SIU Holdings, et.al. vs. Pouya Taaghol

4 9:00 8 25CV477954 SIU Holdings, et.al. vs. Pouya Taaghol Defendants move this court for Plaintiffs to comply with statutory und ertaking requirement of CCP section 1030. Plaintiffs admit that they are out of state entities. The court is not persuaded that the business contacts they have made render them to be entities that are within the state. Defendant also need o nly show that they have a reasonable possibility of prevailing at trial. Defendant h as met its burden showing that a factfinder could find that defendant’s statements ar e protected by the common interest privilege or that the statement is not an accusation of a crime. Defendant’s motion is GRANTED. This court will seek ora l argument regarding the amount of bond appropriate in this matter.

Calendar Line 5

Case Name: Mafi v. Jozani Case No.: 25CV466156

According to the allegations of the first amended complaint (“FAC”), Plaintiff Parastou Mafi (“Plaintiff”) is married to but legally separated from Vahid Assadi (“Assadi”). (See FAC, ¶ 1.) Defendant Lynn Diane Assadi Jozani (“Defendant”) is Assadi’s sister and thus, Plaintiff’s sister-in-law. (Id.) During the marital dissolution proceeding, Assadi made certain false representations to Plaintiff and the court, thereby breaching his fiduciary duties owed to Plaintiff. (See FAC, ¶¶ 9-15.) Defendant knowingly aided and abetted Assadi in the breach of his fiduciary duties and benefitted from these breaches. (See FAC, ¶ 16.)

On January 5, 2026, Plaintiff filed the FAC against Defendant asserting causes of action for:

1) Aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty; 2) Aiding and abetting fraud—intentional misrepresentations—Dougherty Property; 3) Aiding and abetting fraud—intentional misrepresentations—Stevens Creek Property; 4) Aiding and abetting fraud—concealment of material facts—Dougherty Property; 5) Aiding and abetting fraud—concealment of material facts—Stevens Creek Property;