DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
FDI-24-800746·sf·FamilyLaw·Bifurcation and Dissolution
Hearing todayMOOT

Roseanne Bulaong v. Steven Bastuba

Bifurcation and Separate Trial

Hearing date
Aug 18, 2026
Department
403
Prevailing
N/A
Appearance
Not required

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

PetitionerRoseanne Bulaong
RespondentSteven Bastuba

Ruling

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: August 18, 2026) 8 VS.) Hearing Time: 9:00 AM) 9 STEVEN BASTUBA,) Department: 403) 10 Respondent) Presiding: BOBBY P. LUNA) 11) 12 REQUEST FOR ORDER RE: BIFURCATION AND SEPARATE TRIAL (STATUS-ONLY OF 13 DOMESTSIC PARTNERSHIP) 14 TENTATIVE RULING 15 Respondent’s request for bifurcation of trial and termination of domestic partnership status (filed 3/20/26) 16 is MOOT as Status Only Judgment was entered on 7/8/26. As such, the 8/18/26 hearing is VACATED. 17 No appearances are required on 8/18/26. 18

19 The Court acknowledges that Respondent filed a declaration on 7/29/26 indicating the remaining issues 20 left to resolve the parties’ case (allocation of dependent tax benefits and division of retirement assets). To 21 advance in the dissolution process, either party may file an At Issue Memorandum to request a Status 22 Conference at which time a Mandatory Settlement Conference will be scheduled, and a trial date can be 23 requested if it is determined that the parties are ready for trial. The Court encourages the parties to 24 continue to focus their efforts on reaching a full resolution. 25

29

Cited authorities

Extracting citations from the ruling text…
Verify against the source PDF — LLM extraction may miss or mis-normalize citations.

Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities

Ask about this ruling

Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”

Answers reference only this ruling's text. Not legal advice — always verify against the source PDF.

Find similar rulings

Source

Share