ITRIA VENTURES, LLC v. OCEAN PROPERTIES PARTNERS II LLC, et al.

25CV124229: ITRIA VENTURES, LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY vs OCEAN PROPERTIES PARTNERS II LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, et al. 08/20/2026 Hearing on Motion to Set Aside/Vacate Judgment (CCP 473) filed by OCEAN PROPERTIES PARTNERS II LLC, a California limited liability company (Defendant) + CRS# 211843591285 in Department 20

Tentative Ruling - 08/17/2026 Thomas Weathers

The Motion to Set Aside/Vacate Default and / or Default Judgment filed by EMMANUEL BAYO OGUNSANYA, OCEAN PROPERTIES PARTNERS II LLC, a California limited liability company on 07/22/2026 is Granted.

Defendants Ocean Properties II, LLC and Emmanuel Bayo Ogunsanya’s Motion to Vacate and Set Aside Judgment and Default is GRANTED.

BACKGROUND

Plaintiff Itria Ventures, LLC (“Plaintiff”) initiated this action on May 22, 2025 against Defendants Ocean Properties Partners II LLC (“OPP”) and Emmanuel Bayo Ogunsanya (“Ogunsanya”) (collectively, “Defendants”). The operative complaint alleges (1) Appointment of Receiver; (2) Preliminary Injunction; (3) Breach of Written Contract; and (4) Breach of Written Guaranty.

On June 10, 2026, Plaintiff filed two Proofs of Service. One purported to effectuate substitute service on Ogunsanya on June 6, 2025, on Ariel Parajon, a mailbox rental store clerk in Oakland, California. The proof of substitute service includes a declaration of diligence, which lists only the substitute service on Parajon. The proof of service as to OPP states that personal service was effectuated on June 6, 2025, on Miriam Ali of Tresp, Day and Associates in Solana Beach, California.

Plaintiff requested entry of default against OPP on July 14, 2025. Default was entered on the same date. Plaintiff requested entry of default against Ogunsanya on July 28, 2025. Default was also entered on the same date. Judgment was entered against Defendants on October 7, 2025. A writ of execution was issued as to Ogunsanya in Alameda County on January 22, 2026.

Defendants now move to vacate and set aside judgment and any default entered in this action. Defendants further seek an order to vacate/quash any writ of execution, or any other writ issued pursuant to any default or judgment. Defendants contend that they were never properly served with the summons and complaint; did not receive actual notice of this action in time to defend; and resulting default or judgment is void or voidable. Defendants further contend that the Court has inherent equitable authority to grant relief where a party was prevented from participating in the litigation due to extrinsic mistake or lack of due process.

LEGAL STANDARD 25CV124229: ITRIA VENTURES, LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY vs OCEAN PROPERTIES PARTNERS II LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, et al. 08/20/2026 Hearing on Motion to Set Aside/Vacate Judgment (CCP 473) filed by OCEAN PROPERTIES PARTNERS II LLC, a California limited liability company (Defendant) + CRS# 211843591285 in Department 20

“The court may, upon any terms as may be just, relieve a party or his or her legal representative from a judgment, dismissal, order, or other proceeding taken against him or her through his or her mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect.” (C.C.P. § 473(b).) “Application for this relief shall be accompanied by a copy of the answer or other pleading proposed to be filed therein, otherwise the application shall not be granted, and shall be made within a reasonable time, in no case exceeding six months, after the judgment, dismissal, order, or proceeding was taken.” (Id.) Relief is mandatory, however, “whenever an application for relief is made no more than six months after entry of judgment, is in proper form, and is accompanied by an attorney’s sworn affidavit attesting to his or her mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or neglect . . . unless the court finds that the default or dismissal was not in fact caused by the attorney’s mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or neglect.” (Id.)

