Pham vs. Nguoi Viet News, Inc.
Final Accounting
Motion type
Parties
Ruling
TENTATIVE RULINGS 6/25/2026 02:00 PM
100 BOLANOS vs. NEWPORT FAB, LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability Company
2022-01280696 Final Accounting
The settlement administrator, Phoenix Settlement Administrators, has confirmed that the distribution of the settlement funds has been completed and made in accordance with the terms of the settlement that were approved by the Court.
As Plaintiffs have shown that the administrator’s work is complete, the Court’s file may now be closed.
Plaintiffs are ordered to give notice of this ruling to Defendants. 101 Pham vs. Nguoi Viet News, Inc.
2020-01157868 Final Accounting
The settlement administrator, CPT Group, Inc., has confirmed that the distribution of the settlement funds has been completed and made in accordance with the terms of the settlement that were approved by the Court.
As Plaintiffs have shown that the administrator’s work is complete, the Court’s file may now be closed.
Plaintiffs are ordered to give notice of this ruling to Defendant. 102 Southern California Edison Company vs. California State Board of Equalization
2025-01534286
Demurrer to Answer
Plaintiff Southern California Edison Company’s demurrer to Defendant California State Board of Equalization’s (“Board”) answer is SUSTAINED in part and OVERRULED in part. (Code Civ. Proc. [CCP], § 430.20, subd. (a).)
Defendant shall have leave to file and serve a first amended answer within 14 days of notice of this ruling.
As a threshold matter, the Court finds that Defendant’s demurrer was not timely filed per Code. As Defendant points out (ROA #61 [Opp.], p. 7), CCP section 430.40(b) requires demurrers to answers to be filed and served within 10 days after service of the answer. Here, the answer was served electronically on 2/19/2026, so 10 days + 2 court days for electronic service thereafter is 3/3/2026.
Plaintiff counters that CCP section 430.41(a)(2) granted Plaintiff “an automatic 30-day extension” to file the demurrer because “the parties were unable to meet and confer at least 5 days before the date the responsive pleading is due.” (ROA #65 [Reply], pp. 3-4.) However, Plaintiff also acknowledges that the statute requires Plaintiff to “fil[e] and serv[e], on or before the date on which a demurrer would be due, a declaration stating
Cited authorities
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Ask about this ruling
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”