Ortega vs. FCA US, LLC

subsequent motion, Defendants may do so by way of a properly noticed motion.

Plaintiff also requests costs and reasonable attorney’s fees under Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16, subdivision (c)(1) and section 128.5.

Section 425.16, subdivision (c)(1) provides, “If the court finds that a special motion to strike is frivolous or is solely intended to cause unnecessary delay, the court shall award costs and reasonable attorney’s fees to a plaintiff prevailing on the motion, pursuant to Section 128.5.

Given the Court’s ruling on the motion, it does not find the motion to be frivolous or solely intended to cause unnecessary delay. Nor does the Court find Plaintiff, acting in pro per, has incurred “attorney’s fees.”

The Court DENIES Plaintiff’s request for attorney’s fees and costs pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16, subdivision (c)(1).

In summary, the Court GRANTS, in part, Defendants 4Gen Digital, Inc., Craig M. Thomas, Jacqueline Thomas, and Alexandria C. Phillips’s Special Motion to Strike the Complaint (Anti-SLAPP) as to the allegations in the first, third, and sixth causes of action with respect to the police report filed by Defendants on 6/5/24 and DENIES the Motion as to the remaining allegations. 22 24-01382884 Motion to Compel Production

Ortega vs. FCA US, LLC Plaintiff Sandra Ortega’s motion to compel defendant FCA US LLC to provide responses, without objections, to Plaintiff’s Request for Production of Documents, Set One, is MOOT.

On May 14, 2024, Plaintiff served Requests for Production of Documents, Set One (“RFPs”) on FCA. (Rucker Decl., ¶ 4, Ex. 1.) Defendant served verified responses to Plaintiff’s Request for Production of Documents on February 25, 2026 and document production on March 3, 2026. (Hugret Decl., ¶ 6.) The Motion is therefore MOOT.

Plaintiff’s request for sanctions is DENIED.

Moving party to give notice.