Tentative ruling issued by Judge Nathan SCOTT on Nov. 01, 2016 in Orange County, CA - Case no: xxxxxive

Motion #1: Anti-SLAPP Cross-defendant William Rathvon’s anti-SLAPP motion is GRANTED as to the 7th through 10th causes of action of the cross-complaint, and DENIED as to 1st through 6th, 11th, and 12th causes of action.
Rathvon met its initial burden to show the 7th through 10th causes of action arise from protected conduct. (See Code Civ. Proc., § 425.16, subd. (e)(1).) The libel, trade libel, false light, and abuse of process causes of action are based on the protected acts of “initiating an unlawful detainer action” and “publish[ing]” and serving notices to vacate. (See, e.g., Cross-Compl. ¶¶ 42, 52, 61, 66; see also Ulkarim v. Westfield LLC (2014) 227 Cal.App.4th 1266, 1275-1276; Copenbarger v. Morris Cerullo World Evangelism (2013) 12 Cal.App.4th 1237, 1245.)
Cross-complainant InnVigorate has not met its shifted burden to show a probability of prevailing with admissible evidence. (See Finton Construction, Inc. v. Bidna & Keys, APLC (2015) 238 Cal.App.4th 200, 211-213….....