GEO Prison Controversy Centers Adelanto At Ground Zero In National Immigration Debate

By Mark Gutglueck
The U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement processing center run by the GEO Group in 35,000-population Adelanto has generated more controversy in the last eleven months for that High Desert municipality than many cities twice its size normally must weather in three years. The questions raised in the matter are ones that range over much of the governmental policy spectrum. Under scrutiny has been the wisdom of the trade-offs made at City Hall to welcome the GEO Group’s operation within Adelanto’s city limits, together with the impacts the detention center is having on San Bernardino County. Noteworthy is that both the governor and legislature of the State of California have weighed in on the matter, formulating and passing a law which was aimed specifically at institutions such as GEO’s Adelanto facility. At the heart of the matter is national immigration policy and the standards of protection, punishment, discipline, fairness, humane treatment and compassion the United States is going to apply to those who think highly enough of it to want to become its residents but have not adopted the attitude of respect for its laws that the vast majority of American citizens exemplify. And what goes on within GEO’s Adelanto operation is serving not only as a window to the world on how America applies its ideals and values when faced with a challenge, but also forming a standard for what is acceptable internationally when a nation must deal with foreign criminals or at the very least foreigners who flout its laws.
While many communities shun being a host to prisons and detention facilities, as the eighth smallest of San Bernardino County’s 24 cities population-wise and the sixth largest in area, Adelanto has gone out of its way to make itself into a magnet for prisons and detention facilities.
Adelanto has three substantially-sized jails & prisons.
The High Desert Detention Center at 9438 Commerce Way, which is run by the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department, has capacity for over 2,100 inmates, and augments the other facilities run by the Sheriff’s Department, including the West Valley Detention Center, the Central Jail in San Bernardino, the Glen Helen Rehabilitation Center in Devore and a myriad of smaller holding cells and facilities that are within or proximate to the sheriff’s department’s stations and substations around the county. It is characterized as a medium-security detention center that holds inmates awaiting trial or sentencing or both. Most of the sentenced inmates are kept there for less than two years. San Bernardino County accepts inmates from surrounding towns, municipalities, the US Marshal’s Service and the Adelanto Police Department, which consists of a division of the sheriff’s department providing law enforcement services to the city under contract. The sheriff’s Adelanto headquarters does not feature its own long-term lock-up.
The Desert View Modified Community Correctional Facility at 10450 Rancho Road is a moderate level security prison financed, designed, built and run by the GEO Group which houses inmates as well as parole violators for the California Department of Corrections & Rehabilitation as well as housing offenders for the San Bernardino County Sheriff, the Bureau of Prisons and the U.S. Marshals Service.
The Adelanto U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Processing Center at 10400 Rancho Road, owned and operated by the GEO Group, is an immigration detention center. It consists of two separate facilities: East, which since 1991 had been a state prison for adult male inmates and was purchased in June 2010 from the City of Adelanto, with a capacity of about 600 inmates; and the newly built West expansion completed in August 2012 with another 700 beds. After an additional expansion in 2015, the facility’s capacity houses up to 1,940 immigrant detainees of all classification levels, with the average inmate staying for 30 days. Since its opening as a U.S. Immigration and Customs detention center in 2011, the Adelanto Detention Facility has faced accusations of insufficient medical care and poor conditions. In July 2015, 29 members of Congress sent a letter to the U.S. Immigration and Customs Service and federal inspectors requesting an investigation addressing their concerns. In November 2015, the facility garnered further negative publicity when 400 detainees went on a hunger strike, demanding better medical and dental care.
In April 2016, the American Civil Liberties Union and lawyers from Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, working pro bono, filed Hernandez v. Sessions, a class action lawsuit. The plaintiffs in the suit were non-citizens who were detained at the Adelanto Detention Facility due to their inability to afford the bond set by immigration officials. In October 2017, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld a district court’s order granting a classwide preliminary injunction in favor of the plaintiffs. The Hernandez decision was the first court case to impose due process requirements in the immigration context and required Immigration and Customs Enforcement Service officers and immigration judges consider a person’s financial ability to post bond and suitability for non-monetary alternative conditions of supervision when formulating inmates’ conditions of release.
In May 2018, government inspectors from the Department of Homeland Security made an unannounced tour of the detention center, finding in the process that immigrant detainees in different facilities around the center were housed under conditions that inspectors said constituted multiple violations of Immigration and Customs Enforcement Service detention standards, which posed significant health and safety risks for detainees and restricted detainees’ rights. The violations found included nooses in detainee cells, inappropriate segregation including misuse of solitary confinement, improperly handcuffed and shackled inmates, and detainees with limited English not being provided with communication assistance; and both belated and inadequate detainee medical care.
In this way, the Adelanto Detention Facility had come to embody the convulsive debate and controversy that was raging, and continues to rage, throughout the United States. Many believe the hemorrhaging of undocumented and illegal immigrants into the United States represents a dire threat to the culture, status and security of the nation. For them, the security of the borders is paramount to prevent an influx of humanity among whom there could be secreted those with ill-intent toward the United States, its way of life and its people, including those harboring weapons of mass destruction or carrying diseases capable of untold devastation. Others see a less dramatic threat, a subtler one with nevertheless far-reaching and pervasive consequence, as an overwhelming number of the masses migrating to the United States bring with them little in the way of marketable skills, sophistication, training or ability to assimilate into American society as productive and self-sufficient participants in the country’s economic life in the near or even middle term, thus becoming an overpowering burden upon the social welfare system intended for the country’s indigenous indigent population, which carries with it the consequence of rendering the social safety net too porous for the native dispossessed, and leaving the productive members of the society who are defraying the cost of those benefits to the poor unwilling to sustain those social welfare programs. Another objection to an unchecked flow of foreigners into the country whose identities and backgrounds are unknown is that among those might be lurking a criminal element whose propensity for thievery and violence and disregard for others will create a danger to the American community at large.
Still, there are others who believe the wealth of America to be so great and its potential for accommodation so enormous and the generosity of its inhabitants so immense that all who manage to make it onto American soil should be welcomed with good will, recognized for their spirit and determination in making their potentially perilous sojourn and assisted in their efforts to partake in the commonwealth and bounty of the United States and all of its constituent entities. These immigrants should be extended the courtesy of admission, and their status as the new blood that replenishes the pioneer spirit that manifested in the destiny of America spanning the continent celebrated by their assimilation into the teeming masses yearning for freedom, their advocates propound.
In recent years, the line dividing these two factions has hardened, with the Republican Party representing the former attitude and the Democrats embodying the approach of the latter. With the Republicans since 2016 in ascendancy at the national level and the Democrats dominating California politics, the Immigration and Customs Enforcement Service under Republican President Donald Trump has enlarged upon the policy of former President Barack Obama, a Democrat, of aggressively incarcerating those caught making illegal entry into the United States, including separating parents from their children. California’s governor and legislature along with the political leadership of many of the Golden State’s cities, in assuming a position obverse to the Republicans their partisan Democratic identification involves, have openly opposed and defied the policy of the federal government, including many of the state’s cities declaring themselves sanctuaries from the enforcement of federal immigration law.
Last year, the California Legislature and Governor Gavin Newsom intensified the cultural, legal and philosophical battle over immigration policy when the legislature in October 2019 passed and Newsom signed Assembly Bill 32, which phased out private prisons and detention centers, effective on January 1, 2020.
In addition to its immigrant detention center and the 750-inmate capacity Desert View Modified Community Correctional Facility in Adelanto, GEO operates five other private prisons in California, which includes the 700-inmate capacity Central Valley Modified Community Correctional Facility in McFarland, the 700-inmate capacity Golden State Modified Community Correctional Facility in McFarland, the 400-bed Mesa Verde Immigration and Customs Enforcement Processing Center in Bakersfield and two detention facilities for the U.S. Marshals Service, those being the 725-inmate capacity Western Regional Detention Facility in San Diego and the 512-bed El Centro Service Processing Center in El Centro.
In a ploy to overcome the Assembly Bill 32 restriction, the Department of Immigration and Customs Enforcement and GEO, in December before Assembly Bill 32 became law, entered into a 15-year contract to expand the Adelanto ICE Processing Center from 1,940 beds to 2,690 beds, essentially on the basis of folding the Desert View Modified Community Correctional Facility into the processing center. Additionally, GEO joined with the U.S. Department of Justice in suing the State of California, Newsom and California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, contesting the legality and constitutionality of Assembly Bill 32, and asserting it improperly intrudes upon federal prerogatives and the legitimate function of the Department of Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
California’s political establishment, including Newsom, Becerra and Democratic members of California’s congressional delegation, decried the manner in which federal officials were entering into deliberately-drafted last-minute contractual arrangements with California-based providers of private detention services to “evade” the law. Thereafter, protests by groups militating and advocating on behalf of immigrants reached a crescendo.
The matter relating to the Adelanto Department of Immigration and Customs Enforcement Processing Center put the Adelanto community at the forefront, the epicenter and ground zero of the bitter national debate over immigration policy.
On February 19, 2020, the Adelanto Planning Commission on a 4-to-1 vote, with Commissioner JayShawn Johnson dissenting, approved GEO making the expansion. Immigrant rights organizations, including the San Francisco-based Immigrant Legal Resource Center and the Inland Coalition for Immigrant Justice appealed that decision, placing the authority over the ultimate fate of the plan by the federal government to hold ever larger numbers of those detained for having come into the country illegally and attempting to live undocumented among both the native, naturalized and legally documented populations into the hands of the city council. The removal of the decision into the province of the city council presented a dilemma. Councilman Ed Camargo for years has steered clear of any issues relating to GEO because his girlfriend/fiancée, Regina Duran, is employed by GEO. Mayor Gabriel Reyes, whose commitment to economic development and the creation and maintenance of financial activity within the city outruns his sensitivity to and willingness to comply with the wishes of those protesting against the private prison on the basis of social causes such as that relating to the federal government’s treatment of immigrants, placed him on GEO’s side of the issue. To Reyes, GEO’s status as the city’s major employer and a provider of more than $960,000 in mitigation payments and administrative fees to City Hall was reason enough to be positively receptive to GEO’s expansion plans. By allowing the expansion to proceed, Reyes calculated some 150 GEO employees who stood to lose their jobs with the closure of the Desert View Modified Community Correctional Facility would remain employed in Adelanto along with the 450 workers employed at the Adelanto Department of Immigration and Customs Enforcement Processing Center. Reyes was backed in his support of GEO by Councilwoman Joy Jeannette.
