DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
25PSCV03339·la·Civil·Unlawful Detainer
Hearing in 1 dayDENIED without prejudice

Regal Julian, LLC v. Cao

Application for Default Judgment

Hearing date
Aug 25, 2026
Department
H
Judge
Prevailing
N/A

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Causes of action

Parties

PlaintiffRegal Julian, LLC
DefendantLubang Cao

Ruling

(Pomona Courthouse South: Dept. H) August 25, 2026 DEPARTMENT H LAW AND MOTION RULINGS

Cao, Case No. 25PSCV03339 ORDER ON DEFAULT JUDGMENT APPLICATION Plaintiff Regal Julian, LLC's Application for Default Judgment is DENIED without prejudice.

Background

This is an unlawful detainer action involving the commercial premises located at 20267 Paseo Del Prado in Walnut ("subject property"). On September 15, 2025, Plaintiff Regal Julian, LLC ("Plaintiff") filed a complaint for Unlawful Detainer against Lubang Cao ("Defendant") and Does 1-10. On January 2, 2026, Defendant's and "All Unnamed Occupants" defaults were entered. An Order to Show Cause Re: Default Judgment is set for August 25, 2026.

Discussion

Plaintiff's Application for Default Judgment is denied without prejudice. The following defects are noted: RJ Hunsaker ("Hunsaker") represents that he is "an agent of the owner" "for Regal Julian, LLC: See Grant Deed." (Hunsaker Decl., P. 1). Exhibit 1(b)3 is a copy of a quitclaim deed recorded November 1, 2024 with respect to nine different parcel numbers. Page 2 of said document provides the "commonly known as" addresses for each of the aforesaid APNs, none of which correspond to the physical address identified for the subject property (i.e., 20267 Paseo Del Prado in Walnut; see id., P. 2).

Accordingly, the application is denied without prejudice, and Plaintiff is directed to submit a revised and complete default judgment application that addresses the aforementioned issues. Any subsequent default prove-up application must be full and complete in and of itself. The Court will not entertain piecemeal submissions. | Home -->)" -->

Cited authorities

Extracting citations from the ruling text…
Verify against the source PDF — LLM extraction may miss or mis-normalize citations.

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?”

Answers reference only this ruling's text. Not legal advice — always verify against the source PDF.

Find similar rulings

Source

Share