Mayela Gutknecht v. Manuel Sanchez Medina

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

5) 6 MAYELA GUTKNECHT,) Case Number: FMS-26-387618) 7 Petitioner) Hearing Date: June 18, 2026) 8 VS.) Hearing Time: 9:00 AM) 9 MANUEL SANCHEZ MEDINA,) Department: 403) 10 Respondent) Presiding: BOBBY P. LUNA) 11) 12 REQUEST FOR ORDER: RENEWAL OF PASSPORT 13 TENTATIVE RULING 14 Having read and considered the pleadings, declarations, and other evidence submitted in this matter, the 15 Court makes the following findings and orders: 16 A. Procedural History 17 1) The parties are Petitioner Mayela Gutknecht and Respondent Manuel Sanchez Medina. 18 2) On 2/10/26, Petitioner filed a Petition for Custody and Support of Minor Children, which lists 19 minor child Daisy Gutknecht-Medina (DOB: 3/19/18).

Petitioner indicates that Petitioner and 20 Respondent have signed an attached voluntary declaration of parentage or paternity. 21 3) On 2/10/26, Petitioner filed a Request for Order seeking “renewal of passport” to which a copy of 22 the minor child’s expired passport is attached. Petitioner did not include facts in support of the 23 Request for Order. 24 4) There is no Proof of Service on file indicating that the Petition for Custody and Support of Minor 25 Children filed 2/10/26 or Request for Order filed 2/10/26 were served on Respondent. 26 5) Respondent did not file a Response or Responsive Declaration. 27 6) At the prior 4/23/26 hearing, the Court made a finding that Petitioner failed to serve the Petition 28 for Custody and Support of Minor Children filed 2/10/26 and Request for Order filed 2/10/26 as 29

1 required by the Code of Civil Procedure. As such, the matter was continued to 6/18/26 for lack of 2 service. 3 7) There is still no Proof of Service on file indicating that the Petition for Custody and Support of 4 Minor Children filed 2/10/26 or Request for Order filed 2/10/26 were served on Respondent. 5 B. Findings and Order 6 1) Given that Petitioner was previously provided additional time to effectuate proper service and 7 failed to do so, the Court finds good cause to DENY Petitioner’s Request for Order filed 2/10/26 8 without prejudice (i.e., Petitioner may refile). 9 2) The Court will prepare the Findings and Order After Hearing 10

14

18

22

26

29