Broadstone Alton, LLC vs. Aljohani

The Defendants are ordered to file an answer within 5 calendar days.

The Court sets a trial date of July 12, 2026, at 8:30 AM in C61.

Witnesses are required to testify in person unless the Court finds good cause to allow remote testimony. The party seeking remote testimony of a witness must file the request and service notice to all parties and the Court at least 5 days prior to the trial date.

Parties should have at least three (3) copies of any documentary evidence they intend to present in the trial-one for themselves, one for the opposing party, and one for the Court. If the parties upload any evidence to the evidence portal, or intend to present any video evidence, they must have a device available to present such evidence in the courtroom on the day of trial.

Plaintiff’s Counsel is ordered to provide notice of ruling. 3 30-2026-01583415 The Court has read and considered the Defendant’s Demurrer (ROA 12) and Broadstone Alton, the Complaint (ROA 2). LLC vs. Aljohani The Court OVERRULES the Demurrer.

The Defendant is ordered to file an answer within 5 calendar days.

The Plaintiff is ordered to serve notice of the Court’s ruling. 4 30-2026-01577411 The Court has read and considered the Defendant Adeleil Zhang’s Motion to Hoang Do vs. Zhang Quash Service of Summons (ROA 47).

The Court takes Judicial Notice of the Order to Serve Summons by Posting (ROA 11) and Proof of Service of Posting (ROA 18).

The Plaintiff in this matter submitted an Application to Serve Summons by Posting which was granted by this Court on 6/29/2026 (ROA 11). Registered Process Server David Cunningham (OC # 1895) signed a declaration of attempted service at the premises address on three different dates at three different times of the day prior to the Court approving service by posting. In ROA 18, Mr. Cunningham states that on 7/11/2026 at 10:30 AM, he posted the summons, complaint, prejudgment claim, and other documents to the premises and then sent the same packet by certified mail to the Defendant Adeleil Zhang.

California Evidence Code Section 647 creates a rebuttable presumption that a proof of service signed by a registered process server is true. It shifts the burden of proving lack of service to the defendant, rather than requiring the plaintiff to prove proper service. Defendants have provided no evidence to rebut the presumption under Evidence Code Section 647, other than their self- serving statements that they found the summons and complaint in their mailbox on June 24, 2026, and that they have received no other service.