Councilwoman Stevevonna Evans, who is active in Democratic political circles including the San Bernardino County Democratic Central Committee, and Councilman Gerardo Hernandez not only found the position taken by those advocating liberal immigration policies persuasive, but were among those making a case against the Department of Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Thus, when the council after seven months and twice delaying a vote on the matter took up the appeal of the planning commission’s February approval of GEO’s expansion plans for the Adelanto Department of Immigration and Customs Enforcement Processing Center in September, it found itself in a 2-to-2 deadlock on the question. That tie vote took place in the wee hours of Thursday morning, September 10, at the conclusion of a meeting held by means of a teleconference, owing to the danger of the ongoing COVID-19 situation, and which began on Wednesday, September 9. Some 91 members of the public weighed in on the matter through a queue of phone calls to the number 1-415-655-0001, with the lion’s share seeking to persuade the council to block GEO’s expansion plans. Some of those calling in were identified by name if they chose to give it and some were identified only by a numbered designation.
When the council’s members got around to voting on the matter sometime shortly after 3 a.m. on September 10, they were unable to come to a consensus. They approached the vote from different angles. Mayor Gabriel Reyes and Councilwoman Joy Jeannette put forth a motion to deny the appeal and allow the expansion. That course failed, with Hernandez and Evans evening the score with two votes against it. Camargo did not participate in the matter, having recused himself from taking part in the decision.
Equally futilely, Councilwoman Stevevonna Evans and Councilman Gerardo Hernandez floated a motion to uphold the appeal and deny GEO’s expansion plan. That failed 2-to-2.
Based upon the planning commission’s approval of the expansion proposal involving the conversion of the Desert View Modified Community Correctional Facility into an augmenting wing to the Adelanto Department of Immigration and Customs Enforcement Processing Center, City Attorney Lloyd Pilchen said the planning commission’s February vote remains intact, such that GEO is now eligible to proceed with the expansion. GEO and Department of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, which had been limiting the number of inmates being located into the Adelanto facility to the point that it was at that time functioning at well under 50 percent capacity, considered the city council’s tie vote to be a godsend. Both the federal government and GEO were on the brink of loading the detention facility full of prisoners in light of their inability to get clearance to add 1,400 beds to GEO’s immigrant holding facility in the community of McFarland in Central California earlier this year.
Miffed at their inability to prevent the Adelanto facility expansion from taking place, the forces arrayed against GEO and the Department of Immigration and Customs Enforcement redoubled their efforts. At one point, attorney Grisel Ruiz with the Immigrant Legal Resource Center propounded the novel theory that the tie vote by the council on the appeal nullified the planning commission’s original vote, which ran contrary to custom, law, tradition and precedent, which holds that unless an appealed decision is clearly overturned, it remains in place. Ruiz’s gambit failed.
Nevertheless, an act of nature intervened, thwarting, at least for the time being, the federal government’s aggressive illegal immigrant round-up tactics and the lucrative arrangement GEO has for facilitating it.
As the events surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic unfolded earlier this year, a lawsuit was filed in April by the American Civil Liberties Union on behalf of six detainees at the Adelanto facility with medical conditions due to inadequate sanitation and beds placed too close together. These conditions provided an “ideal incubation” opportunity for the coronavirus to spread according to the lawsuit. That suit made its way into the courtroom of U.S. District Judge Terry J. Hatter Jr. Hatter, in reaction to some of the American Civil Liberties Union’s assertions, ruled that action needed to be taken to alleviate conditions at the center, including increasing the spacing between bunk beds which were less than three feet distant from one another; communal eating arrangements in which a half dozen to ten people were eating at the same table; detainees sharing sinks, toilets, counters and showers without the surfaces with which the inmates came into contact being disinfected between uses; housing four to eight people in a single cell; and showers placed less than six feet apart. The government, citing logistical issues and negative tests for the coronavirus among inmates, sought delays in implementing those suggested measures, and the lawsuit appeared to be languishing. But earlier this month, less than a month after the Adelanto City Council’s tie vote on the expansion appeal, data became available to show that 148 or 19.17 percent of the 772 inmates at the facility had tested positive for COVID-19. A comparison with the COVID-19 infection rates within 368 detention facilities holding undocumented immigrants in the United States indicated the Adelanto facility had the highest percentage of COVID-19 among the inmates in such facilities. In addition, 31 of the facility’s staff members had tested positive for COVID-19 at that point. That fact, augmenting information that had already been brought to the court’s attention, was provided to Judge Hatter.
After evaluating the data and hearing the response of attorneys representing the federal government, GEO and the Department of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Hatter on October 15 issued a 15-page order that the number of inmates in GEO’s Adelanto facility be reduced from 772 to 475, and that the cuts in the inmate population take place at a rate of at least 50 prisoners per day beginning Monday, October 19.
In making his ruling, Hatter scored the lawyers for the federal government and the Department of Immigration and Customs Enforcement for what he said was dissembling on their part in the response to the American Civil Liberties Union’s claims and the available data generated by the Department of Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Hatter said he has “been concerned for some time with the lack of candor exhibited by the government and its counsel in this case. Now, the court is concerned with straight up dishonesty on the part of the government’s counsel. The court has started to re-assess the information the government has provided it in this case, as well as the arguments the government has made. The court is concerned that the facts and arguments that it previously perceived to be merely inaccurate or ambiguous might have been, actually, dishonest or, at best, disingenuous.”
Hatter said he is troubled by the entire circumstance at the detention facility, and he feared for “human lives whose reasonable safety is entitled to be enforced and protected by the court pursuant to the United States Constitution.”
In accordance with Judge Hatter’s order, the Department of Immigration and Customs Enforcement has released close to 300 inmates from the Adelanto facility to meet the goal of reducing the prison’s population to 475 inmates. Nevertheless, federal officials maintain, that action is not without risk to the public.
“Due to an order from the Central District of California, and despite requests to transfer detainees to alternative locations, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement has complied with the mandated reduction to the overall detainee population at the Adelanto ICE [U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement] Processing Center in Adelanto, California, which has resulted in the release of dangerous criminal aliens into various communities,” U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement spokesman Alexx Pons said in a prepared statement
Pursuant to the court order, GEO “released more than 250 criminal aliens back into communities – a decision the agency continues to warn could lead to unnecessary victimization by recidivist criminals,” Pons said. “The forced reduction is now complete and the current population at the facility is approximately 465.”
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s acting director, Tony H. Pham, said, “While opponents who continuously seek to discredit the agency might otherwise mislead the public to believe that those in detention pose no risk to public safety, nothing could be further from the truth. ICE has complied with this overreaching court order; however, the public should know that the ruling undoubtedly places them at greater risk.”
Pons said the actual number of inmates in the Adelanto facility last month hovered around 730 rather than the 772 alleged by the American Civil Liberties Union in court papers.
Prior to the reduction, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s enforcement and removal operations division in Los Angeles assessed that among the roughly 730 aliens detained at Adelanto, more than 85 percent had pending criminal charges and/or convictions. “Among those ordered released, more than 60 had final orders of removal by federal immigration judges,” Pons stated. “The criminal histories of those released included, but was not limited to: assault with a deadly weapon, battery, child cruelty, contempt/violating a protected order, domestic violence, disorderly conduct, driving without a license, driving under the influence, false imprisonment, fraud, hit and run, grand theft, obstructing a police officer, possession of a controlled substance, prostitution, sexual offenses (including lewd/lascivious acts with a child), weapons violations, and the federal offense of illegal reentry after removal.”
In complying with Judge Hatter’s order, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement has imposed on those released various alternatives to detention, which include in some cases electronic monitors affixed to their ankles or strict reporting guidelines by which those released must make contact with federal officials at regular intervals.
“Safety has consistently remained a top priority for the agency,” Pons stated. “As such, ICE has imposed strict reporting requirements for those being placed on alternatives to detention. As an added precautionary measure for communities, no detainee was released until officials established a high degree of certainty that they did not pose a COVID-19 public health risk.”
“ICE has been placed in a difficult circumstance to comply with a binding order that completely contradicts our duty to this nation,” Pham said. “These criminal aliens have serious convictions and charges – releasing them is an extremely risky gamble to take with public safety.”
Reports that the prisoners at the Adelanto facility were abused are inaccurate, Pons insisted. “ICE has adhered, and continues to adhere, to an aggressive inspections program for its detention centers,” Pons said. “ICE ensures its facilities follow ICE’s enforcement and removal operations division’s National Detention Standards, while the enforcement and removal operations division’s detention standards compliance unit ensures that detainees in custody reside in safe, secure and humane environments.”
Pons said U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement has been mindful all along of the hazards presented by the COVID-19 situation, and has acted responsibly in safeguarding the inmates at the Adelanto facility.
“Adelanto has restricted intakes and transfers to further protect those in custody,” Pons said. “COVID-19 testing and results at the facility remain ongoing; these are reported on a rolling basis with online information recorded from a live database. Data may change as the agency receives updated case information. Since the onset of the pandemic, ICE has taken proactive measures to tailor conditions across its detention network to maintain safe and secure environments for detainees and staff, while adhering to guidelines for the prevention and control of infectious and communicable diseases from the Center for Disease Control. This has included reducing the overall detained population, providing appropriate personal protective equipment to all staff and detainees, suspending social visitation, and maximizing social distancing practices with staggered meals and recreation times.”

