Syverson

discussion of likelihood of success on the merits would be part of a prong-two analysis: “Again,” the court said, “we do not reach the issue of whether these statements are true, false, or otherwise nonactionable. Such a determination would be part of a prong-two analysis under section 425.16 regarding the merits of the claim, but is irrelevant to the commercial speech analysis required under section 425.17, subdivision (c).” (Id. at p. 996, italics added.) JAMS 2016 is inapposite.

There is no change in the judgment.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

____________________________________________________________

CHANEY, J. ROTHSCHILD, P. J. CRANDALL, J.*

*Judge of the San Luis Obispo County Superior Court, assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the California Constitution.

3 Filed 4/25/22 Syverson v. Reeves CA2/1 (unmodified opinion)

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for…