The allegation of temporary loss of use of property resulting from pandemic-related government closure orders—without any physical loss of the property—is not sufficient to support a claim against an insurer for business income coverage under a policy that requires the suspension be caused by “direct physical loss of or damage to” insured property. Instead some physical alteration of the premises is required. Disagreeing with Coast Restaurant Group, Inc. v. Amguard Ins. Co. (2023) 2023 Cal. App. LEXIS 269, the decision holds that temporary deprivation of the right to use the premises due to government closure orders is not enough to secure coverage under such a policy.