ONEMAIN FINANCIAL, LLC AS SERVICER FOR (’ASF’) WILMINGTON TRUST, N.A., AS ISSUER LOAN TRUSTEE FOR ONEMAIN FINANCIA... vs PENNINGTON

Parties requesting services of a court reporter will need to arrange for private court reporter services at their own expense, pursuant to Government code §68086 and California Rules of Court, Rule 2.956. Requirements for requesting a court reporter are listed in the Policy for Official Reporter Pro Tempore available on the Sacramento Superior Court website at https://www.saccourt.ca.gov/court-reporters/docs/crtrp-6a.pdf. Parties may contact Court- Approved Official Reporters Pro Tempore by utilizing the list of Court Approved Official Reporters Pro Tempore available at https://www.saccourt.ca.gov/court-reporters/docs/crtrp- 13.Pdf

A Stipulation and Appointment of Official Reporter Pro Tempore (CV/E-206) is required to be signed by each party, the private court reporter, and the Judge prior to the hearing, if not using a reporter from the Court’s Approved Official Reporter Pro Tempore list.

Once the form is signed it must be filed with the clerk. If a litigant has been granted a fee waiver and requests a court reporter, the party must submit a Request for Court Reporter by a Party with a Fee Waiver (CV/E-211) and it must be filed with the clerk at least 10 days prior to the hearing or at the time the proceeding is scheduled if less than 10 days away. Once approved, the clerk will be forward the form to the Court Reporter’s Office and an official reporter will be provided.

TENTATIVE RULING

***NOTICE: EFFECTIVE APRIL 13, 2026, THIS DEPARTMENT HAS MOVED TO THE TANI G. CANTIL-SAKAUYE COURTHOUSE LOCATED AT 500 G STREET SACRAMENTO, CA. ALL MOTIONS NOTICED FOR DEPARTMENT 28 WILL BE HEARD IN DEPARTMENT 8C OF THE NEW COURTHOUSE. ALL PAPERS FOR THIS DEPARTMENT MUST BE FILED AT THIS NEW LOCATION AND WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED AT THE HALL OF JUSTICE. ALL HEARINGS WILL TAKE PLACE AT THIS NEW LOCATION***

Defendant in pro per Dustin Pennington’s (“Defendant”) motion to compel arbitration against Plaintiff OneMain Financial Group, LLC, as Servicer for Wilmington Trust, N.A., as Issuer Loan Trustee for OneMain Financial Issuance Trust 2019-2 (“Plaintiff”) is ruled upon as follows.

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO

25CV031557: ONEMAIN FINANCIAL, LLC AS SERVICER FOR ('ASF') WILMINGTON TRUST, N.A., AS ISSUER LOAN TRUSTEE FOR ONEMAIN FINANCIA... vs PENNINGTON 06/01/2026 Hearing on Motion to Compel Arbitration and Stay Proceedings in Department 8C

The notice of motion does not provide notice of the Court’s tentative ruling system, as required by Local Rule 1.06. Defendant is directed to contact opposing counsel and advise of Local Rule 1.06 and the Court’s tentative ruling procedure and the manner to request a hearing. If Defendant is unable to contact opposing counsel prior to the hearing, Defendant is ordered to appear at the hearing by Zoom or in person.

Background

This is a debt collection action arising from an alleged loan agreement. Plaintiff filed its Complaint on December 30, 2025 alleging three causes of action: (1) breach of promissory note; (2) open book account; and (3) account stated.

Defendant moves to compel arbitration pursuant to the arbitration agreement included in the loan agreement attached as Exhibit 1 to the Complaint. The arbitration agreement states, “Except as specified in this Arbitration Agreement, Lender and I agree that either party may elect arbitration of any Covered Claim. The term “Covered Claim” is intended to be broadly interpreted and includes the following claims or disputes, whether based in contract, tort, statute, equity, or any other legal theory: .” (Complaint, Exh. 1, p. 5, § 1.)

