In Doe v. Luster (2006) 145 Cal.App.4th 139, the trial court denied both defendants' anti-SLAPP motions. (Id. at p. 142.) Over three months later, the court subsequently denied plaintiff Doe's motion for attorney fees and costs. (Ibid.) The Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Seven, concluded that the order denying the motion for attorney fees and costs was not immediately appealable. First, it observed: "Section 425.16, subdivision (i), provides, 'An order granting or denying a special motion to strike shall be appealable under Section 904.1.' Neither that statutory provision nor any other authorizes an immediate appeal from the award or denial of attorney fees to the prevailing moving party or from the denial of attorney fees to the prevailing party opposing a special motion to strike." (Id. at pp. 145-146; see 904.1.) Second, the court stated that "the Legislature's concern in enacting the special appeal provision was that the inability to appeal immediately from the denial of a meritorious special motion to strike defeated the protective purpose of section 425.16." (Doe, supra, at p. 147.) It pointed out that "no such similar purpose is served by permitting an immediate appeal from an interlocutory order granting or denying attorney fees following the trial court's ruling on a special motion to strike." (Ibid.)