Daniel Alvarez v. Los Angeles County et al.

O

2 3 4 5 6

United States District Court Central District of California

11 DANIEL ALVAREZ, Case № 2:24-cv-01035-ODW (MARx)

Plaintiff,

ORDER GRANTING IN PART

v.

MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS’ FEES

14 LOS ANGELES COUNTY et al., [58]

15 Defendants.

16 I. INTRODUCTION On July 15, 2025, the Court dismissed all claims asserted by Plaintiff Daniel 19 Alvarez against Defendant Catherine Reay. (Order Grant Mot. Strike (“Anti-SLAPP 20 Order”), Dkt. No. 56.) Reay now moves to recover her attorneys’ fees as a prevailing 21 party pursuant to California’s anti-SLAPP (strategic lawsuits against public 22 participation) law. (Mot. Att’ys’ Fees (“Motion” or “Mot.”), Dkt. No. 58). Alvarez 23 failed to timely respond. (See Notice Non-Opp’n Mot. (“Notice Non-Opp’n”), Dkt. 24 No. 62; Opp’n, Dkt. No. 63.) For the following reasons, the Court GRANTS the 25 Motion.2

1 Catherine Reay was erroneously sued as “Catie” Reay. (See Third Am. Compl. (“TAC”), Dkt. 27 No. 44.) 28 2 Having carefully considered the papers filed in connection with the Motion, the…