Truong vs. Nguyen

opposition no later than 9 court days prior to the continued hearing. No additional briefing will be considered.

Temporary Restraining Order shall remain in effect until the next hearing.

Clerk to give notice.

6 Truong vs. Demurrer to First Amended Complaint Nguyen The demurrer to first amended complaint (FAC) of 30-2025- defendants Uy Nguyen, Teletron, Inc., Teletron Global, 01537299-CU- Inc., and Thanh Dang, is SUSTAINED with 10 days leave RI-CJC to amend.

The entire FAC is uncertain. The court cannot discern which plaintiff is suing which defendant for which cause of action. The court cannot determine whether the alleged conduct falls within the purview of 47 U.S.C. section 230. The FAC does not include sufficient detail of dates of alleged conduct for purposes of testing whether plaintiffs have complied with the statutes of limitation. The court cannot determine what images were used, when, which statements were published, when, which defendant hired or supervised Tran or which plaintiff suffered injury, or what that injury is. The court cannot determine whether the information was streamed on the internet or broadcast on television or both. These are but a few of the uncertainties. The entire pleading will likely need to be re-drafted from the ground up to survive future attack.

If plaintiffs choose to amend, plaintiffs are ORDERED to file a red-lined and clean version of the amended pleading.

Clerk to give notice.

7 Zheng vs. Zheng The instant case is one for malicious prosecution, which 30-2025- alleges a previous case for malicious prosecution over a 01488963-CU- domestic violence restraining order (DVRO) was NP-CJC malicious.

Plaintiffs Gene Zheng and May Zheng, and Defendant Jack Zhen Zheng, are siblings. Defendant Nigel Burns is an attorney whose firm represented Jack in the first malicious prosecution action.

Defendant Nigel Burns’s Demurrer to Complaint

Defendants Nigel Burns and The Law Offices of Nigel Burns’ Demurrer to Plaintiff’s Complaint is OVERRULED.