Daiana Cherhynets v. Farooq Imam

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

5) 6 DAIANA CHERHYNETS,) Case Number: FDI-22-796786) 7 Petitioner) Hearing Date: June 2, 2026) 8 VS.) Hearing Time: 9:00 AM) 9 FAROOQ IMAM,) Department: 403) 10 Respondent) Presiding: BOBBY P. LUNA) 11) 12 REQUEST FOR ORDER FOR CHANGE OF CHILD CUSTODY AND VISITATION BY 13 RESPONDENT, FAROOQ IMAM CHANGE OF CHILD CUSTODY, VISITATION (PARENTING 14 TIME) 15 TENTATIVE RULING 16 Having read and considered the pleadings, declarations, and other evidence submitted in this matter, the 17 Court makes the following findings and orders: 18 A.

Procedural History 19 1) The parties to this action are Petitioner Daiana Cherhynets (Mother) and Respondent Farooq 20 Imam (Father). They share one minor child: David Imam (DOB: 09/20/15). 21 2) On March 5, 2026, Father filed a Request for Order seeking modification of the custody and 22 visitation orders. Father seeks joint legal and joint physical custody orders with visitation on a 23 week on/week off basis. The existing orders are from December 16, 2025, and provide for joint 24 legal and joint physical custody.

Father’s timeshare is on Tuesdays and Thursdays from 3-7 and 25 every other week from Friday at 3:00 p.m. – Tuesday at 7:00 p.m. 26 3) On April 17, 2026, Mother filed a Responsive Declaration in which she requests that the Court: 27 a. Maintain the current parenting plan, pending completion of full child custody evaluation; 28 and 29 b. Admonish Father again about actively lobbying child about court/custody matters.

1 4) On April 20, 2026, the Court held a Readiness hearing, and the matter was set for Family Court 2 Services (FCS) Mediation on May 14, 2026 and return hearing on June 2, 2026. 3 5) On May 19, 2026, Father filed Supplemental Declaration in Response to Petitioner’s filed 4 Declaration in which he requests Family Code section 271 sanctions against counsel for alleged 5 lack of cooperation and undermining proceedings. This declaration has been read and considered 6 by the Court. 7 B. Findings and Order 8 1) This Court has jurisdiction to make child custody orders in this case under the Uniform Child 9 Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act.

A violation of this order may subject the party in 10 violation to civil or criminal penalties, or both. The country of habitual residence of the minor 11 child(ren) is the United States. 12 2) The Court confirms its prior order that both parents share joint legal and joint physical custody. 13 3) Father’s request for a modification of the existing parenting plan is GRANTED. 14 4) Effective immediately, the parties shall exercise a week on/week off parenting plan. 15 5) Exchanges shall occur on Sundays at 5:00 p.m.