VII. SBC California's Failure to Respond to Discovery
Requests

Consumer Groups allege that SBC California has resisted responding to previous data requests and, following service of its motion, refused to provide responses to any data requests. SBC California did not deny this allegation in any pleading. SBC states in reply comments to the proposed decision that it "notified ORA and TURN on November 14 and 17, 2003, that it objected to providing further discovery responses because it had sought to withdraw its application." This notice was more than two weeks before the ALJ formally suspended the proceeding.

SBC California's refusal to cooperate with parties on matters of discovery was improper. The scoping memo issued in this proceeding and Commission practice presumes that parties will act in good faith during the discovery process. The appropriate course of action for SBC California, if it objected to a discovery request would have been to meet and confer and to raise the issue with the assigned ALJ. Alternatively, SBC California should have filed a motion seeking suspension of discovery pending resolution of its motion to withdraw. As discussed previously, only the Commission may determine the procedural course of this application.