RUBY LIU v. LEANDRO COIMBRA RODRIGUES

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

5) 6 RUBY LIU,) Case Number: FDI-24-800682) 7 Petitioner) Hearing Date: April 30, 2026) 8 VS.) Hearing Time: 9:00 AM) 9 LEANDRO COIMBRA RODRIGUES,) Department: 403) 10 Respondent) Presiding: BOBBY P. LUNA) 11) 12 REQUEST FOR ORDER: BIFURCATION OF MARITAL STATUS, VALIDITY OF PMA, 13 EPMLOYMENT ORDER STATUS 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 Ruby Liu and Respondent Leandro Coimbra Rodrigues. 20 2) On 2/17/26, Petitioner filed a Request for Order seeking bifurcation of trial on termination of 21 marital status and validity of the premarital agreement (PMA). Petitioner also requests the Court 22 order Respondent to notice Petitioner of any change in employment status for the purpose of 23 wage garnishment “until debt is settled”. Petitioner alleges that Respondent has a history of 24 inconsistent employment and requests notice of any change in employment status within one 25 week. Petitioner attached form FL-315 (Request for Separate Trial) which lists a Charles Schwab 26 Roth IRA ending in 706 (which Petitioner asserts is her separate property pursuant to the terms of 27 the PMA) and a 401(k)-plan belonging to Respondent. Petitioner asserts the PMA is attached as 28 Exhibit 1; however, the Court docket reflects there aren’t any exhibits attached to the Request for 29 Order.

1 3) On 2/17/26, Petitioner filed a Proof of Electronic Service indicating service was effectuated by 2 email on 2/17/26. 3 4) Respondent did not file a Responsive Declaration. 4 5) The Court notes that Petitioner filed form FL-141 (Declaration Regarding Service of Declaration 5 of Disclosure and Income and Expense Declaration) on 2/26/26 and Respondent filed form FL- 6 141 on 2/25/26. 7 6) The Court also notes the parties appeared on: (a) 2/27/26 for a Mandatory Settlement Conference 8 but did not reach an agreement; (b) 3/23/26 for a Status Conference and the Court continued the 9 matter to 6/29/26 to permit the exchange of additional financial documents; and (c) 4/17/26 for a 10 hearing on the Family Law Discovery calendar. 11 B. Findings and Order 12 1) As preliminary issue, Petitioner’s request for the Court to order Respondent to notice Petitioner of 13 any change in employment status is GRANTED as the Court issued an Earnings Assignment 14 Order on 12/31/25. 15 2) Respondent shall notice Petitioner of any change in employment status within 7 days. 16 3) Petitioner’s request for bifurcated trial on termination of marital status and validity of the PMA is 17 GRANTED. 18 4) The parties are ordered to appear to set the bifurcated issues for trial. The parties shall be 19 prepared to: (a) discuss their time estimate for trial (i.e., number of days); and (b) inform the 20 Court of the proposed number of witnesses they intend to present. 21 5) The Court will prepare the Findings and Order After Hearing. 22