Navellier

This appeal arises in.an action for fraud and breach of contract brought by Louis G. Navellier (Navellier) and Navellier Management, Inc. (NMI; collectively plaintiffs) against Kenneth G. Sletten (defendant). Defendant moved to strike the complaint under the anti-SLAPP (strategic lawsuit against public participation) statute (Code Civ. Proc., § 425.16; hereafter section 425.16), the motion was denied, and we affirmed (Navellier v. Sletten (Dec. 27, 2000, A090058) [nonpub. opn.]). The Supreme Court reversed and remanded with instructions to reconsider our decision in light of its opinion. (Navellier v. Sletten (2002) 29 Cal.4th 82, 96 [ 124 Cal.Rptr.2d 530 , 52 P.3d 703 ].)

Ruling on an anti-SLAPP motion is “a two-step process. First, the court decides whether the defendant has made a threshold showing that the challenged cause of action is one arising from protected activity. ... If the court finds such a showing has been made, it then determines whether the plaintiff has demonstrated a probability of prevailing on the claim.” (Equilon Enterprises v. Consumer Cause, Inc. (2002) 29 Cal.4th 53, 67 [ 124 Cal.Rptr.2d 507 , 52 P.3d 685 ].) We previously concluded that…