“The general underlying purpose of section 473(b) is to promote the determination of actions on their merits.” (Austin v. Los Angeles Unified School District (2016) 244 Cal.App.4th 918, 928.) Therefore, “any doubts in applying section 473 must be resolved in favor of the party seeking relief from default[.]” (Rappleyea v. Campbell (1994) 8 Cal. 4th 975, 980 [internal citations omitted].) “Section 473 is often applied liberally where the party in default moves promptly to seek relief, and the party opposing the motion will not suffer prejudice if relief is granted.” (Elston v. City of Turlock (1985) 38 Cal. 3d 227, 233 [internal citations omitted].) “In such situations ‘very slight evidence will be required to justify a court in setting aside the default.’” (Id.)

When service of a summons has not resulted in actual notice to a party in time to defend the action and a default or default judgment has been entered against her in the action, she may serve and file a notice of motion to set aside the default or default judgment and for leave to defend the action. (C.C.P. § 473.5, subd. (a).) The notice of motion shall be served and filed within a reasonable time, but in no event exceeding the earlier of: (i) two years after entry of default judgment against her; or (ii) 180 days after service on her of a written notice that the default or default judgment has been entered. (Ibid.) The motion shall be accompanied by (1) an affidavit showing under oath that the party’s lack of actual notice in time to defend the action was not caused by her avoidance of service or inexcusable neglect, and (2) the proposed pleading to be filed. (Id., subd. (b).)

DISCUSSION

As an initial matter, Plaintiff contends that the motion should be denied because Defendants failed to serve Plaintiff with the moving papers. However, because Plaintiff filed an opposition to the motion, did not request a continuance of the hearing, and did not claim prejudice by reason of insufficient notice or service, Plaintiff has effectively waived any claim of inadequate service or

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ALAMEDA

25CV124229: ITRIA VENTURES, LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY vs OCEAN PROPERTIES PARTNERS II LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, et al. 08/20/2026 Hearing on Motion to Set Aside/Vacate Judgment (CCP 473) filed by OCEAN PROPERTIES PARTNERS II LLC, a California limited liability company (Defendant) + CRS# 211843591285 in Department 20 notice. (Carlton v. Quint (2000) 77 Cal.App.4th 690, 697.)

As to Ogunsanya, substitute service was not properly effectuated. Under California law, all means other than personal delivery to the defendant are considered substituted service; personal service must have been diligently attempted before substitute service may be performed. (Bonita Packing Co. v. O’Sullivan (1995 C.D. Cal.) 165 F.R.D. 610, 613.) Pursuant to Local Rule 3.50, for purposes of Code of Civil Procedure section 415.20(b), reasonable diligence in attempting personal service is established by attempting personal service in good faith on at least three occasions. Here, there does not appear to have been any attempts for personal service on Ogunsanya before resorting to substitute service. As such, service was not effectuated upon Ogunsanya in June 2025 and resulting default and judgment against Ogunsanya are void. (C.C.P. § 473.5.)

As to OPP, the parties dispute whether service was properly effectuated. OPP contends that it did not have a registered agent for service of process at the time of purported service. OPP further contends that even if attempted service had occurred, it never received actual notice of the action in time to appear and defend the action. OPP further argues that relief is warranted under the Court’s equitable authority because it was deprived of the opportunity to participate in this action through no fault of its own. OPP argues that the Court should consider the strong public policy favoring determination of cases on their merits.

Pursuant to the sworn declaration of Ogunsanya, the managing member of OPP, Tersp, Day and Associates was not authorized to accept service on OPP’s behalf. (Ogunsanya Decl. ¶¶ 2-4.) Ogunsanya states that even if the entity were authorized to accept service, the property address would have been in Cardiff-by-the-Sea, not the address listed in the proof of service. (Id. ¶ 4.) Ogunsanya further states that neither he nor OPP knew of the lawsuit and had only learned of it after default was entered. (Id. ¶¶ 5-7.) Ogunsanya states that upon learning of the default, he retained counsel to defend the action. (Id. ¶¶ 9-10.)

