Motions to Dismiss
Regents Smith Motion is not filed by May 11, the court will order that material, which shall not be considered by the court, permanently deleted. Any opposition to any motion for an order sealing any record lodged conditionally under seal in support of the Regents Smith Motion must be filed and served no later than May 13. Any reply must be filed on or before May 15.
The Regents Signa Motion, the Olson Motion, the Regents Reyes Motion, and the Millard Motion: The court notes that, though the materials submitted in support of and in opposition to the Olson Motion and the Millard Motion have been filed publicly in the court, the same deficiencies exist in regard to the lodging by the Regents of material conditionally under seal as a basis for adjudication of the Regents Signa Motion and the Regents Reyes Motion.
For example, court records reflect that the two volume appendix of exhibits submitted by the Regents in support of the Regents Signa Motion was lodged conditionally under seal on January 22, 2026. On February 25, 2026, the Regents lodged similar documents in regard to the amended appendix of evidence filed in support of that motion and of the Regents Reyes Motion, conditionally under seal.
Though the Regents Signa Motion, the Olson Motion, the Regents Reyes Motion, and the Millard Motion are calendared for hearing on May 15, 2026, to the extent any material submitted as a basis for adjudication of those motions has been lodged conditionally under seal, the court expects that appropriate motions to seal those materials will be filed sufficiently in advance of that hearing considering the May Order and the court's ruling herein.
Tentative Ruling: Mark Signa et al vs The Regents of the University of CA et al
Tentative Ruling: Mark Signa et al vs The Regents of the University of CA et al
Case Number 18CV05728
Case Type Civil Law & Motion
Hearing Date / Time Fri, 06/12/2026 - 10:00
Nature of Proceedings Mark Signa vs The Regents of the University of California et al
Tentative Ruling
(1) For the reasons stated herein, the motion of defendant The Regents of the University of California for summary judgment, or in the alternative, summary adjudication against Matthew Stern's complaint is denied.
(2) For the reasons stated herein, the motion of defendant The Regents of the University of California for summary judgment, or in the alternative, summary adjudication against plaintiff Tiffany Little's complaint is denied.
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”
(3) For the reasons stated herein, the motion of defendant The Regents of the University of California for summary judgment, or in the alternative, summary adjudication against plaintiff Michael Little's complaint is denied.
(4) For the reasons stated herein, the motion of defendants The Regents of the University of California and University of California, Santa Barbara Police Chief Dustin Olson, to dismiss plaintiff Mark Signa's action is denied.
(5) For the reasons stated herein, the motion of defendants The Regents of the University of California, Dusin Olson, Cathy Farley, David Millard, Robert Romero, Gregory Pierce, and Gregory Smorodinsky to dismiss plaintiffs Michael Little and Tiffany Little's action is denied.
(6) For the reasons stated herein, the motion of defendants The Regents of the University of California, David Millard and Gregory Smorodinsky to dismiss plaintiff Jonathan Lee Reyes' action is denied.