Santa Clara County Federal Credit Union vs Naotala Tafua-Teo

SUPERIOR COURT, STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA Department 12 Honorable Nahal Iravani-Sani, Presiding Courtroom Clerk, Ryan Nguyen 191 North First Street, San Jose, CA 95113 Telephone: (408) 882-2230

DATE: 06/17/2026 TIME: 9:00 A.M. and 9:01 A.M.

LINE # CASE # CASE TITLE RULING LINE 1 22CV403688 Santa Clara County Motion to Set Aside Dismissal Federal Credit Union vs Naotala Tafua-Teo Please Ctrl Click on (or scroll down to) Line 1 LINE 2 23CV421818 Greenberg Motion to Strike Answer & Enter Default Development & Construction, Inc. vs Fernando Pio-Molinero The Court has received no opposition from Defendant PMC. “[T]he et al failure to file an opposition creates an inference that the motion or demurrer is meritorious.” (Sexton v. Superior Court (1997) 58 Cal.App.4th 1403, 1410.)

Good Cause Appearing, Plaintiff’s motion is granted.

Plaintiff to prepare the final order, accompanied by the necessary Forms EFS-020, within 10 days of the date of the hearing.

LINES 3-4 24CV433114 Storesund Motion to Strike & Demurrer Construction, Inc.vs Christopher Quinn et al Please Ctrl Click on (or scroll down to) Line 3 LINE 5 24CV443503 Linda Dashell vs Louie Motion to Quash Goros et al Please Ctrl Click on (or scroll down to) Line 5

Calendar Line 1 Santa Clara County Federal Credit Union v Tafua-Teo

PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR ENTRY OF JUDGMENT PURSUANT TO CCP 664.6

The parties entered into a written settlement agreement on June 22, 2023 resolving this action. The agreement was signed by Defendant and by Plaintiff’s counsel on Plaintiff’s behalf and satisfies the requirements of Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6. The agreement sets forth the material settlement terms, including the amount owed, payment schedule, and default provisions.

On April 15, 2024, the Court dismissed the action without prejudice and expressly retained jurisdiction under Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6 to enforce the settlement and enter judgment upon default.

Plaintiff has established that Defendant defaulted under the settlement agreement. Defendant has not made payment since October 23, 2024. Plaintiff provided written notice of default as required by the agreement on February 17, 2026, and afforded Defendant the contractual opportunity to cure. Defendant failed to cure the default. No opposition has been filed by Defendant to the pending motion.