Jerry Eaves, Whose Grifting In Office Epitomized His Political Era, Dead At 81

Jerry Eaves, who was for more than two decades empowered to hold office by tens of thousands of voters who were less than fully aware of the depredations he involved himself in while he served in various roles as one of San Bernardino County’s quintessentially corrupt politicians, has died.
As a line employee at the Kaiser Steel Mill in Fontana, Eaves became involved in the Steelworkers Union, an association he exploited when he decided to become involved in politics in blue collar Rialto when he was in his late thirties. With what was solid union and then Democratic Party backing, Eaves wormed his way into the local political establishment when corruption and patronage was de rigueur throughout local government. The connections he made and favors he provided to others within the administrative/law enforcement/judicial monolith that was San Bernardino County government assured that he never went to prison, even after his participation in multiple graft, payoff and bribery schemes was exposed and prosecuted, and his conviction ensued.
Born on May 17, 1939 in Miami, Arizona to Thomas and Gladys Carter Eaves originally from Marlow, Oklahoma, Gerald Eaves had just turned 16 when his family relocated to California in 1955, moving to Rialto. After he graduated from San Bernardino High School, the closest high school to the east side of Rialto, in 1957, Eaves attended San Bernardino Valley College, earning an associate of arts degree. In 1959 he began work as a laborer tending one of the blast furnaces at Kaiser Steel. Over the next quarter of a century he was promoted to positions with increasing responsibility, until 25 years later he had reached the level of general foreman when the plant was shuttered in 1984.
In 1977 he was elected to the Rialto City Council and was reelected two years later. In 1980, he was elected mayor. He remained in that position for four years, and in 1984 challenged Terry Goggin, then the 66th District assemblyman. With the heavy support of energy companies and police unions, who were opposed to legislation Goggin had written, sponsored and had seen passed into law, Eaves was able to beat the incumbent in the Democratic primary in that heavily Democratic district, which made him a shoo-in in the November 1984 General Election.
Eaves served in the Assembly for eight years. In that capacity he was a member of the Ways and Means, Rules, Transportation and other key committees. He was the author of legislation creating the state’s first telecommuting project, a procedure whereby people could “dial in” to work. He sponsored legislation targeting gang activity and drug use, among other bills favored by law enforcement officers. His Assembly Bill 419 allowed the establishment of joint agencies to redevelop Norton Air Force Base and George Air Force Base. He was responsible for legislation which authorized the admissibility of expert testimony relating to battered woman syndrome.
With his marriage to his first wife on the rocks in large measure because of his constant presence in Sacramento, Eaves in 1992 opted not to seek reelection to the Assembly in a last-ditch effort to salvage his marriage. Instead, he sought election as San Bernardino County Fifth District supervisor. Before filing to run for that post, he told the incumbent, Robert Hammock, with whom he had attended San Bernardino High School more than thirty years previously and who remarkably held the distinction of being one of few local officials who was more steeped in corruption than Eaves, that he intended to seek the supervisorial post. Hammock, a Republican who had held the Fifth District supervisorial post since 1976 largely on his ability to convert votes he made in favor of developmental projects in his previous capacity as a San Bernardino city councilman and then as supervisor into both campaign donations and bribes from the development community, recognized that the district’s overwhelming voter registration in favor of the Democrats left him at a disadvantage to Eaves, who could count upon substantial monetary support from state, national and international business interests for whom Eaves had done favors while in Sacramento as a legislator. Hammock elected to run for Congress that year, losing in that effort, which effectively ended his political career. Eaves cruised to an easy victory in the November 3, 1992 election.
In his first political incarnation as a Rialto city councilman and mayor, Eaves had engaged in the relatively minor exploitation of his parochial authority, involving himself in the petty corruption of such things as driving around Rialto in his mini-size pickup truck intoxicated without fear of arrest by the Rialto Police Department. Once installed in Sacramento, he gradually awakened to the degree to which he could personally cash in on his position of power.
His transition back to a position of local authority on the board of supervisors represented a significant shift in the dynamics of governance in San Bernardino County. Whereas previously, political money employed in San Bernardino County had pretty much originated with local business interests intent on currying favor with the county’s top ranking decision-makers in order to further their efforts to procure county contracts, franchises or project approval, members of the county board of supervisors after Eaves was elected to that panel found themselves the recipients of the largesse from individuals far afield from San Bernardino County. While influence peddling and graft were by no means unheard of in San Bernardino County prior to Eaves’ presence on the board of supervisors, he tapped into sources of money that were more distant from where the county’s politicians had previously gotten their campaign bread buttered.
As a Democrat, Eaves was somewhat out of step with the Republican majority board at that time, which featured Fourth District Supervisor Larry Walker, like Eaves a Democrat, along with Republican First District Supervisor Marsha Turoci, Republican Second District Supervisor Jon Mikels and Republican Third District Supervisor Barbara Cram Riordan. Despite Eaves’ shared Democratic affiliation with Walker, the two found themselves out of sync on certain basic issues of county governance. By instinct or as a consequence of action he saw Eaves engage in, Walker steered clear of him for the most part, avoiding making any lasting alliance with him. Eaves managed, however, to ingratiate himself with both Turoci and Mikels. Eaves did this in no small measure by putting the arm on political donors he had cultivated while he was in Sacramento and who yet were beholden to him for legislation he had carried or supported which benefited them to come across with money to assist Turoci and Mikels in their campaign efforts. When Turoci was defeated in 1996 in her effort to gain reelection as First District supervisor by another Republican, former Apple Valley Mayor Kathy Davis, Eaves adroitly moved in to form ties with Davis, providing her with access to many of the donors who had formerly invested in his career as an Assemblyman. Moreover, Eaves introduced lobbyists whom he had encountered in Sacramento to his board colleagues. Those lobbyists in turn sought out local business interests, who then made use of their lobbying services in influencing the members of the board to vote their way.
Two years after he was elected to the board of supervisors, Eaves was elevated by his colleagues to be chairman of the board of supervisors. He remained as chairman from 1994 to 1998.
Eaves was involved in an unknown number of depredations as supervisor. One entailed his sojourning with then-County Treasurer Tom O’Donnell to New York City, where the two represented themselves as San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department detectives when they discussed with officers at the Bank of New York trading on the international currency market. It is unclear whether O’Donnell and Eaves had embezzled county funds to make those currency purchases or investments in other financial instruments. Eaves’ connections with the sheriff’s department, in particular then-Sheriff Gary Penrod, hampered an investigation into the matter that might have gotten to the bottom of that scandal.
Another element of the way Eaves operated was to blend his authority as an elected official with the authority of the county’s appointed or hired administrators or managers to stampede the rest of the board or the county governmental structure into action that proved lucrative for himself or his cronies. In this way, Eaves utilized his relationship with one-time San Bernardino County Chief Administrative Officer Harry Mays and Mays’ protégé, James Hlawek, who succeeded Mays as the chief county administrative officer, to approve contracts and enter into arrangements that provided Mays and other business entities with contracts worth tens of millions of dollars and kickbacks to himself and Hlawek.
One example of this was the huge profit turned by SHL Associates, Ltd., which combined the first initials of the first names – Scott, Harry and Lance – of its three principals, Scott Beard, Harry Mays and Lance Goodwin, in its company name. In 1998, both Mays and Hlawek were indicted by a federal grand jury on bribery charges that related to their acceptance of cash in return for arranging lucrative county contracts for several entities. Ultimately, Hlawek began cooperating with the FBI, telling agents that Mays provided him with a briefcase stuffed with $60,000 in cash during a meeting he had with Mays, Eaves and Beard, as a payoff for securing a $26 million 15-year county lease for a recently vacated K-Mart building in Rialto owned by SHL. That building lease was approved in a controversial 3-2 vote on June 23, 1997, with then-supervisors Eaves, Mikels and Davis prevailing. The building was converted for use by the county’s behavioral services department. The deal was promoted by Hlawek, who was then the county’s chief administrative officer. In 1994, Mays had been instrumental in convincing the board of supervisors to promote Hlawek as his successor when he departed as the county’s top administrator. Eaves was the recipient of scores of thousands of dollars of political donations from Beard. Beard and Goodwin narrowly avoided being indicted by both county and federal prosecutors during the scandal. Eaves was less fortunate, and was charged or indicted on both state and federal counts.
In his statements to the FBI, Hlawek revealed a multitude of activities that involved outright bribery or graft. One of those was the county’s awarding of a landfill management contract to Norcal Waste Systems, Inc, which beginning in 1989 had been engaged in a contract with the county relating to trash and refuse handling at the county’s landfills. Kenneth James Walsh, a vice-president of Norcal, in 1994 began negotiations with the county relating to Norcal assuming control over the county’s landfills, representing an up-rating of the company’s contract from roughly $18 million to more than $40 million.
In September 1994, shortly after Mays had retired and was succeeded by Hlawek, Mays entered into a consulting agreement with Norcal to assist Norcal in obtaining county approval of the landfill management contract. Mays’ services for Norcal included bribing Hlawek to ensure Norcal obtained the landfill management contract. In October 1994, Walsh set up Queue Corporation as a conduit for bribes. Mays transferred funds from from Norcal into Queue and another Walsh company, and the illicit payments to Hlawek came from those companies. Thereafter, Mays and Hlawek arranged for further personal financial gain from the new Norcal contract. Mays negotiated a more lucrative consulting agreement with Norcal in January 2005. The revised contract provided that Mays and his company, Bio-Reclamation Technologies, Inc., were to receive a $1 million fee when the county approved the Norcal contract, plus additional payments if Norcal’s revenue increased through the issuance of bonds to finance landfill closures. Mays agreed to split Bio-Reclamation Technologies’ fees 60 percent to 40 percent with Walsh. Hlawek’s share of the payoffs was quantified by prosecutors as $227,000.
During 1995, Hlawek used his authority and influence as county administrative officer and chairperson of the county’s negotiating committee to obtain county approval of the Norcal contract. Among other things, Hlawek convinced the county board of supervisors to award the contract without competitive bidding. The county board of supervisors, led by Eaves, approved the Norcal contract on September 12, 1995.
From 1995 to 2000, the County paid Norcal more than $200 million. During the same period, Norcal paid $4.2 million to Mays and Bio-Reclamation Technologies under their consulting agreement and Bio-Reclamation Technologies, in turn, paid more than $1.1 million to Queue and Walsh’s other company. Hlawek intimated that bribes had been paid to Eaves, but was not able to quantify those.
Hlawek provided further information on another set of circumstances that led to the 2001 indictment of Eaves and others on federal charges. In that matter, Orange County-based billboard mogul, W. Shepardson “Shep” McCook, paid Hlawek $35,000 to induce him to alter a lease for “surplus” county property near Interstates 215 and 10 where in 1997, McCook’s Company, Oakridge Corporation, erected a series of billboards in Colton. Oakridge netted $4.3 million in that deal. Ultimately, investigators determined, Eaves, then-Colton Mayor Karl Gaytan and Colton councilmembers Don Sanders, Abe Beltran and James Grimsby had received money provided by McCook in exchange for Oakridge getting clearance to proceed with placing billboards along the freeway. Though Gaytan, Sanders, and Grimsby were removed from office as a consequence of the indictments which came after Beltran had been voted out of office, and all four Colton officials were ultimately convicted on felony bribery counts, the political corruption cases against Eaves bogged down when both the U.S. Attorney’s Office and the San Bernardino County District Attorney’s Office pursued criminal charges against him. Federal Judge Manuel Real ultimately dismissed the federal case against Eaves on the basis of his ruling that pressing dual federal and state charges against him growing out of the same offenses constituted double jeopardy. That left the case against Eaves based on the state charges intact.
Eaves, however, had an ally in then-Sheriff Gary Penrod, who detailed his department’s anti-corruption task force to look into charges that the county prosecutor’s office, then headed by District Attorney Dennis Stout, had leaked information relating to his office’s investigation of Eaves for political purposes. That task force outfitted Eaves’ opponent in the 2000 election for Fifth District Supervisor, Rialto Councilman Ed Scott, with a recording device which he used to capture utterances from Stout, then-Assistant District Attorney Dan Lough and the district attorney’s office’s head of investigations, Barry Bruins, as they responded to Scott’s inquiries with regard to progress in the investigation. The contents of those recordings were then leaked to Bob Page, who at that time was a reporter with the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin. Page wrote and the Bulletin published articles relating to Scott’s conversations with Stout, Lough and Bruins. Eaves’ lawyers subsequently pushed for continuance after continuance in the case against him, succeeding in postponing a trial on the matter until after the 2002 election, during which Stout, damaged by the reports of his office having engaged in a “political” prosecution of Eaves, was defeated by one of his prosecutors running against him, Mike Ramos. Ramos, his career having advanced as a consequence of the faux pas Stout had committed in during the prosecution of Eaves, entered into plea negotiations with Eaves’ lawyers rather than insisting on taking the matter before a jury. Influenced in some measure as well by his alliance with Sheriff Penrod, Ramos was prevailed upon to go easy on Eaves, who in his capacities as assemblyman and supervisor had engaged in political horsetrading and provided favors to untold numbers of public officials and members of the county establishment. Ultimately, in exchange for agreeing in January 2004 to leave office, pay a $10,000 fine and submit to three years probation, Eaves avoided a prison term.
As a footnote, Scott’s environmental clean-up company was provided with county contracts, and he remains a city councilman in Rialto. Page left the newspaper business shortly after his articles on Scott, Stout, Lough and Bruins appeared, and he was hired as the chief of staff to Supervisor Mikels, subsequently moving into the county administrator’s office after Mikels lost the 2002 election. Consistently promoted up the county hierarchy ever since, Page is now serving as San Bernardino County’s registrar of voters, at an annual salary of $158,884.41, further pay of $34,179.20, and benefits of $100,209.40, for a total annual compensation of $293,273.01.
During his tenure as supervisor, Eaves was the co-chair of the Inland Valley Development Agency, which was charged with the development of the area around Norton Air Force Base after it was shuttered by the Department of Defense in 1994, as well as a member of the board of the San Bernardino International Airport Authority, dedicated to the civilian use conversion of the Air Force Base. He was the chairman of the Agua Mansa Industrial Growth Association; president of the California State Association of Counties; and chairman of the county’s transportation agency, known as San Bernardino Associated Governments. He hosted a cable television program, County News and Views. He was chairman of the Inland Empire Legislative Caucus. He was instrumental in having the current county hospital, known as the Arrowhead Regional Medical Center, built in Colton.
While he was holding elective office, Eaves remained involved as a Little League coach in Rialto, and was director and president of the Little League there. He received the P.T.A. Honorary Service Award for fifteen years of dedicated service to young people and was named Kiwanian of the Year by the East Rialto Kiwanis Club and distinguished citizen of the year by the Boy Scouts of America. He established the Jerry and Jenna Eaves Foundation for the purpose of assisting underprivileged children, nonprofit child care centers and other community organizations.
John Longville, who as a Rialto city councilman served on that panel when Eaves was mayor and was once considered one of Eaves’ primary political allies and eventually succeeded Eaves as mayor after he went on to the Assembly, told the Sentinel, “I first met Jerry when I began attending Rialto City Council meetings in the late 1970s. I was appointed to the city’s airport commission and I got to know him as one of the people involved in city government. Jerry was more of a conservative Democrat when I first encountered him, and he became less conservative as time went on. He was an ally of mine when I first ran for the council. He supported me when I successfully worked to establish Martin Luther King Day as a holiday in Rialto, which the city did before it became a state and federal holiday. I assisted him when he ran for the Assembly in 1984. I was unsuccessful in my first run for mayor that same year, so I was off the council from 1984 to 1986, but I was elected mayor the following year. I worked for him while he was in the Assembly. I think there was a substantial shift in his political philosophy after he became an assemblyman. He grew much more progressive. I think that was a combination of his time in Sacramento and his own maturation. Jerry was part of the Democratic caucus, and was among people who were in power. He learned a lot in that position. Jerry was a smart guy who would pick up on things very quickly. He was a natural politician.”
After his first marriage ended, Eaves married Jena Rae Wilson, the daughter of Oswen and Allene Wilson. They were married on May 20, 1994, which precipitated Eaves’ move from Rialto to San Bernardino. After he left office, Eaves and Jena moved to Palm Desert.
Earlier this month, Eaves was diagnosed with stage 4 lymphoma during an examination at the Eisenhower Medical Center in Rancho Mirage. Death claimed him on Monday, October 26 while he was in residence at his Palm Desert home.
He is survived by Jena and a daughter, Laura Scroggin; a brother, Darrell; a sister, Betty Mulligan; and thirteen grandchildren; eight great-grandchildren; and three great-great-grandchildren he had in combination with Jena. Eaves was preceded in death by his son, Michael, and his daughter, Cheryl.
-Mark Gutglueck

