Nabil Abdou and MP Solutions Inc. v. Simulator Product Solutions, LLC and Orbit International Corp.

(Stanley Mosk Courthouse: Dept. 517) August 24, 2026 DEPARTMENT 517 LAW AND MOTION RULINGS

Plaintiff Zeus Realty Group LLC ("Zeus") to consolidate this civil action that Zeus against 1032 N. Sycamore Owner (LA), LLC ("Sycamore") with related unlawful detainer action that Sycamore brought against Zeus. Having considered the parties' briefs, the Court has concluded that consolidation would frustrate the summary nature of Sycamore's unlawful detainer action against Zeus and that issues underpinning the civil action can be raised by Zeus in the unlawful detainer action.

The Court also is denying Zeus's separate motion to bifurcate or specially set for early determination the validity of Sycamore's three-day notice to Zeus issued on November 21, 2025. The validity of the notice will be determined in the unlawful detainer action. The Court will today set a trial date in the unlawful detainer action. The Court will discuss with counsel today what should be done with the multiple discovery motions on calendar in the civil action.

Case Number: 25STCV35945 Hearing Date: August 24, 2026 Dept: 517

Subject to hearing from Plaintiff on the issue, the Court is inclined to grant the ex parte application of Defendant to stay the deposition of Gregory Tariloff that Plaintiff noticed pending resolution of Defendant's motion to quash or modify the deposition subpoena that Plaintiff issued to Tariloff and the related motion for protective order that Defendant filed. The Court also is inclined to advance the hearings on Defendants' motions to September 15, 2026. This case already is on calendar that day for other motions.

Case Number: 26STCV02585 Hearing Date: August 24, 2026 Dept: 517

Plaintiffs Nabil Abdou ("Abdou") and MP Solutions Inc. ("MP") (collectively, "Plaintiffs") sued Defendants Simulator Product Solutions, LLC ("SPS") and Orbit International Corp. ("Orbit") (collectively, "Defendants") in the Superior Court of California in Los Angeles County in January 2026.

The root of Plaintiffs' California action is a transaction in which Orbit purchased the assets of MP, which was Abdou's company, and transferred them to SPS. As part of the transaction, Abdou was made the President of SPS. The majority of the Plaintiffs' claims arise from two contracts: (1) an Employment Agreement between Abdou and SPS; and (2) a Working Capital Settlement Agreement between the Plaintiffs and Defendants.

Pending before this Court is Defendants' motion to stay the California action pending resolution of an action in Delaware that MP brought against the Defendants in December 2024 and that is scheduled to go to trial in April 2027. According to the Defendants, the issues in the Delaware action overlap with those in the California action and it thus would be efficient and convenient to stay the California action in favor of the Delaware action.

The Court is denying the Defendants' motion. The following considerations have informed the Court's decision. First, while MP, Orbit, and SPS are parties to the Delaware action, Abdou is not. Second, none of the claims in Delaware action are based on the Employment Agreement between Abdou and SPS, which is the foundation for two of the claims in the California action. Third, the Employment Agreement has a forum selection clause that specifies that litigation of disputes arising from the Agreement shall take place in either California state courts or in the federal district court for the Central District of California.

California generally favors the enforceability of forum selection clauses. (EpicentRx, Inc. v. Superior Court (2025) 18 Cal.5th 58, 74.) Defendants bear the burden to demonstrate that the clause should not be given effect. (Id. at p. 76.) They have not met that burden. Yes, MP filed the Delaware action before MP and Abdou filed the California action and there is some overlap between the two actions. But neither of these facts compels the Court to conclude that the California action should be stayed at this time in favor of the Delaware action.

Fourth, none of the claims in the Delaware arise from the Working Capital Settlement Agreement, which is the foundation for three of the claims in the California action. Fifth, aside from the claims under the Employment Agreement and Working Capital Settlement, Abdou assets in the California action three other claims that are personal to him -- claims for defamation, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and failure to pay wages in violation of the California Labor Code -- that MP cannot assert in the Delaware action.

Defendants shall file a response to the Plaintiffs' Complaint within 21 days of this order. The case management conference that is on calendar today is continued to December 2, 2026 at 8:30 a.m.

Case Number: 26STCV07392 Hearing Date: August 24, 2026 Dept: 517

The Court's tentative ruling is to sustain with leave to amend the unopposed demurrer of Defendant and to grant with leave to amend the unopposed motion to strike of the Defendant. | Home -->)" -->