Trejo-Castillo vs. American Honda Motor Co Inc

briefing regarding the initial petition, or in their written opposition to the petition that is the subject of this motion for reconsideration. (See ROAs 632, 643, 707.) Defendants instead waited until the eleventh hour—at the February 24, 2026, hearing—to raise the issue. At this point 3D Co Holdings, LLC, had been in suspended status for nearly 10 months.

The declaration supporting Defendants’ motion for reconsideration contends that counsel was unaware of the suspended status at the time the opposition to the underlying motion was due. However, there is no explanation as to why the information could not have been discovered sooner with reasonable diligence.

Thus, although Defendants have not met their burden on their motion for reconsideration, the Court additionally finds that Defendants forfeited their argument regarding 3D Co Holdings, LLC’s suspended status.

Accordingly, the motion is denied.

Defendants’ requests for judicial notice are granted.

Defendants to give notice.

107 Trejo-Castillo vs.

1. Motion to Enforce Settlement American Honda Motor Co Inc 2. Case Management Conference

Unopposed Motion to Enforce Settlement is GRANTED. CCP§ 664.6. The Parties Entered into an Enforceable Settlement Agreement on June 13, 2024. (Decl. Gopstein ¶ 4, Exs. 1-2.) Despite prior representations that the settlement funds would be delivered by 12/2/2025, Plaintiff’s counsel declares, as of 3/16/2025, “Plaintiff still does not have any concrete information about the Settlement check and therefore, has yet to receive any portion of the settlement funds, with Defendant’s counsel’s lack of response being a further delay tactic.” (Decl. Gopstein¶7.)