Roseanne Bulaong v. Steven Bastuba

1 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA 2 COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 3 UNIFIED FAMILY COURT 4

5) 6 ROSEANNE BULAONG,) Case Number: FDI-24-800746) 7 Petitioner) Hearing Date: May 21, 2026) 8 VS.) Hearing Time: 9:00 AM) 9 STEVEN BASTUBA,) Department: 403) 10 Respondent) Presiding: JUDGE KATHLEEN DIESMAN) 11) 12 REQUEST FOR ORDER RE: BIFURCATION AND SEPARATE TRIAL (STATUS-ONLY OF 13 DOMESTSIC PARTNERSHIP) 14 TENTATIVE RULING 15 Having read and considered the pleadings, declarations, and other evidence submitted in this matter, the 16 Court makes the following findings and orders: 17 A. Procedural History 18 1) The parties are Petitioner Roseanne Bulaong and Respondent Steven Bastuba. 19 2) On 3/20/26, Respondent filed a Request for Order seeking bifurcation and termination of 20 domestic partnership status.

Respondent attached form FL-315 (Request for Separate Trial). 21 Respondent states he pays $200 dollars for Petitioner’s health insurance and requests the Court 22 exercise its discretion to impose conditions under Family Code section 2337(c) related to 23 Petitioner’s health insurance. 24 3) On 4/28/26, Petitioner filed a Responsive Declaration agreeing to bifurcation and termination of 25 domestic partnership status so long as Respondent continues to be financially responsible for 26 Petitioner’s health insurance. 27 B.

Findings and Order 28 1) Public policy favors bifurcation and termination of domestic partnership status. 29

1 2) The Court finds that Respondent’s request for bifurcation of the parties’ domestic partnership 2 status is unopposed. 3 3) Based on the pleadings filed with the Court and signed under penalty of perjury, the Court further 4 finds that: 5 a. Petitioner filed a Petition for Dissolution of Domestic Partnership on 12/20/24. 6 b. Under Family Code section 2339(a), the Court first acquired jurisdiction over Respondent 7 when Respondent was served with the Petition and Summons on 1/3/25. See Proof of 8 Service of Summons filed 1/15/25. 9 c.

Respondent filed a Response and Request for Dissolution of Domestic Partnership on 10 5/2/25. 11 d. Within the Petition and Response, both parties indicate that Respondent was a resident of 12 California for at least six months and of San Francisco County for at least three months 13 immediately preceding the filing of the Petition. 14 e. Within the Petition and Response, both parties request a divorce based on irreconcilable 15 differences. 16 f. On 10/13/25, Respondent filed a Declaration Regarding Service of Declaration of 17 Disclosure stating that Respondent’s Preliminary Declaration of Disclosure was served 18 on the other party by mail on 8/30/25. 19 g.

On 2/2/26, Petitioner filed a Declaration Regarding Service of Declaration of Disclosure 20 stating that Petitioner’s Preliminary Declaration of Disclosure was served on the other 21 party by mail on 10/23/25. 22 h. In the Request for Separate Trial (attached to Respondent's 3/20/26 Request for Order), 23 Respondent responded to the prompt “All pension or retirement plans in which the 24 community has an interest are listed below” by listing the following: 25 i. 401(k) in Respondent’s name administered by Alaska Airlines Fidelity 26 ii.