8 Years Later, State Agrees To Release Local RDA Money To SB Airport Authority

The Inland Valley Development Agency has reached a settlement with the State of California Department of Finance that will free up money long in dispute between the state and two local agencies for use in further development at San Bernardino International Airport.
The Inland Valley Development Agency and the San Bernardino International Airport Authority were formed in the early 1990s as joint power authorities by the County of San Bernardino and the cities of Redlands, Highland, San Bernardino, Loma Linda, Grand Terrace and Colton in anticipation of the closure of Norton Air Force Base. The Inland Valley Development Agency was intended to oversee the redevelopment of property around the base property for the economic benefit of the region, and the San Bernardino International Airport Authority was chartered to convert the base to civilian use. Eventually the cities of Redlands, Highland and Grand Terrace ceased their involvement in the Inland Valley Development Agency and the cities of Redlands and Grand Terrace ended their participation in the San Bernardino International Airport Authority.
In 2011, Governor Jerry Brown induced the state legislature to pass two laws, ABX126 and ABX127, which eliminated the more than 400 redevelopment agencies throughout the state and directed that the money normally passed through to them by Sacramento instead to be utilized for education and law enforcement funding. The law dissolved redevelopment agencies and enjoined them from entering into contracts with enforceable obligations after June 28, 2011. The legislation gave the California Department of Finance authority over the cessation of the redevelopment agencies and the money they had formerly controlled, and mandated that any disputes between defunct city or county redevelopment agencies and the Department of Finance be hashed out in Sacramento Superior Court. Part of the legislation shelving the redevelopment agencies called for cities to create for themselves or have the county create for them a successor agency to oversee and wind down that particular agency’s functions and dispose of its enforceable obligations by scheduling and executing the payments needed to discharge those obligations.
The boards for the San Bernardino International Airport Authority and the Inland Valley Economic Development Authority asserted that since they are joint powers authorities dedicated to the reuse of what was formerly federal military property, they were not municipal redevelopment agencies and, accordingly, not subject to ABX126 and ABX127. They contended the property tax money from the area around the former air base should remain available to the Inland Valley Development Authority and be used to assist in defraying the $949.5 million in debt and obligations both agencies had accumulated in the airport conversion effort. The agencies issued hundreds of millions of dollars in bonds to fund improvements to the facility and the area surrounding it. Those bonds were sold to investors under the assumption that the infrastructure to be purchased with the bond proceeds would lead to the creation of an aerodrome with operational revenue, and together with property tax revenue increases enough money would be generated to make timely payments to the bondholders.
Those agencies held in their dispute with the California Department of Finance that they are legally eligible to remain in place and that they intended to bring in roughly $432 million in property taxes over the span between 2012 and 2022, and had committed $22 million of that toward road improvements and the rest for improvements and operations at the airport.
The Department of Finance asserted that since the authorities had no specific contracts related to the $432 million, they had no legitimate claim to the projected property tax revenue, as the money was secured only by an agency board resolution.
After eight years of back-and-forth, the settlement reached earlier this month resolves outstanding payments in support of the San Bernardino International Airport Authority under the Inland Valley Development Agency’s commitments to support the conversion of the military base to a civilian airport.
The executed agreement resolves all disputed contentions between the Department of Finance and the Inland Valley Development Agency, while arranging for a final payment of over $5.5 million to the San Bernardino International Airport Authority from the Inland Valley Development Agency in January 2021.

Political Implications Surround Upbeat City Of Upland Financial Assessment

Questions emerged this week about the integrity of financial oversight, and staff oversight of municipal operations in general, at Upland City Hall. This came after the city’s assistant city manager offered a far more confident assessment of the city’s financial circumstance than was envisioned in the current fiscal year’s budget, than previous recent surveys of the city’s fiscal performance indicated and in defiance of the reasonable expectations of what the drastic downturn in revenue the city is experiencing as a consequence of the COVID-19 pandemic is doing to the municipality’s bottom line.
Several regular observers of Upland city government, who include those with a solid understanding of the shaky financial footing the city has been on for nearly a decade as it struggles to deal with the escalating cost of providing pensions to retired city employees, believe Assistant City Manager Stephen Parker’s presentation of the first quarter budget review for Fiscal Year 2020-21 was shaded for political purposes. Specifically, it was suggested, the sanguine picture Parker painted of how the city’s financials balance may have been altered and calculated to benefit the electoral chances of the two city council incumbents involved in next Tuesday’s election.
Both Mayor Debbie Stone and Councilman Bill Velto are running for mayor, and are attempting to fend off challengers Lois Sicking Dieter and Alexander Novikov, as Sicking Dieter is surging in the polls.
Upon adopting the 2020-21 Fiscal Year budget, which runs from July 1, 2020 until June 30, 2021, the council scheduled utilizing at least $2.1 million in its reserve funds to bridge the gap between the revenues it anticipated it would realize in that 12 month span and the amount of money that it would need to spend on city operations during that same period.
During Parker’s presentation at Monday night’s Upland City Council meeting however, he stated that based upon the city’s overall financial performance in terms of where it had actually ended at the close of Fiscal Year 2019-20 on June 30 and incoming revenue in July, August and September, the city is safely out of the economic doldrums.
The city’s reserve funds have miraculously increased by $5.5 million, such that the city has salted away 37.8 percent of its general fund into accounts that are not being tapped, Parker said. The city’s current reserves exceed what the city had in that regard going back many years, Parker said.
Parker’s presentation had a staged quality to it.
“Despite being in the middle of a pandemic, Upland’s financial picture has become much brighter in the four months since we adopted the Fiscal Year 20-21 budget,” he said, asserting “Revenues ended last year more than $5 million higher than projected. Sales tax came in $950,000 better than the previous estimates by HDL, the city’s sales tax consultants. While that revenue that came in was still $1 million lower than the original 19-20 budget, it was much stronger than anticipated, as many companies found innovative ways to keep their businesses open during the pandemic.”
The city pulled a rabbit out of its hat, Parker said, by means of some sly bookkeeping. One stratagem involved, he said, was “cost allocation,” which boils down to how the city juggles payments to, from and among its internal programs. The city had a city consultant, Willdan Financial Services, write up a cost allocation plan and exploited that to yield a line item in its budget it could call either savings or income, Parker said.
“The cost allocation plan summarizes in writing the methods and procedures the city uses to allocate costs to various programs, grants and funds,” he said. “The results of the cost allocation plan increased reimbursement to the general fund from six special revenue and enterprise funds by almost $800,000 in Fiscal Year 19-20. Staff is recommending a corresponding budget adjustment for the affected funds for 19-20.”
With Fiscal Year 2019-20 ending far less disastrously than it was thought it would, the city had a head start going into 2020-21 it didn’t previously recognize it had, Parker said.
Money has just been pouring into city coffers, he said. Sales tax revenues beat previous estimates by $953,310, he said, and it is now projected that the city will experience sales tax revenue $1.2 million higher than was projected at the outset of the current fiscal year. Property tax revenue went beyond what was anticipated by $942,849, he said.
Parker stated, “Four line items in the licenses and permit area beat budget by large amounts, building permits by $117,000, electrical permits by $167,000, public works construction permits was up $693,000, and other permits was $89,000 higher.”
In addition, according to his report, planning fees increased by $55,360, building plan check fees were up by $85,345, building department fees exceeded expectations by $273,926 and engineering fees were $153,571 greater than was projected.
Additionally, staff vacancies have reduced city outlays by $332,368, and the city has recently received a federal CARES Act grant of $539,412, he maintained.
Accordingly, the city’s unassigned fund balance has jumped to $16.4 million from $11.4 million, Parker insisted.
All this left Stone and Velto gloating about what a great job they are doing managing the city’s finances.
Others dryly observed that much of what Parker was basing his confident assessment on consisted of smoke and mirrors, what was essentially a reframing of the figures already in the budget in their most flattering light. They noted Parker gave himself some leeway in case his credibility is questioned, with a veiled disclosure at the beginning of his report. “I’d like to point out before we begin that the figures provided in this presentation are unaudited and likely to change in the comprehensive annual financial report once the auditors complete their fieldwork,” he said. “I do not anticipate them changing in a material fashion.”
-Mark Gutglueck

Temporarily Felled By Minor Stroke, Chino Hills Mayor Bennett Still Campaigning

Chino Hills’ 73-year-old mayor, Art Bennett, who is now locked in a reelection effort, suffered what was initially described as a stroke on October 17, according to a knowledgeable individual at Chino Hills City Hall.
A stroke is defined as anything that temporarily interrupts the flow of blood to the brain. While the precise type of event Bennett experienced has not been publicly disclosed, it is believed that he likely endured an episode related to, but not an actual, stroke, known as a transient ischemic attack.
A transient ischemic attack, known by the acronym TIA, is a transitory state of symptoms similar to those of a stroke. Statistically, roughly one third of those who are confronted with a transient ischemic attack will eventually experience a full-blown stroke.
The Sentinel was informed that on October 17, a Saturday, Bennett was beset by a series of what he and his wife sensed to be circulatory challenges, upon which they immediately sought for him medical assistance. He was given treatment and then subjected to a battery of tests at an undisclosed medical facility.
Two individuals who have come into contact with Bennett since the October 17 incident said there were no apparent aftereffects that they could detect in his speech or mannerisms.
Bennett, a retired real estate appraiser and specialist with regard to property taxation, was a 13-year member of the Chino Hills Planning Commission before he ran unopposed for the city council in 2008 and was proclaimed a victor in that race without being subjected to an actual election. He was elected in 2012 and re-elected in 2016.
Selected by his council colleagues to serve as mayor in 2012 and 2016, Bennett is again in the role of mayor. A resident of the Village Oaks district previously elected at-large, he is now vying to represent Chino Hills’ newly-created District 3, and is opposed by Sabir St Taqi, Tyler Shields and James Gallagher.

October 30 SBC Sentinel Legal Notices

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE FOR CHANGE OF NAME CASE NUMBER  CIVDS2018363
TO  ALL INTERESTED PERSONS: Petitioner KATARZYNA DANIELA PODLECKI filed with this court for a decree changing names as follows:
LENA PODLECKI to LENA KAROLINA PIETRZYKOWSKA
THE COURT ORDERS that all persons interested in this matter appear before this court at the hearing indicated below to show cause, if any, why the petition for change of name should not be granted. Any person objecting to the name changes described above must file a written objection that includes the reasons for the objection at least two court days before the matter is scheduled to be heard and must appear at the hearing to show cause why the petition should not be granted. If no written objection is timely filed, the court may grant the petition without a hearing.
Notice of Hearing:
Date: 11/23/2020
Time: 9:00 a.m.
Department: S16
The address of the court is Superior Court of California,County of San Bernardino, San Bernardino District – Civil Division, 247 West Third Street, Same as above, San Bernardino, CA 92415-0210, San Bernardino
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this order be published in the SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL in San Bernardino County California, once a week for four successive weeks prior to the date set for hearing of the petition.
Dated: SEPTEMBER 2, 2020
Lynn M. Poncin
Judge of the Superior Court.
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel on 10/09, 10/16, 10/23 & 10/30, 2020

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE FOR CHANGE OF NAME CASE NUMBER  CIVDS2018363
TO  ALL INTERESTED PERSONS: Petitioner KATARZYNA DANIELA PODLECKI filed with this court for a decree changing names as follows:
LENA PODLECKI to LENA KAROLINA PIETRZYKOWSKA
THE COURT ORDERS that all persons interested in this matter appear before this court at the hearing indicated below to show cause, if any, why the petition for change of name should not be granted. Any person objecting to the name changes described above must file a written objection that includes the reasons for the objection at least two court days before the matter is scheduled to be heard and must appear at the hearing to show cause why the petition should not be granted. If no written objection is timely filed, the court may grant the petition without a hearing.
Notice of Hearing:
Date: 11/23/2020
Time: 9:00 a.m.
Department: S16
The address of the court is Superior Court of California,County of San Bernardino, San Bernardino District – Civil Division, 247 West Third Street, Same as above, San Bernardino, CA 92415-0210, San Bernardino
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this order be published in the SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL in San Bernardino County California, once a week for four successive weeks prior to the date set for hearing of the petition.
Dated: SEPTEMBER 2, 2020
Lynn M. Poncin
Judge of the Superior Court.
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel on 10/09, 10/16, 10/23 & 10/30, 2020

FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT FILE NO-20200008966
The following person(s) is(are) doing business as: Calibeadman, 6274 S Kingsmill Ct, Fontana, CA 92336, Mailing Address: 8282 Sierra Ave #3336, Fontana, CA 92334, David B. Griffith, 6274 S Kingsmill Ct, Fontana, CA 92336, Jadat D. Griffith, 6274 S Kingsmill Ct, Fontana, CA 92336
Business is Conducted By: A Married Couple
Signed: BY SIGNING BELOW, I DECLARE THAT ALL INFORMATION IN THIS STATEMENT IS TRUE AND CORRECT. A registrant who declares as true information, which he or she knows to be false, is guilty of a crime. (B&P Code 17913) I am also aware that all information on this statement becomes Public Record upon filing.
s/ David Griffith
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 9/30/20
I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office.
Began Transacting Business: 9/01/20
County Clerk, s/ D5511
NOTICE- This fictitious business name statement expires five years from the date it was filed in the office of the county clerk. A new fictitious business name statement must be filed before that time. The filing of this statement does not of itself authorize the use in this state of a fictitious name in violation of the rights of another under federal, state, or common law (see section 14400 et. Seq. Business & Professions Code).
10/02/20, 10/09/20, 10/16/20, 10/23/20
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT FILE NO-20200008987
The following person(s) is(are) doing business as: American Check Cashing, 8001- Archibald Ave, Ste B, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730, S& W, Inc., 8001- Archibald Ave, Ste B, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Business is Conducted By: A Corporation
Signed: BY SIGNING BELOW, I DECLARE THAT ALL INFORMATION IN THIS STATEMENT IS TRUE AND CORRECT. A registrant who declares as true information, which he or she knows to be false, is guilty of a crime. (B&P Code 17913) I am also aware that all information on this statement becomes Public Record upon filing.
s/ Wagar Rasul
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 9/30/20
I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office.
Began Transacting Business: N/A
County Clerk, s/ D5511
NOTICE- This fictitious business name statement expires five years from the date it was filed in the office of the county clerk. A new fictitious business name statement must be filed before that time. The filing of this statement does not of itself authorize the use in this state of a fictitious name in violation of the rights of another under federal, state, or common law (see section 14400 et. Seq. Business & Professions Code).
10/09/20, 10/16/20, 10/23/20, 10/30/20

FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT FILE NO-20200008985
The following person(s) is(are) doing business as: American Check Cashing, 8001- Archibald Ave, Ste B, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730, ISWA, Inc., 8001- Archibald Ave, Ste B, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Business is Conducted By: A Corporation
Signed: BY SIGNING BELOW, I DECLARE THAT ALL INFORMATION IN THIS STATEMENT IS TRUE AND CORRECT. A registrant who declares as true information, which he or she knows to be false, is guilty of a crime. (B&P Code 17913) I am also aware that all information on this statement becomes Public Record upon filing.
s/ Asma Zahid
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 9/30/20
I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office.
Began Transacting Business: 01/09/07
County Clerk, s/ D5511
NOTICE- This fictitious business name statement expires five years from the date it was filed in the office of the county clerk. A new fictitious business name statement must be filed before that time. The filing of this statement does not of itself authorize the use in this state of a fictitious name in violation of the rights of another under federal, state, or common law (see section 14400 et. Seq. Business & Professions Code).
10/09/20, 10/16/20, 10/23/20, 10/30/20

FBN 20200007905 The following person is doing business as: SPONGEE, 1515 W ARROW HWY, #18 UPLAND, CALIF 91786, MAILING ADDRESS: 1515 WEST ARROW HIGHWAY SPACE 18 UPLAND, CA 91786, EFREN C. DY AGUILERA, 1515 WEST ARROW HIGHWAY SPACE 18 UPLAND, CAL 91786 This Business is Conducted By: AN INDIVIDUAL BY SIGNING BELOW, I DECLARE THAT ALL INFORMATION IN THIS STATEMENT IS TRUE AND CORRECT. A registrant who declares as true information, which he or she knows to be false, is guilty of a crime. (B&P Code 17913) I am also aware that all information on this statement becomes Public Record upon filing. S/ EFREN C. DY AGUILERA This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 8/28/2020 I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office. Began Transacting Business: N/A County Clerk, Deputy l1327 NOTICE- This fictitious business name statement expires five years from the date it was filed in the office of the county clerk. A new fictitious business name statement must be filed before that time. The filing of this statement does not of itself authorize the use in this state of a fictitious name in violation of the rights of another under federal, state, or common law (see section 14400 et. Seq. Business & Professions Code). Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel on 9/4, 9/11, 9/18 & 9/25, 2020 Corrected on: 10/09/20, 10/16/20, 10/23/20, 10/30/20

NOTICE OF PETITION TO ADMINISTER ESTATE OF: DAVID LOPEZ RAMOS JR.
CASE NO. PROPS 2000720
To all heirs, beneficiaries, creditors, contingent creditors, and persons who may otherwise be interested in the will or estate, or both of DAVID LOPEZ RAMOS JR.
A PETITION FOR PROBATE has been filed by RICHARD ROSALES RAMOS in the Superior Court of California, County of SAN BERNARDINO.
THE PETITION FOR PROBATE requests that RICHARD ROSALES RAMOS be appointed as personal representative to administer the estate of the decedent.
THE PETITION requests authority to administer the estate under the Independent Administration of Estates Act. (This authority will allow the personal representative to take many actions without obtaining court approval. Before taking certain very important actions, however, the personal representative will be required to give notice to interested persons unless they have waived notice or consented to the proposed action.) The independent administration authority will be granted unless an interested person files an objection to the petition and shows good cause why the court should not grant the authority.
A hearing on the petition will be held in Dept. No. S-36 at 9:00 A.M. on NOVEMBER 16, 2020 at Superior Court of California, County of San Bernardino, 247 West Third Street, San Bernardino, CA 92415, San Bernardino District.
IF YOU OBJECT to the granting of the petition, you should appear at the hearing and state your objections or file written objections with the court before the hearing. Your appearance may be in person or by your attorney.
IF YOU ARE A CREDITOR or a contingent creditor of the decedent, you must file your claim with the court and mail a copy to the personal representative appointed by the court within the later of either (1) four months from the date of first issuance of letters to a general personal representative, as defined in section 58(b) of the California Probate Code, or (2) 60 days from the date of mailing or personal delivery to you of a notice under Section 9052 of the California Probate Code.
Other California statutes and legal authority may affect your rights as a creditor. You may want to consult with an attorney knowledgeable in California law.
YOU MAY EXAMINE the file kept by the court. If you are a person interested in the estate, you may file with the court a Request for Special Notice (form DE-154) of the filing of an inventory and appraisal of estate assets or of any petition or account as provided in Probate Code section 1250. A Request for Special Notice form is available from the court clerk.
Attorney for the Petitioner:
R. SAM PRICE SBN 208603
PRICE LAW FIRM, APC
300 E STATE STREET SUITE 620
REDLANDS, CA 92373
(909) 475 8800
sam@pricelawfirm.com

Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel on 10/16, 10/23 & 10/30, 2020

FBN 20200008547
The following entity is doing business as CALI HOT DOGS 7345 POPLAR DR FONTANA, CA 92336-1757 LUKE ADESINO 7345 POPLAR DR FONTANA, CA 92336-1757
This Business is Conducted By: AN INDIVIDUAL
BY SIGNING BELOW, I DECLARE THAT ALL INFORMATION IN THIS STATEMENT IS TRUE AND CORRECT. A registrant who declares as true information, which he or she knows to be false, is guilty of a crime. (B&P Code 17913) I am also aware that all information on this statement becomes Public Record upon filing.
S/ ADESINO LUKE
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 09/16/2020
I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office.
Began Transacting Business: June 16, 2020
County Clerk, Deputy M0597
NOTICE- This fictitious business name statement expires five years from the date it was filed in the office of the county clerk. A new fictitious business name statement must be filed before that time. The filing of this statement does not of itself authorize the use in this state of a fictitious name in violation of the rights of another under federal, state, or common law (see section 14400 et. Seq. Business & Professions Code).
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel on 10/16, 10/23, 10/30 & 11/06, 2020.

FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT FILE NO-20200008753
The following person(s) is(are) doing business as: Pasley Motorsports LLC, 2621 S Sacramento Pl, Ontario, CA 91761, Pasley Motorsports LLC, Ontario, CA 91761
Business is Conducted By: A Limited Liability Company
Signed: BY SIGNING BELOW, I DECLARE THAT ALL INFORMATION IN THIS STATEMENT IS TRUE AND CORRECT. A registrant who declares as true information, which he or she knows to be false, is guilty of a crime. (B&P Code 17913) I am also aware that all information on this statement becomes Public Record upon filing.
s/ Preston Pasley
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 9/22/20
I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office.
Began Transacting Business: 9/8/20
County Clerk, s/ M0597
NOTICE- This fictitious business name statement expires five years from the date it was filed in the office of the county clerk. A new fictitious business name statement must be filed before that time. The filing of this statement does not of itself authorize the use in this state of a fictitious name in violation of the rights of another under federal, state, or common law (see section 14400 et. Seq. Business & Professions Code).
10/16/20, 10/23/20, 10/30/20, 11/06/20

FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT FILE NO-20200008569
The following person(s) is(are) doing business as: Lovers, 495 W Orange Show Rd, Suite A, San Bernardino, CA 92408, Mailing Address: 901 W Main St, Auburn, WA, 98001, TLA Acquisition Corp, 901 W Main St #A, Auburn, WA, 98001
Business is Conducted By: A Corporation
Signed: BY SIGNING BELOW, I DECLARE THAT ALL INFORMATION IN THIS STATEMENT IS TRUE AND CORRECT. A registrant who declares as true information, which he or she knows to be false, is guilty of a crime. (B&P Code 17913) I am also aware that all information on this statement becomes Public Record upon filing.
s/ Jennifer Conner
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 9/17/20
I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office.
Began Transacting Business: N/A
County Clerk, s/ D5511
NOTICE- This fictitious business name statement expires five years from the date it was filed in the office of the county clerk. A new fictitious business name statement must be filed before that time. The filing of this statement does not of itself authorize the use in this state of a fictitious name in violation of the rights of another under federal, state, or common law (see section 14400 et. Seq. Business & Professions Code).
10/16/20, 10/23/20, 10/30/20, 11/06/20

FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT FILE NO-20200009399
The following person(s) is(are) doing business as: Richformation Health And Wellness Coaching, 9860 Galena Ct, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730, Mailing Address: 9860 Galena Ct, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730, Katrina M. Richardson, 9860 Galena Ct, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Business is Conducted By: An Individual
Signed: BY SIGNING BELOW, I DECLARE THAT ALL INFORMATION IN THIS STATEMENT IS TRUE AND CORRECT. A registrant who declares as true information, which he or she knows to be false, is guilty of a crime. (B&P Code 17913) I am also aware that all information on this statement becomes Public Record upon filing.
s/ Katrina M Richardson
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 10/13/20
I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office.Began Transacting Business: N/A
County Clerk, s/ D5511
NOTICE- This fictitious business name statement expires five years from the date it was filed in the office of the county clerk. A new fictitious business name statement must be filed before that time. The filing of this statement does not of itself authorize the use in this state of a fictitious name in violation of the rights of another under federal, state, or common law (see section 14400 et. Seq. Business & Professions Code).
10/16/20, 10/23/20, 10/30/20, 11/06/20

FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT FILE NO20200007278 The following person(s) is(are) doing business as: AR Wiltshire Enterprises; Nubieyan Designs, 7950 Etiwanda Avenue, Apt 24101, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739, Ann R. Wiltshire, 7950 Etiwanda Avenue, Apt 24101, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 Business is Conducted By: An Individual Signed: BY SIGNING BELOW, I DECLARE THAT ALL INFORMATION IN THIS STATEMENT IS TRUE AND CORRECT. A registrant who declares as true information, which he or she knows to be false, is guilty of a crime. (B&P Code 17913) I am also aware that all information on this statement becomes Public Record upon filing. s/ Ann R. Wiltshire This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 8/12/20 I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office. Began Transacting Business: N/A County Clerk, s/ D5511 NOTICE- This fictitious business name statement expires five years from the date it was filed in the office of the county clerk. A new fictitious business name statement must be filed before that time. The filing of this statement does not of itself authorize the use in this state of a fictitious name in violation of the rights of another under federal, state, or common law (see section 14400 et. Seq. Business & Professions Code). 9/11/20, 9/18/20, 9/25/20, 10/2/20. Corrected on: 10/16/20, 10/23/20, 10/30/20, 11/06/20

FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT FILE NO20200007273 The following person(s) is(are) doing business as: Educational Ties, 7317 Rosebay Place, Fontana, CA 92336, Irishia Williams, 7317 Rosebay Place, Fontana, CA 92336 Business is Conducted By: An Individual Signed: BY SIGNING BELOW, I DECLARE THAT ALL INFORMATION IN THIS STATEMENT IS TRUE AND CORRECT. A registrant who declares as true information, which he or she knows to be false, is guilty of a crime. (B&P Code 17913) I am also aware that all information on this statement becomes Public Record upon filing. s/ Irishia Williams This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 8/12/20 I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office. Began Transacting Business: 8/6/2020 County Clerk, s/ I1327 NOTICE- This fictitious business name statement expires five years from the date it was filed in the office of the county clerk. A new fictitious business name statement must be filed before that time. The filing of this statement does not of itself authorize the use in this state of a fictitious name in violation of the rights of another under federal, state, or common law (see section 14400 et. Seq. Business & Professions Code). 9/11/20, 9/18/20, 9/25/20, 10/2/20. Corrected on: 10/16/20, 10/23/20, 10/30/20, 11/06/20

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE FOR CHANGE OF NAME
CASE NUMBER CIVDS2020338
TO ALL INTERESTED PERSONS: Petitioner: Raveen Hailer filed with this court for a decree changing names as follows:
Raveen Hailer to Monica Kaur
THE COURT ORDERS that all persons interested in this matter appear before this court at the hearing indicated below to show cause, if any, why the petition for change of name should not be granted. Any person objecting to the name changes described above must file a written objection that includes the reasons for the objection at least two court days before the matter is scheduled to be heard and must appear at the hearing to show cause why the petition should not be granted. If no written objection is timely filed, the court may grant the petition without a hearing.
Notice of Hearing:
Date: 12/07/20
Time: 9:00 a.m.
Department: S17
The address of the court is Superior Court of California,County of San Bernardino, San Bernardino District – Civil Division, 247 West Third Street, Same as above, San Bernardino, CA 92415-0210, San Bernardino
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this order be published in the SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL in San Bernardino County California, once a week for four successive weeks prior to the date set for hearing of the petition.
Dated: September 23, 2020
Lynn M. Poncin
Judge of the Superior Court.
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel on 10/16/20, 10/23/20, 10/30/20, 11/6/20
FBN 20200008418
The following entity is doing business as OPTIMIST PACKAGING 206 E MISSION BLVD POMONA, CA 91766 MARTIN HERNANDEZ 206 E MISSION BLVD POMONA, CA 91766
This Business is Conducted By: AN INDIVIDUAL
BY SIGNING BELOW, I DECLARE THAT ALL INFORMATION IN THIS STATEMENT IS TRUE AND CORRECT. A registrant who declares as true information, which he or she knows to be false, is guilty of a crime. (B&P Code 17913) I am also aware that all information on this statement becomes Public Record upon filing.
S/ MARTIN HERNANDEZ
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 9/15/2020
I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office.
Began Transacting Business: AUGUST 31, 2020
County Clerk, Deputy D5511
NOTICE- This fictitious business name statement expires five years from the date it was filed in the office of the county clerk. A new fictitious business name statement must be filed before that time. The filing of this statement does not of itself authorize the use in this state of a fictitious name in violation of the rights of another under federal, state, or common law (see section 14400 et. Seq. Business & Professions Code).
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel on 9/25, 10/02, 10/09 & 10/16, 2020. CORRECTED 10/23, 10/30. 11/06 & 11/13, 2020.

FBN 20200008547
The following entity is doing business as CALI HOT DOGS 7345 POPLAR DR FONTANA, CA 92336-1757 LUKE ADESINO 7345 POPLAR DR FONTANA, CA 92336-1757
This Business is Conducted By: AN INDIVIDUAL
BY SIGNING BELOW, I DECLARE THAT ALL INFORMATION IN THIS STATEMENT IS TRUE AND CORRECT. A registrant who declares as true information, which he or she knows to be false, is guilty of a crime. (B&P Code 17913) I am also aware that all information on this statement becomes Public Record upon filing.
S/ ADESINO LUKE
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 09/16/2020
I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office.
Began Transacting Business: June 16, 2020
County Clerk, Deputy M0597
NOTICE- This fictitious business name statement expires five years from the date it was filed in the office of the county clerk. A new fictitious business name statement must be filed before that time. The filing of this statement does not of itself authorize the use in this state of a fictitious name in violation of the rights of another under federal, state, or common law (see section 14400 et. Seq. Business & Professions Code).
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel on 10/16, 10/23, 10/30 & 11/06, 2020.
NOTICE OF PETITION TO ADMINISTER ESTATE OF: RHONDA SUE GENTRY
CASE NO. PROPS 2000724
To all heirs, beneficiaries, creditors, contingent creditors, and persons who may otherwise be interested in the will or estate, or both of RHONDA SUE GENTRY,
A PETITION FOR PROBATE has been filed by JENNA GROOT in the Superior Court of California, County of SAN BERNARDINO.
THE PETITION FOR PROBATE requests that JENNA GROOT be appointed as personal representative to administer the estate of the decedent.
THE PETITION requests authority to administer the estate under the Independent Administration of Estates Act. (This authority will allow the personal representative to take many actions without obtaining court approval. Before taking certain very important actions, however, the personal representative will be required to give notice to interested persons unless they have waived notice or consented to the proposed action.) The independent administration authority will be granted unless an interested person files an objection to the petition and shows good cause why the court should not grant the authority.
A hearing on the petition will be held in Dept. No. S-36 at 9:00 A.M. on NOVEMBER 18, 2020 at Superior Court of California, County of San Bernardino, 247 West Third Street, San Bernardino, CA 92415, San Bernardino District.
IF YOU OBJECT to the granting of the petition, you should appear at the hearing and state your objections or file written objections with the court before the hearing. Your appearance may be in person or by your attorney.
IF YOU ARE A CREDITOR or a contingent creditor of the decedent, you must file your claim with the court and mail a copy to the personal representative appointed by the court within the later of either (1) four months from the date of first issuance of letters to a general personal representative, as defined in section 58(b) of the California Probate Code, or (2) 60 days from the date of mailing or personal delivery to you of a notice under Section 9052 of the California Probate Code.
Other California statutes and legal authority may affect your rights as a creditor. You may want to consult with an attorney knowledgeable in California law.
YOU MAY EXAMINE the file kept by the court. If you are a person interested in the estate, you may file with the court a Request for Special Notice (form DE-154) of the filing of an inventory and appraisal of estate assets or of any petition or account as provided in Probate Code section 1250. A Request for Special Notice form is available from the court clerk.
Attorney for the Petitioner:
TYLER H. BROWN
1152 N. MOUNTAIN AVE.
UPLAND, CA 91786
(909) 982-5086
tylerbrown@brownandbrownllp.com
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel on 10/23, 10/30 & 11/06, 2020
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE FOR CHANGE OF NAME CASE NUMBER CIVDS 2021647
TO ALL INTERESTED PERSONS: Petitioner ERIC JON ZUCK filed with this court for a decree changing names as follows: ERIC JON ZUCK
to ERIC JON OATES
THE COURT ORDERS that all persons interested in this matter appear before this court at the hearing indicated below to show cause, if any, why the petition for change of name should not be granted. Any person objecting to the name changes described above must file a written objection that includes the reasons for the objection at least two court days before the matter is scheduled to be heard and must appear at the hearing to show cause why the petition should not be granted. If no written objection is timely filed, the court may grant the petition without a hearing.
Notice of Hearing:
Date: 12/07/20
Time: 9:00 a.m.
Department: S17
The address of the court is Superior Court of California,County of San Bernardino, San Bernardino District – Civil Division, 247 West Third Street, Same as above, San Bernardino, CA 92415-0210, San Bernardino
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this order be published in the SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL in San Bernardino County California, once a week for four successive weeks prior to the date set for hearing of the petition.
Dated: OCTOBER 5, 2020
Lynn M. Poncin
Judge of the Superior Court.
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel on 10/23/20, 10/30/20, 11/06/20 & 11/13/20, 2020.

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE FOR CHANGE OF NAME CASE NUMBER CIVDS 2020684
TO ALL INTERESTED PERSONS: Petitioner FRANK HURTADO JR. filed with this court for a decree changing names as follows: FRANK HURTADO JR. to FRANK MACIAS
THE COURT ORDERS that all persons interested in this matter appear before this court at the hearing indicated below to show cause, if any, why the petition for change of name should not be granted. Any person objecting to the name changes described above must file a written objection that includes the reasons for the objection at least two court days before the matter is scheduled to be heard and must appear at the hearing to show cause why the petition should not be granted. If no written objection is timely filed, the court may grant the petition without a hearing.
Notice of Hearing:
Date: 12/07/20
Time: 9:00 a.m.
Department: S16
The address of the court is Superior Court of California,County of San Bernardino, San Bernardino District – Civil Division, 247 West Third Street, Same as above, San Bernardino, CA 92415-0210, San Bernardino
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this order be published in the SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL in San Bernardino County California, once a week for four successive weeks prior to the date set for hearing of the petition.
Dated: OCTOBER 8, 2020
Lynn M. Poncin
Judge of the Superior Court.
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel on 10/23/20, 10/30/20, 11/06/20 & 11/13/20, 2020.
TO ALL INTERESTED PERSONS: Petitioner JAVIER BRIZUELA C filed with this court for a decree changing names as follows: JAVIER BRIZUELA C to JAVIER BRIZUELA ORTEGA
THE COURT ORDERS that all persons interested in this matter appear before this court at the hearing indicated below to show cause, if any, why the petition for change of name should not be granted. Any person objecting to the name changes described above must file a written objection that includes the reasons for the objection at least two court days before the matter is scheduled to be heard and must appear at the hearing to show cause why the petition should not be granted. If no written objection is timely filed, the court may grant the petition without a hearing.
Notice of Hearing:
Date: 12/02/20
Time: 9:00 a.m.
Department: S16
The address of the court is Superior Court of California,County of San Bernardino, San Bernardino District – Civil Division, 247 West Third Street, Same as above, San Bernardino, CA 92415-0210, San Bernardino
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this order be published in the SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL in San Bernardino County California, once a week for four successive weeks prior to the date set for hearing of the petition.
Dated: OCTOBER 14, 2020
Lynn M. Poncin
Judge of the Superior Court.
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel on 10/23/20, 10/30/20, 11/06/20 & 11/13/20, 2020.

