Uriarte

DISCUSSION

It is somewhat difficult to tell whether Matrai has included in the record any of the requests for orders that the court “dropped from calendar” based on his failure to appear at the two hearings. But whether or not rulings on those requests would be appealable, the trial court did not rule on them, and there is no indication that Matrai asked the court to re-calendar them. (See Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1304(d) [“If a party fails to appear at a law and motion hearing without having given notice [that the party will not appear], the court may take the matter off calendar, to be reset only upon motion, or may rule on the matter”].) “ ‘[A]n order is not appealable unless declared to be so by the

2 Constitution or by statute.’ ” (In re Brekke (1965) 233 Cal.App.2d 196, 199.) Interim orders not disposing of all causes of action in a case generally are not appealable. (Code Civ. Proc., § 904.1, subd. (a)(1);3 Aixtron, Inc. v. Veeco Instruments Inc. (2020) 52 Cal.App.5th 360, 384.) Matrai has not provided any authority to establish the appealability of the orders insofar as they took his requests for orders off calendar based on his non-appearance. Matrai also challenges…