Defendant Frank Gonzalez's motion for judgment on the pleadings; Cross-complainant Frank Gonzalez's motion for reconsideration
Case No.: 25STCV15515 Hearing Date: August 14, 2026 [TENTATIVE] order RE: defendant frank gonzalez's motion for judgment on the pleadings | | | BACKGROUND
On May 29, 2025, Plaintiff Delta Pacific Technologies, LLC (Delta) filed this action for declaratory and injunctive relief against Defendant Frank Gonzalez (Gonzalez). The dispute arises from Gonzalez's claims of ownership over Delta. Delta alleges that it was originally founded by Ellen Atkins, who passed away in January 2025. Ellen Atkins allegedly passed Delta to her son, Kyle Atkins, who possessed power of attorney.
Gonzalez is a former employee who was allegedly fired by Ellen Atkins for embezzlement. However, Gonzalez claims that he entered into a verbal partnership with Ellen Atkins to take over Delta. Delta filed this action to obtain a judicial declaration of its ownership rights and to enjoin Gonzalez from making further claims of ownership.
On October 6, 2025, Gonzalez filed a first amended cross-complaint (FACC) against Delta, Kyle Atkins, Don Atkins, and Rachael Fedden (collectively, Cross-Defendants). Kyle and Don Atkins are the sons of Ellen Atkins. Rachael Fedden is an employee of Delta who was allegedly fired and then rehired. Gonzalez alleges that Cross-Defendants locked him out of the business by claiming ownership over Delta and having the police detain him until he relinquished the office keys.
The FACC asserts a single cause of action for conversion of the keys, which Gonzalez alleges led to the following damages: (a) loss of access to the business premises and company vehicles; (b) loss of shared profits; and (c) reputational harm.
On June 26, 2026, Gonzalez filed the instant motion for judgment on the pleadings. Delta filed an opposition on August 3, 2026.
LEGAL STANDARD
A motion for judgment on the pleadings may be made on the same grounds as those supporting a general demurrer, i.e., that the pleading fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a legally cognizable claim or defense. (Stoops v. Abbassi (2002) 100 Cal.App.4th 644, 650.)
A motion for judgment on the pleadings performs the same function as a general demurrer, and hence attacks only defects disclosed on the face of the pleadings or by matters that can be judicially noticed. (Cloud v. Northrop Grumman Corp. (1999) 67 Cal.App.4th 995, 999
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”
Judgment on the pleadings must be denied where there are material factual issues that require evidentiary resolution. (Schabarum v. Calif. Legislature (1998) 60 Cal.App.4th 1205, 1216.)
DISCUSSION
Gonzalez's MJOP is based on the contention that Delta Pacific Technologies, LLC is not the valid successor to Delta Pacific Technologies, Inc. This is a question of fact unsuited for resolution on the pleadings. Delta LLC alleges that it is the successor to Delta Inc., which must be assumed true for pleading purposes. Delta LLC is not required to allege the evidentiary facts proving its successor status. Accordingly, there is no basis for judgment on the pleadings.
CONCLUSION
Defendant Frank Gonzalez's motion for judgment on the pleadings is DENIED.
DELTA PACIFIC TECHNOLOGIES, LLC, Plaintiff, v. FRANK GONZALEZ, Defendant. | Case No.: 25STCV15515 Hearing Date: August 14, 2026 [TENTATIVE] order RE: cross-complainant frank gonzalez's motion for reconsideration | | | BACKGROUND
On May 29, 2025, Plaintiff Delta Pacific Technologies, LLC (Delta) filed this action for declaratory and injunctive relief against Defendant Frank Gonzalez (Gonzalez). The dispute arises from Gonzalez's claims of ownership over Delta. Delta alleges that it was originally founded by Ellen Atkins, who passed away in January 2025. Ellen Atkins allegedly passed Delta to her son, Kyle Atkins, who possessed power of attorney.
Gonzalez is a former employee who was allegedly fired by Ellen Atkins for embezzlement. However, Gonzalez claims that he entered into a verbal partnership with Ellen Atkins to take over Delta. Delta filed this action to obtain a judicial declaration of its ownership rights and to enjoin Gonzalez from making further claims of ownership.
On October 6, 2025, Gonzalez filed a first amended cross-complaint (FACC) against Delta, Kyle Atkins, Don Atkins, and Rachael Fedden (collectively, Cross-Defendants). Kyle and Don Atkins are the sons of Ellen Atkins. Rachael Fedden is an employee of Delta who was allegedly fired and then rehired. Gonzalez alleges that Cross-Defendants locked him out of the business by claiming ownership over Delta and having the police detain him until he relinquished the office keys.
The FACC asserts a single cause of action for conversion of the keys, which Gonzalez alleges led to the following damages: (a) loss of access to the business premises and company vehicles; (b) loss of shared profits; and (c) reputational harm.
On June 8, 2026, the Court denied Gonzalez's motion for leave to file a second amended cross-complaint. On June 22, 2026, Gonzalez filed the instant motion for reconsideration. Cross-Defendants filed an opposition on August 3, 2026. Gonzalez filed a reply on August 7, 2026.
LEGAL STANDARD
"When an application for an order has been made to a judge, or to a court, and refused in whole or in part, or granted, or granted conditionally, or on terms, any party affected by the order may, within 10 days after service upon the party of written notice of entry of the order and based upon new or different facts, circumstances, or law, make application to the same judge or court that made the order, to reconsider the matter and modify, amend, or revoke the prior order. The party making the application shall state by affidavit what application was made before, when and to what judge, what order or decisions were made, and what new or different facts, circumstances, or law are claimed to be shown." (Code Civ. Proc., Sec. 1008(a).)
DISCUSSION
Gonzalez's proposed SACC adds Delta's counsel (Kennedy McCarthy & Rumm) as a defendant and adds eight causes of action. This would substantially expand the scope of the case without good cause. Therefore, the Court denied leave to amend, finding that Gonzalez had failed to explain what new facts supported the amendment or why he could not have made the amendment earlier.
The Court rejected Gonzalez's claim that he recently discovered "that Delta Pacific Technologies LLC had been operating since December 3, 2024" because it bore no relation to the claims, and in any case, the complaint was clearly filed by Delta Pacific Technologies LLC.
In the instant motion, Gonzalez cites "entity misidentification" as a different circumstance warranting reconsideration. This is merely a rehash of the "Delta LLC" issue that the Court rejected in the underlying motion. According to the complaint, Delta was founded by Ellen Atkins as Delta Pacific Technologies, Inc. (Compl. P. 1.) Plaintiff Delta Pacific Technologies, LLC is the successor entity. (Ibid.) There is no "misidentification" or "overlooked fact." This has been the allegation from the outset, and Delta LLC has always been the party of record.
There remains no valid explanation for Gonzalez's substantial delay in raising the proposed SACC or any explanation for why amendment is necessary. Gonzalez's skepticism as to the validity of the succession is not a basis for reconsideration. The purported "new" evidence, consisting of gas bills charged to Delta Pacific Technologies, Inc., has no bearing on the proposed amendments and does not justify the delay in seeking leave to amend.
In sum, the Court finds no reason to reconsider its order denying leave to amend.
CONCLUSION
Cross-Complainant Frank Gonzalez's motion for reconsideration is DENIED.
Case Number: 25STCV30868 Hearing Date: August 14, 2026 Dept: 406 EMPLOYERS ASSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff, v. HONEY PACIFICA LLC, et al., Defendants. |