FBN 20200009420
The following entity is doing business as KERRY APEX (KUL) 5490 EAST FRANCIS STREET ONTARIO, CA 91761 KULS, LLC 577 AIRPORT BOULEVARD, SUITE 800 BURLINGAME, CA 94010
This Business is Conducted By: A LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY
BY SIGNING BELOW, I DECLARE THAT ALL INFORMATION IN THIS STATEMENT IS TRUE AND CORRECT. A registrant who declares as true information, which he or she knows to be false, is guilty of a crime. (B&P Code 17913) I am also aware that all information on this statement becomes Public Record upon filing.
S/ LENA CHEUNG
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 10/13/2020
I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office.
Began Transacting Business: N/A
County Clerk, Deputy I5199
NOTICE- This fictitious business name statement expires five years from the date it was filed in the office of the county clerk. A new fictitious business name statement must be filed before that time. The filing of this statement does not of itself authorize the use in this state of a fictitious name in violation of the rights of another under federal, state, or common law (see section 14400 et. Seq. Business & Professions Code).
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel on 10/23, 10/30. 11/06 & 11/13, 2020.
FBN 20200009279
The following entity is doing business as EQUITY LAW GROUP 5862 PINE AVE UNIT B8 CHINO HILLS, CA 91709 DAVID S KOZICH 5862 PINE AVE UNIT B8 CHINO HILLS, CA 91709
This Business is Conducted By: AN INDIVIDUAL
BY SIGNING BELOW, I DECLARE THAT ALL INFORMATION IN THIS STATEMENT IS TRUE AND CORRECT. A registrant who declares as true information, which he or she knows to be false, is guilty of a crime. (B&P Code 17913) I am also aware that all information on this statement becomes Public Record upon filing.
S/ DAVID S KOZICH
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 10/07/2020
I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office.
Began Transacting Business: N/A
County Clerk, Deputy D5511
NOTICE- This fictitious business name statement expires five years from the date it was filed in the office of the county clerk. A new fictitious business name statement must be filed before that time. The filing of this statement does not of itself authorize the use in this state of a fictitious name in violation of the rights of another under federal, state, or common law (see section 14400 et. Seq. Business & Professions Code).
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel on 10/23, 10/30. 11/06 & 11/13, 2020.
FBN 20200009686
The following entity is doing business as BEST BUILDING SERVICES 875 W. 23RD STREET UPLAND, CA 91784 HECTOR A. MOLINA 875 W. 23RD STREET UPLAND, CA 91784
This Business is Conducted By: AN INDIVIDUAL
BY SIGNING BELOW, I DECLARE THAT ALL INFORMATION IN THIS STATEMENT IS TRUE AND CORRECT. A registrant who declares as true information, which he or she knows to be false, is guilty of a crime. (B&P Code 17913) I am also aware that all information on this statement becomes Public Record upon filing.
S/ HECTOR A. MOLINA
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 10/07/2020
I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office.
Began Transacting Business: N/A
County Clerk, Deputy I1327
NOTICE- This fictitious business name statement expires five years from the date it was filed in the office of the county clerk. A new fictitious business name statement must be filed before that time. The filing of this statement does not of itself authorize the use in this state of a fictitious name in violation of the rights of another under federal, state, or common law (see section 14400 et. Seq. Business & Professions Code).
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel on 10/23, 10/30. 11/06 & 11/13, 2020.
FBN 20200009056
The following entity is doing business as BAM BALLOONS 26495 VERONICA CT LOMA LINDA, CA 92354 ANICA M TIJERINA 26495 VERONICA CT LOMA LINDA, CA 92354
This Business is Conducted By: AN INDIVIDUAL
BY SIGNING BELOW, I DECLARE THAT ALL INFORMATION IN THIS STATEMENT IS TRUE AND CORRECT. A registrant who declares as true information, which he or she knows to be false, is guilty of a crime. (B&P Code 17913) I am also aware that all information on this statement becomes Public Record upon filing.
S/ ANICA M TIJERINA
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 10/02/2020
I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office.
Began Transacting Business: JANUARY 3, 2020
County Clerk, Deputy D5511
NOTICE- This fictitious business name statement expires five years from the date it was filed in the office of the county clerk. A new fictitious business name statement must be filed before that time. The filing of this statement does not of itself authorize the use in this state of a fictitious name in violation of the rights of another under federal, state, or common law (see section 14400 et. Seq. Business & Professions Code).
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel on 10/23, 10/30. 11/06 & 11/13, 2020.
NOTICE OF PETITION TO ADMINISTER ESTATE OF: ROBERT GERALD LIGHTFOOT
CASE NO. PROPS 2000021
To all heirs, beneficiaries, creditors, contingent creditors, and persons who may otherwise be interested in the will or estate, or both of ROBERT GERALD LIGHTFOOT
A PETITION FOR PROBATE has been filed by REBECCA ANN LIGHTFOOT in the Superior Court of California, County of SAN BERNARDINO.
THE PETITION FOR PROBATE requests that REBECCA ANN LIGHTFOOT be appointed as personal representative to administer the estate of the decedent.
THE PETITION requests authority to administer the estate under the Independent Administration of Estates Act. (This authority will allow the personal representative to take many actions without obtaining court approval. Before taking certain very important actions, however, the personal representative will be required to give notice to interested persons unless they have waived notice or consented to the proposed action.) The independent administration authority will be granted unless an interested person files an objection to the petition and shows good cause why the court should not grant the authority.
A hearing on the petition will be held JANUARY 7, 2021 at 9:00 a.m. in Dept. No. S-35 at Superior Court of California, County of San Bernardino, 247 West Third Street, San Bernardino, CA 92415, San Bernardino District.
IF YOU OBJECT to the granting of the petition, you should appear at the hearing and state your objections or file written objections with the court before the hearing. Your appearance may be in person or by your attorney.
IF YOU ARE A CREDITOR or a contingent creditor of the decedent, you must file your claim with the court and mail a copy to the personal representative appointed by the court within the later of either (1) four months from the date of first issuance of letters to a general personal representative, as defined in section 58(b) of the California Probate Code, or (2) 60 days from the date of mailing or personal delivery to you of a notice under Section 9052 of the California Probate Code.
Other California statutes and legal authority may affect your rights as a creditor. You may want to consult with an attorney knowledgeable in California law.
YOU MAY EXAMINE the file kept by the court. If you are a person interested in the estate, you may file with the court a Request for Special Notice (form DE-154) of the filing of an inventory and appraisal of estate assets or of any petition or account as provided in Probate Code section 1250. A Request for Special Notice form is available from the court clerk.
Filed: JANUARY 9, 2020
Attorney for the Petitioner: TYLER H. BROWN, ESQ.
1152 N. MOUNTAIN AVE, SUITE 210
UPLAND, CA 91786
Telephone No: (909) 982-5086
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel on 10/30, 11/06 & 11/13, 2020

NOTICE OF PETITION TO ADMINISTER ESTATE OF JOHN CHARLES ANICIC JR,
CASE NO. PROPS2000803
To all heirs, beneficiaries, creditors, and contingent creditors of JOHN CHARLES ANICIC JR, and persons who may be otherwise interested in the will or estate, or both: A petition has been filed by JOHN CHARLES ANICIC III in the Superior Court of California, County of SAN BERNARDINO, requesting that JOHN CHARLES ANICIC III be appointed as personal representative to administer the estate of JOHN CHARLES ANICIC JR. Decedent died intestate. (The petition requests authority to administer the estate under the Independent Administration of Estates Act. This will avoid the need to obtain court approval for many actions taken in connection with the estate. However, before taking certain actions, the personal representative will be required to give notice to interested persons unless they have waived notice or have consented to the proposed action. The petition will be granted unless good cause is shown why it should not be.) The petition is set for hearing in Dept. No. S35 at SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO SAN BERNARDINO DISTRICT – PROBATE DIVISION 247 W. 3rd STREET SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92415-0212 on December 10, 2020 at 09:00 AM IF YOU OBJECT to the granting of the petition, you should appear at the hearing and state your objections or file written objections with the court before the hearing. Your appearance may be in person or by your attorney. IF YOU ARE A CREDITOR or a contingent creditor of the deceased, you must file your claim with the court and mail a copy to the personal representative appointed by the court within the later of either (1) four months from the date of first issuance of letters to a general personal representative, as defined in subdivision (b) of Section 58 of the California Probate Code, or (2) 60 days from the date of mailing or personal delivery of the notice to you under Section 9052 of the California Probate Code. YOU MAY EXAMINE the file kept by the court. If you are interested in the estate, you may request special notice of the filing of an inventory and appraisal of estate assets or of any petition or account as provided in Section 1250 of the California Probate Code. Petitioner: JOHN CHARLES ANICIC III 1080 E 9TH ST SPC 19 SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92410 Telephone: 909-547-9918
FBN 20200008485 The following entity is doing business as LANGA CELLARS 30082 RED HILL ROAD HIGHLAND, CA 92346 LANGA CELLARS LLC 3002 RED HILL ROAD HIGHLAND, CA 92346 Mailing Address: 30082 RED HILL ROAD HIGHLAND, CA 92346 This Business is Conducted By: A LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY BY SIGNING BELOW, I DECLARE THAT ALL INFORMATION IN THIS STATEMENT IS TRUE AND CORRECT. A registrant who declares as true information, which he or she knows to be false, is guilty of a crime. (B&P Code 17913) I am also aware that all information on this statement becomes Public Record upon filing. S/ BARTOLOMEO ROSSO This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 09/15/2020 I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office. Began Transacting Business: FEBRUARY 18, 2015 County Clerk, Deputy M0597 NOTICE- This fictitious business name statement expires five years from the date it was filed in the office of the county clerk. A new fictitious business name statement must be filed before that time. The filing of this statement does not of itself authorize the use in this state of a fictitious name in violation of the rights of another under federal, state, or common law (see section 14400 et. Seq. Business & Professions Code). Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel on 9/25, 10/2, 10/9 & 10/16, 2020 Corrected on 10/30/20, 11/6/20, 11/13/20, 11/20/20

STATEMENT of Withdrawal From Partnership Operating Under a Fictitious Business Name FILE NO-20200008473 Fictitious Business Name of the Partnership: Pacific Shift, 7149 Powell Pl, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 04/23/2019 County Clerk File No. FBN20190005040 Name of Person Withdrawing: Carlos Soriano, 7149 Powell Pl, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 Signed: BY SIGNING BELOW, I DECLARE THAT ALL INFORMATION IN THIS STATEMENT IS TRUE AND CORRECT. A registrant who declares as true information, which he or she knows to be false, is guilty of a crime. (B&P Code 17913) I am also aware that all information on this statement becomes Public Record upon filing. s/ Carlos Soriano I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office. County Clerk, s/ I1327 9/25/20, 10/02/20, 10/09/20, 10/16/20 Corrected on 10/30/20, 11/6/20, 11/13/20, 11/20/20

FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT FILE NO20200007704 The following person(s) is(are) doing business as: NK Jewelers, 2450 Vineyard Ave, Ontario, CA 91761, Mailing Address: 17780 Mesa Rd, Fontana, CA 92336, Noeila K. Moreno, 17780 Mesa Rd, Fontana, CA 92336 Business is Conducted By: An Individual Signed: BY SIGNING BELOW, I DECLARE THAT ALL INFORMATION IN THIS STATEMENT IS TRUE AND CORRECT. A registrant who declares as true information, which he or she knows to be false, is guilty of a crime. (B&P Code 17913) I am also aware that all information on this statement becomes Public Record upon filing. s/ Noeila Moreno This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 8/25/20 I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office. Began Transacting Business: 09/01/2015 County Clerk, s/ D5511 NOTICE- This fictitious business name statement expires five years from the date it was filed in the office of the county clerk. A new fictitious business name statement must be filed before that time. The filing of this statement does not of itself authorize the use in this state of a fictitious name in violation of the rights of another under federal, state, or common law (see section 14400 et. Seq. Business & Professions Code). 9/25/20, 10/02/20, 10/09/20, 10/16/20 Corrected on 10/30/20, 11/6/20, 11/13/20, 11/20/20

NOTICE OF SALE OF VESSEL
Notice is hereby given the undersigned will sell the following vessel and trailer at lien sale at said address below on: 11/06/2020 9:00 am
VESSEL
6986NC, YAMA2098C090, CA
DATE OF SALE-11/06/2020
TIME OF SALE-09:00 AM
LOCATION OF SALE-1744 S WILLOW AVE, RIALTO, CA 92376
To be sold by JV MOTORSPORTS 1744 S WILLOW AVE, RIALTO, CA 92376
Said sale is for the purpose of satisfying lien for together with costs of advertising and expenses of sale.
Published on: 10-30-20

