summary judgment solely 0n the basis that no opposition was filed, consistent With a local rule providing that failure t0 file opposition t0 a motion could be deemed an admission that the motion was meritorious. (Id. at p. 1084) Plaintiff respectfully requests this Court deem the above-stated Defendant’s failure t0 file opposition papers to be an admission that the underlying Motion is meritorious. The Motion was properly served t0 Defendant Via USPS mail-service. Resultantly, the Motion t0 Re-open the case should be granted in its entirety. /// DATED: FEBRUARY 09, 2022 RESHMA KAMATH 44%”;7W Reshma Kamath Counsel for Excellence Timber, Inc. _ 2 _ NOTICE OF NON-OPPOSITION 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 PROOF OF SERVICE F.R.C.P. 5 / C.C.P. § 1013(a)(3), C.C.P. § 1010.6(a)(6) / Cal. R. Ct. R. 2.260 I am a resident 0f, or employed in, the County of Yuma, Arizona. I am over the age 0f 18, and not a party to this action. My business address is: P.O. Box 2792, Yuma, Arizona 85366. On February 09, 2022, I served the following document(s), by method(s) indicated below, on the parties in this action: SEE ATTACHED SERVICE LIST. PROOF OF SERVICE FOR NOTICE OF NON-OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO RE-OPEN THE CASE UNITED STATES MAIL SERVICE: In enclosing the documents in a sealed envelope 0r package addressed to the persons at the addresses below in depositing the sealed envelope With the United States Postal Service, With the postage fully prepaid. I declare under penalty 0f perjury under the laws 0f the State 0f California and the United States 0f America that the above is true and correct. Executed in Yuma, Arizona. DATED: February 09, 2022 /S/Reshma Kamath Reshma Kamath SERVICE LIST CHI KWO NIAN, DEFENDANT PO Box 2921 1 1, Sacramento, CA 95829; 14602 Union Ave San Jose, CA 95124; 5836 Bosco Way Sacramento, CA 95824; 7058 New Sacto Way Sacramento, CA 95824; Ph. No.2 914-465-3320. Cell Ph. No.2 916-465-3320. -1- PROOF OF SERVICE