DANIELA MARTINEZ v. JORGE ESPINOZA OCHOA

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

5) 6 DANIELA MARTINEZ,) Case Number: FDI-24-800166) 7 Petitioner) Hearing Date: July 2, 2026) 8 VS.) Hearing Time: 9:00 AM) 9 JORGE ESPINOZA OCHOA,) Department: 403) 10 Respondent) Presiding: BOBBY P. LUNA) 11) 12 REQUEST FOR ORDER RE: STRIKE RESPONDENT'S RESPONSE TO DISSOLUTION AS A 13 TERMINATING SANCTION AND TO ALLOW PETITIONER TO PROCEED BY DEFAULT 14 TENTATIVE RULING 15 The parties are ordered to appear. The parties may appear in person in Dept. 403 or remotely by 16 Zoom video. If a party chooses to appear by video, that party must abide by the Notice and 17 Instructions for Remote Appearances in San Francisco Family Court set forth above. 18 A.

Procedural History 19 1) The parties are Petitioner Daniela Martinez and Respondent Jorge Espinoza Ochoa. 20 2) On 5/15/26, Petitioner filed a Request for Order seeking to strike Respondent’s Response and 21 Request for Dissolution as a terminating sanction to permit Petitioner to proceed by default due to 22 Respondent’s noncompliance with disclosure requirements. 23 3) On 5/15/26, Petitioner filed a Memorandum of Points and Authorities. 24 4) On 6/22/26, Respondent filed a Responsive Declaration in opposition to Petitioner’s Request for 25 Order.

Respondent states he commits to serving his Preliminary Declaration of Disclosure (PDD) 26 before the Court hearing. 27 B. Findings and Order 28

1 1) The parties are ordered to appear and shall be prepared to inform the Court whether 2 Respondent complied with the mandatory disclosure requirements set forth in Family Code 3 section 2104 (i.e., served his PDD on Petitioner). 4

8

12

16

20

24

28

29