The list of covered claims includes “claims arising out or relating to any aspect of the relationship between Lender and me, including but not limited to, this Agreement or loan; any previous retail credit agreement (‘Retail Contract’) assigned to Lender; or any previous loan from or assigned to Lender;” and “claims arising out of or relating to negotiations, performance, or breach of this or any previous loan or Retail Contract made by or assigned to Lender; .” (Complaint, Exh. 1, p. 5, § 1.) Additionally, the arbitration agreement specifies that it “covers claims brought by or against my and Lender’s Third Parties.” (Complaint, Exh. 1, p. 5, § 2.)

The “Lender’s Third Parties” include “any thid party that participates in efforts to collect a debt owed under or to repossess collateral pursuant to this or any other Agreement or loan issued by or assigned to Lender;” and “any other third party providing services to or contracting with Lender or any of Lender’s Third Parties; .” (Complaint, Exh. 1, p. 5, § 2.)

The arbitration agreement also includes a clause outlining a pre-arbitration notice of dispute and informal resolution process. That clause states:

A party who intends to seek arbitration must first send to the other party a written Notice of Dispute (“Notice”). The Notice to Lender may be sent by U.S. mail or professional courier service addressed to OneMain Financial, Legal Department, 100 International

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO

25CV031557: ONEMAIN FINANCIAL, LLC AS SERVICER FOR ('ASF') WILMINGTON TRUST, N.A., AS ISSUER LOAN TRUSTEE FOR ONEMAIN FINANCIA... vs PENNINGTON 06/01/2026 Hearing on Motion to Compel Arbitration and Stay Proceedings in Department 8C

Drive, 16th Floor Baltimore, MD 21202 (“Notice Address”). The Notice to me may be sent to the address on file with my account. The Notice must include all of the following information: (a) my name; (b) my account number; (c) a description of the nature and basis of the claim or dispute; (d) an explanation of the specific relief sought and the basis for the calculations; (e) the signature of the party sending the Notice; and (f) if I am sending the Notice and have retained an attorney, my signed statement authorizing Lender to disclose my confidential account records to my attorney if necessary in resolving my claim.

After the Notice containing all of the information required above is received, within 60 days either party may request a conference to discuss informal resolution of the dispute (“Informal Settlement Conference”). If timely requested, the Informal Settlement Conference will take place at a mutually agreeable time by telephone or videoconference. I and a Lender representative must both personally participate in a good-faith effort to resolve the dispute informally without the need to proceed with arbitration. Any counsel representing Lender or me also may participate. The requirement of personal participation in an Informal Settlement Conference may be waived only if both Lender and I agree in writing.

Any applicable statute of limitations will be tolled during the period between the date that either Lender or I send the other a fully complete Notice, until the later of (i) 60 days after receipt of the Notice; or (ii) if an Informal Settlement Conference is timely requested, 30 days after completion of the Informal Settlement Conference (the “Informal Resolution Period”).

(Complaint, Exh. 1, p. 5, § 4.)

Additionally, the arbitration agreement contains a clause outlining the process for commencing arbitration. That clause states:

An arbitration proceeding may be commenced by filing a demand for arbitration with the American Arbitration Association (“AAA”) only if Lender and I do not reach an agreement to resolve the claim during the Informal Resolution Period. A court will have authority to enforce this section 5, including the power to enjoin the filing or prosecution of arbitrations without first providing a fully complete Notice and participating in a timely requested Informal Settlement Conference. Unless prohibited by applicable law, the arbitration provider shall not accept or administer any arbitration unless the claimant

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO

25CV031557: ONEMAIN FINANCIAL, LLC AS SERVICER FOR ('ASF') WILMINGTON TRUST, N.A., AS ISSUER LOAN TRUSTEE FOR ONEMAIN FINANCIA... vs PENNINGTON 06/01/2026 Hearing on Motion to Compel Arbitration and Stay Proceedings in Department 8C

has complied with the Notice and Informal Settlement Conference requirements of Section 4.

(Complaint, Exh. 1, p. 5, § 5.)

Discussion

As an initial matter, the Court notes that there is no proof of service attached to the moving papers, which were filed on February 11, 2026. On April 23, 2026, Plaintiff filed a request for entry of default and for clerk’s judgment, which has not been acted upon at this time. On April 27, 2026, Defendant filed a document titled, “Defendant’s Notice of Pending Motion to Compel Arbitration and Objection to Entry of Default and Default Judgment,” along with a supporting declaration. These documents also do not include proofs of service.