The exhibit attached to Ogunsanya’s declaration does not show that there was no agent for service of process at the time of purported service on OPP; instead, it shows that Tresp, Day & Associates resigned from OPP’s agent in February 2026. (Ogunsanya Decl. Exh. A.) Plaintiff’s counsel submits OPP’s State Registration – Articles of Organization dated February 2021, which states that Tresp, Day & Associates is OPP’s agent for service of process. (Chang Decl. Exh. A.) However, there is no address listed for Tresp. (Id.)

Defense counsel states in his sworn declaration that while Defendants acted promptly in retaining counsel after learning of the default, due to an inadvertent filing error, the motion to vacate was not timely filed after obtaining a reservation for a hearing on the motion. (Madison Amended Decl. ¶¶ 6, 9.)

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ALAMEDA

25CV124229: ITRIA VENTURES, LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY vs OCEAN PROPERTIES PARTNERS II LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, et al. 08/20/2026 Hearing on Motion to Set Aside/Vacate Judgment (CCP 473) filed by OCEAN PROPERTIES PARTNERS II LLC, a California limited liability company (Defendant) + CRS# 211843591285 in Department 20

OPP fails to establish that service was not properly effectuated under its agent for service of process in June 2025. OPP’s motion was filed more than six (6) months from entry of judgment, and more than 180 days after entry of judgment. As such, OPP has not established that it is entitled to relief under C.C.P. §§ 473(b) or (d) or 473.5.

“Apart from any statute, courts have inherent authority to vacate a default and default judgment on equitable grounds such as extrinsic fraud or extrinsic mistake.” (Bae v. T.D. Service Co. of Arizona (2016) 245 Cal.App.4th 89, 97, internal citations omitted.) Relief pursuant to extrinsic mistake is available if it is determined that (1) the defaulting party has a meritorious case; (2) the party seeking to set aside the default articulates a satisfactory excuse for not presenting a timely defense; and (3) the moving party demonstrates diligence in seeking to set aside default once discovered. (Id. at p. 100.)

Based on the record before the Court, OPP is entitled to relief from default and default judgment due to equitable mistake. Defendants submit a proposed answer with appropriate denials of the complaint’s allegations, demonstrating the existence of a meritorious defense. (Madison Decl. Exh. A.) Defendants submit sworn declarations stating the reasons why they did not find a timely answer and establishing diligence once they learned of the default. The Court further considers the State’s policy in favor of resolution of cases on their merits.

CONCLUSION

Defendants’ motion to set vacate and set aside judgment and default is GRANTED.

The 7/14/25 and 7/28/25 defaults are VACATED.

Judgment entered on October 7, 2025 is VACATED.

The writ of execution issued on January 22, 2026 is QUASHED.

Defendants shall file and serve their responsive pleading by August 31, 2026. Please note that the proposed responsive pleading submitted with the moving papers is NOT deemed filed or served.

If a party does not timely contest the foregoing Tentative Ruling and appear at the hearing, the Tentative Ruling will become the order of the court.

HOW DO I CONTEST A TENTATIVE RULING?

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ALAMEDA

25CV124229: ITRIA VENTURES, LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY vs OCEAN PROPERTIES PARTNERS II LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, et al. 08/20/2026 Hearing on Motion to Set Aside/Vacate Judgment (CCP 473) filed by OCEAN PROPERTIES PARTNERS II LLC, a California limited liability company (Defendant) + CRS# 211843591285 in Department 20

THROUGH ECOURT Notify the Court and all the other parties no later than 4:00 PM one court day before the scheduled hearing, and briefly identify the issues you wish to argue through the following steps: 1. Log into eCourt Public Portal 2. Case Search 3. Enter the Case Number and select "Search" 4. Select the Case Name 5. Select the Tentative Rulings Tab 6. Select "Click to Contest this Ruling" 7. Enter your Name and Reason for Contesting 8. Select "Proceed" BY EMAIL Send an email to the DEPARTMENT CLERK and all the other parties no later than 4:00 PM one court day before the scheduled hearing. This will permit the department clerk to send invitations to counsel to appear remotely.

BOTH ECOURT AND EMAIL notices are required.