NOTICE OF SALE OF VESSEL
Notice is hereby given the undersigned will sell the following vessel and trailer at lien sale at said address below on: 11/06/2020 9:00 am
VESSEL
7027NC, YAMA2013C090, CA
DATE OF SALE-11/06/2020
TIME OF SALE-09:00 AM
LOCATION OF SALE-1744 S WILLOW AVE, RIALTO, CA 92376
To be sold by JV MOTORSPORTS 1744 S WILLOW AVE, RIALTO, CA 92376
Said sale is for the purpose of satisfying lien for together with costs of advertising and expenses of sale.
Published on: 10-30-20
FBN 20200009910 The following person is doing business as: BLUE SKY MASSAGE 1964 W 9TH ST, SUITE C UPLAND, CA 91786 APE MEDICAL INC. 243 S ROSEMEAD BLVD PASADENA, CA 91107
This Business is Conducted By: A CORPORATION
BY SIGNING BELOW, I DECLARE THAT ALL INFORMATION IN THIS STATEMENT IS TRUE AND CORRECT. A registrant who declares as true information, which he or she knows to be false, is guilty of a crime. (B&P Code 17913) I am also aware that all information on this statement becomes Public Record upon filing.
S/ CHARLES CHAO PANG
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 10/26/2020 I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office. Began Transacting Business: N/A
County Clerk, Deputy l1327 NOTICE- This fictitious business name statement expires five years from the date it was filed in the office of the county clerk. A new fictitious business name statement must be filed before that time. The filing of this statement does not of itself authorize the use in this state of a fictitious name in violation of the rights of another under federal, state, or common law (see section 14400 et. Seq. Business & Professions Code). Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel on 10/30/20, 11/06/20, 11/13/20 & 11/20/20
FBN 20200009950 The following person is doing business as: PRO DIAMOND CLEAN LLC 3894 N. MOUNTAIN AVE SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92405 PRO DIAMOND CLEAN LLC 3894 N. MOUNTAIN AVE SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92405
This Business is Conducted By: A LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY
BY SIGNING BELOW, I DECLARE THAT ALL INFORMATION IN THIS STATEMENT IS TRUE AND CORRECT. A registrant who declares as true information, which he or she knows to be false, is guilty of a crime. (B&P Code 17913) I am also aware that all information on this statement becomes Public Record upon filing.
S/ DENISE URRUTIA
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 10/27/2020 I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office. Began Transacting Business: JUNE 30, 2020
County Clerk, Deputy D5511
NOTICE- This fictitious business name statement expires five years from the date it was filed in the office of the county clerk. A new fictitious business name statement must be filed before that time. The filing of this statement does not of itself authorize the use in this state of a fictitious name in violation of the rights of another under federal, state, or common law (see section 14400 et. Seq. Business & Professions Code). Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel on 10/30/20, 11/06/20, 11/13/20 & 11/20/20

FBN 20200009949 The following person is doing business as: HOMETOWN REALTY 23570 KNAPPS CUTOFF CRESTLINE, CA 92404 ROSEMARIE LABADIE 23570 KNAPPS CUTOFF CRESTLINE, CA 92325
Mailing Address: PO BOX 3046 CRESTLINE, CA 92325
This Business is Conducted By: AN INDIVIDUAL
BY SIGNING BELOW, I DECLARE THAT ALL INFORMATION IN THIS STATEMENT IS TRUE AND CORRECT. A registrant who declares as true information, which he or she knows to be false, is guilty of a crime. (B&P Code 17913) I am also aware that all information on this statement becomes Public Record upon filing.
S/ DENISE URRUTIA
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 10/27/2020 I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office. Began Transacting Business: OCTOBER 21, 2020
County Clerk, Deputy I1327
NOTICE- This fictitious business name statement expires five years from the date it was filed in the office of the county clerk. A new fictitious business name statement must be filed before that time. The filing of this statement does not of itself authorize the use in this state of a fictitious name in violation of the rights of another under federal, state, or common law (see section 14400 et. Seq. Business & Professions Code). Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel on 10/30/20, 11/06/20, 11/13/20 & 11/20/20
FBN 20200009932 The following person is doing business as: I’M SO INTO ME [and] UNITY NOW OFFICIAL 301 S LILAC AVE, SUITE #23 RIALTO, CA 92376 MIA D JACKSON 301 S LILAC AVE, SUITE #23 RIALTO, CA 92376
Mailing Address: 219 S RIVERSIDE AVE, SUITE #221 RIALTO, CA 92376
This Business is Conducted By: AN INDIVIDUAL
BY SIGNING BELOW, I DECLARE THAT ALL INFORMATION IN THIS STATEMENT IS TRUE AND CORRECT. A registrant who declares as true information, which he or she knows to be false, is guilty of a crime. (B&P Code 17913) I am also aware that all information on this statement becomes Public Record upon filing.
S/ MIA D JACKSON
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 10/26/2020 I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office. Began Transacting Business: OCTOBER 1, 2020
County Clerk, Deputy D5511
NOTICE- This fictitious business name statement expires five years from the date it was filed in the office of the county clerk. A new fictitious business name statement must be filed before that time. The filing of this statement does not of itself authorize the use in this state of a fictitious name in violation of the rights of another under federal, state, or common law (see section 14400 et. Seq. Business & Professions Code). Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel on 10/30/20, 11/06/20, 11/13/20 & 11/20/20

FBN 20200008679
The following person is doing business as: SB CASH AND CARRY 240 N. WATERMAN SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92408; SB CASH AND CARRY 240 N. WATERMAN SAN BERNARDINO, CA 9240
The business is conducted by: A CORPORATION
The registrant commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on: 07/13/2020
By signing, I declare that all information in this statement is true and correct. A registrant who declares as true information which he or she knows to be false is guilty of a crime (B&P Code 179130. I am also aware that all information on this statement becomes Public Record upon filing.
s/ JOUN SEDER, PRESIDENT Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 09/21/2020
I hereby certify that this copy is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office San Bernardino County Clerk By:/Deputy
Notice-This fictitious name statement expires five years from the date it was filed in the office of the county clerk. A new fictitious business name statement must be filed before that time. The filing of this statement does not of itself authorize the use in this state of a fictitious business name in violation of the rights of another under federal, state, or common law (see Section 14400 et seq., Business and Professions Code).
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel 10/16/2020, 10/23/2020, 10/30/2020, 11/06/2020 CNBB41202001MT

FBN 20200009340
The following person is doing business as: BEACH TO HILLS HOMES 15931 JANINE DRIVE WHITTIER, CALIF 90603; SHANON BROWN REAL ESTATE GROUP, INC. 15931 JANINE DRIVE WHITTIER, CALIFO 90603
The business is conducted by: A CORPORATION
The registrant commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on: 10/18/2019
By signing, I declare that all information in this statement is true and correct. A registrant who declares as true information which he or she knows to be false is guilty of a crime (B&P Code 179130. I am also aware that all information on this statement becomes Public Record upon filing.
s/ SHANNON COLETTE BROWN, PRESIDENT Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 10/08/2020
I hereby certify that this copy is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office San Bernardino County Clerk By:/Deputy
Notice-This fictitious name statement expires five years from the date it was filed in the office of the county clerk. A new fictitious business name statement must be filed before that time. The filing of this statement does not of itself authorize the use in this state of a fictitious business name in violation of the rights of another under federal, state, or common law (see Section 14400 et seq., Business and Professions Code).
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel 10/16/2020, 10/23/2020, 10/30/2020, 11/06/2020 CNBB41202002IR

FBN 20200009343
The following person is doing business as: YUMMY BITES FONTANA 16163 COLEEN STREET FONTANA, CA 92337; RADCHI A FLORES 16163 COLEEN STREET FONTANA, CA 92337; VIOLA M FLORES 16163 COLEEN STREET FONTANA, CA 92337
The business is conducted by: A MARRIED COUPLE
The registrant commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on: N/A
By signing, I declare that all information in this statement is true and correct. A registrant who declares as true information which he or she knows to be false is guilty of a crime (B&P Code 179130. I am also aware that all information on this statement becomes Public Record upon filing.
s/ RADCHI A. FLORES, HUSBAND Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 10/08/2020
I hereby certify that this copy is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office San Bernardino County Clerk By:/Deputy
Notice-This fictitious name statement expires five years from the date it was filed in the office of the county clerk. A new fictitious business name statement must be filed before that time. The filing of this statement does not of itself authorize the use in this state of a fictitious business name in violation of the rights of another under federal, state, or common law (see Section 14400 et seq., Business and Professions Code).
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel 10/16/2020, 10/23/2020, 10/30/2020, 11/06/2020 CNBB41202003MT

FBN 20200009344
The following person is doing business as: LEGACY SMOKERS 1091 S MOUNT VERNON AVE COLTON, CA 92324;[ MAILING ADDRESS P.O BOX 1501 COLTON, CA 92324]; DINA A ABDELHADI 1091 S MOUNT VERNON AVE COLTON, CA 92324
The business is conducted by: AN INDIVIDUAL
The registrant commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on: N/A
By signing, I declare that all information in this statement is true and correct. A registrant who declares as true information which he or she knows to be false is guilty of a crime (B&P Code 179130. I am also aware that all information on this statement becomes Public Record upon filing.
s/ DINA A. ABDELHADI, OWNER Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 10/08/2020
I hereby certify that this copy is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office San Bernardino County Clerk By:/Deputy
Notice-This fictitious name statement expires five years from the date it was filed in the office of the county clerk. A new fictitious business name statement must be filed before that time. The filing of this statement does not of itself authorize the use in this state of a fictitious business name in violation of the rights of another under federal, state, or common law (see Section 14400 et seq., Business and Professions Code).
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel 10/16/2020, 10/23/2020, 10/30/2020, 11/06/2020 CNBB41202004IR

FBN 20200009415
The following person is doing business as: ROYALCLD$ 2523 DUFFY ST SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92407; CHALYSA L DIXON 2523 DUFFY ST SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92407; CHALARRA L DIXON-SESSION 2523 DUFFY ST SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92407; CHADONA L DIXON 2523 DUFFY ST SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92407; CHADEN L DIXON 2523 DUFFY ST SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92407
The business is conducted by: A GENERAL PARTNERSHIP
The registrant commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on: N/A
By signing, I declare that all information in this statement is true and correct. A registrant who declares as true information which he or she knows to be false is guilty of a crime (B&P Code 179130. I am also aware that all information on this statement becomes Public Record upon filing.
s/ CHALYSA L. DIXON, GENERAL PARTNER Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 10/13/2020
I hereby certify that this copy is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office San Bernardino County Clerk By:/Deputy
Notice-This fictitious name statement expires five years from the date it was filed in the office of the county clerk. A new fictitious business name statement must be filed before that time. The filing of this statement does not of itself authorize the use in this state of a fictitious business name in violation of the rights of another under federal, state, or common law (see Section 14400 et seq., Business and Professions Code).
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel 10/16/2020, 10/23/2020, 10/30/2020, 11/06/2020 CNBB41202005MT

FBN 20200009404
The following person is doing business as: MARINE’S TAX SERVICE 390 N PALM AVE STE A RIALTO, CA 92376;[ MAILING ADDRESS P.O. BOX 1868 RIALTO, CA 92371]; MARGARITA MARINELARENA 390 N PALM AVE STE A RIALTO, CA 92376
The business is conducted by: AN INDIVIDUAL
The registrant commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on: 11/20/2014
By signing, I declare that all information in this statement is true and correct. A registrant who declares as true information which he or she knows to be false is guilty of a crime (B&P Code 179130. I am also aware that all information on this statement becomes Public Record upon filing.
s/ MARGARITA MARINELARENA, OWNER Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 10/13/2020
I hereby certify that this copy is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office San Bernardino County Clerk By:/Deputy
Notice-This fictitious name statement expires five years from the date it was filed in the office of the county clerk. A new fictitious business name statement must be filed before that time. The filing of this statement does not of itself authorize the use in this state of a fictitious business name in violation of the rights of another under federal, state, or common law (see Section 14400 et seq., Business and Professions Code).
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel 10/16/2020, 10/23/2020, 10/30/2020, 11/06/2020 CNBB41202006IR

FBN 20200009414
The following person is doing business as: DUARTE’S MITIGATION 777 S. TEMESCAL ST. SPC. 13 CORONA, CA 92879; VANESSA DUARTE 777 S. TEMESCAL ST. SPC. 13 CORONA, CA 92879
The business is conducted by: AN INDIVIDUAL
The registrant commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on: N/A
By signing, I declare that all information in this statement is true and correct. A registrant who declares as true information which he or she knows to be false is guilty of a crime (B&P Code 179130. I am also aware that all information on this statement becomes Public Record upon filing.
s/ VANESSA DUARTE, OWNER Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 10/13/2020
I hereby certify that this copy is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office San Bernardino County Clerk By:/Deputy
Notice-This fictitious name statement expires five years from the date it was filed in the office of the county clerk. A new fictitious business name statement must be filed before that time. The filing of this statement does not of itself authorize the use in this state of a fictitious business name in violation of the rights of another under federal, state, or common law (see Section 14400 et seq., Business and Professions Code).
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel 10/16/2020, 10/23/2020, 10/30/2020, 11/06/2020 CNBB41202007IR