109 Cervantes vs. Verdin

those contracts, Defendant never invested the money or obtained the promised return, and Defendant knew when he entered into the contracts that he could not guarantee any return on investments made in the stock market. They further establish that Defendant had no intent to invest the money received from Plaintiffs, he used the money received from Plaintiffs for purposes other than those represented in the contracts, and his actions caused Plaintiffs financial loss in the full amount as alleged in the Complaint.

Plaintiffs have shown that Defendant fraudulently induced them to enter into the contracts underlying their Complaint, Defendant breached those contracts by failing to obtain the promised returns and make payments to Plaintiffs as agreed, and Defendant’s conduct has damaged Plaintiffs. Thus, Plaintiffs have carried their burden of proving the elements of their causes of action. (Code Civ. Proc., § 437c(p)(1).) Defendant has failed to raise any triable issue of a material fact as to the causes of action or any defenses. Thus, Plaintiffs are entitled to summary judgment as a matter of law.

In light of the above, the Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED. Plaintiffs are ordered to prepare the appropriate order and judgment.

Moving party to give notice. 110 LUC vs. MAI, 26-01568185 Continued to July 30, 2026 at 1:30 p.m. No further briefing allowed. 111 Rask vs. County of Orange, 25-01495933 On June 12, 2026, the Court continued the hearings on three motions: (1) Motion to Stay Proceedings; (2) Demurrer to First Amended Complaint; and (3) Motion to Strike Portions of FAC. (ROA 93.)

The hearings were continued because they necessarily required the Court to review the First Amended Complaint, which is not in the file. Plaintiff was ordered to file a copy of the FAC no later than 9 court days prior to the continued hearings, which Plaintiff did not do.

Accordingly, the Court sets an OSC re: dismissal for failure to prosecute for September 17, 2026 at 1:30 p.m. in Department W15. Plaintiff is ORDERED to file a response no later than 9 court days before the hearing.

The Court CONTINUES the hearings on the above three motions to September 17, 2026 at 1:30 p.m. in Department W15. No further briefing is allowed.

Finally, the Court stays the remainder of the action pending the resolution of the motion to stay proceedings.

Moving Defendants to give notice. 112 Space Exploration Technologies Corp. vs. Enteshari, 23-01365637 On 12/12/2025 Defendants filed the following Motions which were originally set for hearing on 6/25/2026:

(ROA 169) Defendant Ali Enteshari (“Defendant”) will move to compel Plaintiff Space Exploration Technologies Corp. (“Plaintiff”) to provide further responses to Requests for Production of Documents and Tangible Things, Set One, and reimburse Defendant for his attorneys’ fees incurred in bringing this Motion.

(ROA 181) Defendant Amin Enteshari (“Defendant”) will move to compel Plaintiff Space Exploration Technologies Corp. (“Plaintiff”) to provide further responses to Requests for Production of Documents and Tangible Things, Set One, and reimburse Defendant for his attorneys’ fees incurred in bringing this Motion.

(ROA 185) Defendant Amin Enteshari (“Defendant”) will move to compel Plaintiff Space Exploration Technologies Corp. (“Plaintiff”) to provide further responses to Special Interrogatories, Set One, and reimburse Defendant for his attorneys’ fees incurred in bringing this Motion.

(ROA 189) Defendant Ali Enteshari (“Defendant”) will move to compel Plaintiff Space Exploration Technologies Corp. (“Plaintiff”) to provide further responses to Special Interrogatories, Set One, and reimburse Defendant for his attorneys’ fees incurred in bringing this Motion.

Additionally, on 4/10/2026 Plaintiff filed the following Motions:

(ROA 203) Plaintiff Space Exploration Technologies Corp. (“Plaintiff”) will and hereby does move this Court pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 2031.310(a) for an order compelling Defendant Ali Enteshari (“Defendant”) to provide further responses to Plaintiff’s Third Set of Requests for Production of Documents, Numbers 67 68, 71-76, and 78. Plaintiff also moves for sanctions against Defendant his counsel at Berstein Law PC pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure §§ 2031.310(h) and 2023.050(a)(3), in the amount of $2,000.

(ROA 207) Plaintiff Space Exploration Technologies Corp. (“Plaintiff”) will and hereby does move this Court pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 2031.320(a) for an order compelling Ali Enteshari (“Defendant”) to comply with his response to Plaintiff’s requests for production of