Pantoja vs. Collins

the same to be considered “substantially related.” Both cases involve loans made by Bian and allegations of wrongful foreclosure. Bian’s lending and foreclosure practices were material to the Cashera Lawsuit and are material to the evaluation, prosecution, and settlement of this action.

Once it has been established that there is a “substantial relationship” between the Cashera Lawsuit and this action, it is presumed that Diulio and his firm possess confidential information. Contrary to Plaintiffs’ argument, the Court takes the position Bian does not need to identify the specific confidential information that was exchanged during the prior representation.

Accordingly, the motion to disqualify Diulio and The Diulio Firm as to their representation of Plaintiffs in this action is GRANTED.

MOTION TO SEAL

Defendant Wenqiang Bian’s Motion to Seal is GRANTED.

Defendant seeks to seal the order issued by the arbitrator, the Hon. Judith Ryan, ret., in JAMS Case No. 5240002186, on Bian’s motion to disqualify attorney Kristopher Diulio from representing the respondents in that proceeding adverse to Bian. (See ROA 46.)

The motion is unopposed and Bian has identified an overriding interest in maintaining the confidentiality of the arbitration proceedings. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 2.550(d).)

Accordingly, the motion to seal is GRANTED.

The Clerk is ordered to seal the document identified herein and consistent with the Court’s order.

The Case Management Conference is CONTINUED to December 3, 2026, at 9:30 a.m. in Department C12.

Moving Party Defendant shall give notice of all of the above.

7. Pantoja vs. Collins Demurrer to Amended Complaint

23-01370879 CONTINUED TO JUNE 12, 2026. See ROA 598