Judge: Robert B. Broadbelt, Case: 21STCV33335, Date: 2023-08-07 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 21STCV33335 Hearing Date: August 7, 2023 Dept: 53
Superior Court of California
County of Los Angeles – Central District
Department
53
| 
   vs.  | 
  
   Case
  No.:  | 
  
   21STCV33335  | 
 
| 
   | 
  
   | 
 |
| 
   Hearing
  Date:  | 
  
    August
   7, 2023  | 
  
 |
| 
   | 
  
   | 
 |
| 
   Time:  | 
  
   | 
 |
| 
   | 
  
   | 
 |
| 
   [Tentative]
  Order RE: plaintiffs’ request for court judgment by
  default  | 
 ||
MOVING PARTIES:
            Plaintiffs Aaron G. Villa and
Armando Navarro
RESPONDING PARTY:       n/a
Plaintiffs’ Request for Court Judgment by Default
Plaintiffs Aaron G. Villa and Armando Navarro (“Plaintiffs”) previously
requested the court (1) enter default judgment against defendant Extra Mile
Staffing (“Defendant”); (2) order that the Certificate of Dissolution filed on
March 4, 2021 (Filing No. D1618033) with regard to Extra Mile Staffing is
cancelled, annulled, and declared void and of no effect whatsoever; and (3)
order that Extra Mile Staffing (i) had a California Secretary of State Entity
Number of 4604702, and (ii) is reinstated. 
On March 28, 2023, the court issued an order denying Plaintiffs’
request for default judgment, finding, in relevant part, that Plaintiffs had
not shown that they were entitled to an order setting aside the Certificate of
Dissolution because Plaintiffs had not alleged facts or provided evidence
establishing that they are the only shareholders or that they are otherwise
authorized to set aside the certificate based on their status as
shareholders.  
On June 21, 2023, the court issued a second order denying Plaintiffs’
request for court judgment by default and an order that the Certificate of
Dissolution is void and set aside or that Extra Mile Staffing is reinstated, on
the ground that Plaintiffs did not address the issue of standing that the court
raised in its March 28, 2023 order.  The
court noted that, although Plaintiffs filed further briefing in support of
their request for default judgment, Plaintiffs did not present authority and
argument establishing that they are entitled to set aside the Certificate of
Dissolution solely because they are shareholders. 
The court also (1) ordered Plaintiffs to file a set of default
judgment documents no later than July 21, 2023, and (2) set an Order to Show
Cause re: dismissal for Plaintiffs’ failure to prove up entry of default
judgment on their third cause of action for cancellation of instrument.  However, Plaintiffs have not filed any
additional documents in support of their request for court judgment by default.
The court therefore orders that this action, filed by plaintiffs Aaron
G. Villa and Armando Navarro on September 9, 2021, is dismissed, for failure to
prove their request for court judgment by default on the third cause of action
for cancellation of instrument. 
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED:  
_____________________________
Robert
B. Broadbelt III
Judge
of the Superior Court