Can a defendant in an ordinary private dispute take advantage of the anti-SLAPP statute?

"[A] defendant in an ordinary private dispute cannot take advantage of the anti-SLAPP statute simply because the complaint contains some references to speech or petitioning activity by the defendant. [Citation.] ['[T]he statute does not accord anti-SLAPP protection to suits arising from any act having any connection, however remote, with an official proceeding'].) . . . [I]t is the principal thrust or gravamen of the plaintiff's cause of action that determines whether the anti-SLAPP statute applies [citation], and when the allegations referring to arguably protected activity are only incidental to a cause of action based essentially on nonprotected activity, collateral allusions to protected activity should not subject the cause of action to the anti-SLAPP statute." (Martinez v. Matabolife Internat., Inc. (2003) 113 Cal.App.4th 181, 188.)