However, on May 19, 2026, Plaintiff filed an opposition to the present motion. The opposition refers to Defendant’s April 27 filings but not his moving papers filed on February 11. It is unclear how Plaintiff came to be aware of this pending motion or the April 27 filings. While this procedural history would normally warrant dropping the motion for defective service, the Court will instead reach the merits on the basis that Plaintiff’s opposition effectively waives any defects in service, despite the fact that the opposition only refers to the April 27 filings. (Carlton v.

Quint (2000) 77 Cal.App.4th 690, 697 [opposing a motion on the merits waives any defects or irregularities in the notice of motion].) This is because Plaintiff’s arguments in opposition are applicable to the merits of Defendant’s motion as addressed in Defendant’s February 11 filing, which indicates to the Court that Plaintiff must have reviewed Defendant’s February 11 filing, despite the lack of any reference thereto in Plaintiff’s opposition. Moreover, the Court agrees with Plaintiff’s argument regarding Defendant’s failure to satisfy conditions precedent to arbitration.

“Private arbitration is a matter of agreement between the parties. Under the law of contracts, parties may expressly agree that a right or duty is conditional upon the occurrence or nonoccurrence of an act or event. Thus, a condition precedent is either an act of a party that must be performed or an uncertain event that must happen before the contractual right accrues or the contractual duty arises.” (Platt Pacific, Inc. v. Andelson (1993) 6 Cal.4th 703, 713.) In Platt Pacific, the Supreme Court found that a term in an arbitration agreement requiring that a demand for arbitration be filed by a certain date was “a condition precedent that must be performed before the contractual duty to submit the dispute to arbitration arises.” (Id. at pp. 713-714.)

Here, the arbitration agreement includes a mandatory pre-arbitration notice requirement that must be satisfied before arbitration may be commenced. (Complaint, Exh. 1, p. 5, § 4.) The

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO

25CV031557: ONEMAIN FINANCIAL, LLC AS SERVICER FOR ('ASF') WILMINGTON TRUST, N.A., AS ISSUER LOAN TRUSTEE FOR ONEMAIN FINANCIA... vs PENNINGTON 06/01/2026 Hearing on Motion to Compel Arbitration and Stay Proceedings in Department 8C

agreement specifies that the arbitrator is prohibited from accepting or administering any arbitration unless the notice requirement has been satisfied. (Complaint, Exh. 1, p. 5, § 5.) Defendant has not shown that he has complied with the notice requirement, and thus his right to compel arbitration, and Plaintiff’s duty to submit its claims to arbitration, has not arisen. (Platt Pacific, supra, 6 Cal.4th at pp. 713-714.)

Accordingly, Defendant’s motion to compel arbitration is DENIED.

Regarding Plaintiff’s pending request for entry of default and clerk’s judgment, the Court notes that a motion to compel arbitration “may be filed in lieu of filing an answer to a complaint.” (Code Civ. Proc. § 1281.7.) Defendant filed his motion on February 11, 2026, within 30 days of being served with the summons, and before Plaintiff filed its default request. The Court acknowledges that the motion was apparently not served on Plaintiff, which would explain why Plaintiff filed its default request.

However, Code of Civil Procedure section 585 requires the clerk to enter default upon written request of the plaintiff only if the defendant has been served with the summons and “no answer” or other responsive pleading “has been filed” within the time specified in the summons. (Code Civ. Proc. § 585(a), emphasis added.) The statute does not mention service of the responsive pleading. While the statute also does not mention a motion to compel arbitration as a responsive pleading, section 1281.7 expressly authorizes a motion to compel arbitration to be filed in lieu of an answer, so the Court reads “answer” within section 585(a) to include a motion to compel arbitration.

Therefore, since Defendant filed his motion to compel arbitration before Plaintiff filed its request for entry of default and clerk’s judgment, the clerk is not authorized to enter default, notwithstanding the lack of service of the motion.

The clerk is therefore directed to reject Plaintiff’s request for entry of default and clerk’s judgment filed on April 23, 2026.

Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1281.7, Defendant shall file a responsive pleading by no later than June 16, 2026, which is 15 days after this order denying the motion to compel arbitration.

This minute order is effective immediately. No formal order or other notice is required. (Code Civ. Proc. § 1019.5; Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1312.)