SUMMONS – (CITACION JUDICIAL)
CASE NUMBER (NUMERO DEL CASO) CIVSB2415991
NOTICE TO: P TRAIN BBQ and DOES 1 TO 50
(AVISO DEMANDADO): P TRAIN BBQ and DOES 1 TO 50
YOU ARE BEING SUED BY PLAINTIFF:
(LO ESTA DEMANDANDO EL DEMANDANTE):
MHILL ENTERPRISES, LLC, a California corporation
NOTICE! You have been sued. The court may decide against you without your being heard unless you respond within 30 days. Read the information below.
You have 30 CALENDAR DAYS after this summons is served on you to file a written response at this court and have a copy served on the plaintiff. A letter or phone call will not protect you. Your written response must be in proper legal form if you want the court to hear your case. There may be a court form that you can use for your response. You can find these court forms and more information at the California Courts Online Self-Help Center (www.courtinfo.ca.gov/selfhelp), your county law library, or the courthouse nearest you. If you cannot pay the filing fee, ask the court clerk for a fee waiver form. If you do not file your response on time, you may lose the case by default, and your wages, money, and property may be taken without further warning from the court.
There are other legal requirements. You may want to call an attorney right away. If you do not know an attorney, you may want to call an attorney referral service. If you cannot afford an attorney, you may be eligible for free legal services from a nonprofit legal services program. You can locate these nonprofit groups at the California Legal Services Web site (www.lawhelpcalifornia.org), the California Courts Online Self-Help Center (www.courtinfo.ca.gov/selfhelp), or by contacting your local court or county bar association. NOTE: The court has a statutory lien for waived fees and costs on any settlement or arbitration award of $10,000 or more in a civil case. The court’s lien must be paid before the court will dismiss the case.
¡AVISO! Lo han demandado. Si no responde dentro de 30 dias, la corte puede decidir en su contra sin escuchar su version. Lea la informacion a continuacion
Tiene 30 DIAS DE CALENDARIO después de que le entreguen esta citación y papeles legales para presentar una repuesta por escrito en esta corte y hacer que se entreque una copia al demandante. Una carta o una llamada telefonica no le protegen. Su respuesta por escrito tiene que estar on formato legal correcto si desea que procesen su caso en la corte. Es posible que haya un formulano que usted puede usar para su respuesta. Puede encontrar estos formularios de la corte y mas información en el Centro de Ayuda de las Cortes de California (www.sucorte.ca.gov), en la biblioteca de leyes de su condado o en la corte que le quede mas cerca. Si no puede pagar la cuota de presentación, pida si secretario de la corta que le de un formulario de exencion de pago de cuotas. Si no presenta su respuesta a tiempo, puede perder el caso por incumplimiento y la corta le podrá quitar su sueldo, dinero y bienes sin mas advertencia.
Hay otros requisitos legales. Es recomendable que llame a un abogado inmediatamente. Si no conace a un abogado, puede llamar a un servicio de referencia a abogados. Si no peude pagar a un a un abogado, es posible que cumpia con los requisitos para obtener servicios legales gratu de un programa de servicios legales sin fines de lucro. Puede encontrar estos grupos sin fines de lucro en el sitio web de California Legal Services, (www.lawhelpcalifornia.org), en el Centro de Ayuda de las Cortes de California, (www.sucorte.ca.gov), o poniendoso en contacto con la corte o el colegio de abogados locales. AVISO: Por ley, la corte tiene derecho a reclamar las cuotas y los costos exentos gravamen sobre cualquier recuperación da $10,000 o mas de vaior recibida mediante un aceurdo o una concesión de arbitraje en un caso de derecho civil. Tiene que pagar el gravamen de la corta antes de que la corta pueda desechar el caso.
The name and address of the court is: (El nombre y la direccion de la corte es):
Superior Court of California, County of San Bernardino
247 West Third Street, San Bernardino California 92415
San Bernardino Justice Center
The name, address and telephone number of plaintiff’s attorney, or plaintiff without an attorney, is: (El nombre, la direccion y el numero de telefono del abogado del demandante, o del demendante que no tiene abogado, es):
FRANK J. LIZARRAGA, JR State Bar Number 128689
3401 CENTRE LAKE DR., SUITE 600
ONTARIO, CA 91761;
(909) 989-9393
Frank@lizarragalaw.com
ELECTRONICALLY FILED
DATE (Fecha):

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO
SAN BERNARDINO DISTRICT
Clerk (Secretario)
By: Rena Aguayo-Betancourt, DEPUTY
/s/ Rena Aguayo-Betancourt
CIVSB2415991
5/20/2024
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel on and August 1, 8, 15 & 22, 2025.

Continue reading →

A seven-month-old child is believed to be in the custody of a kidnapper and potentially in grave danger after a vicious attack on his mother in Yucaipa on Thursday.
According to the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department, the child’s mother had just changed him when an individual, described as a heavyset man, attacked her, rendering her nearly or fully unconscious before snatching the child and leaving the scene in a white four-runner.
The Sentinel is informed that the kidnapping occurred proximate to the Big 5 Sports outlet at 34579 Yucaipa Boulevard in the shared parking lot for the now-shuttered Big Lots and Big 5 retail stores.
According to Rebecca Haro, she had traveled with her husband and four of her children and stepchildren from their home in Cabazon in Riverside County to the athletic field on 7th Street so her stepson could compete in a summer football scrimmage in Yucaipa. She had driven a few blocks to the Big 5 to purchase her stepson a mouth guard. She was parked in the parking lot there when she took her son, seven-month old Emmanuel, out of his car seat to change his diaper. She set him down on the backseat on the passenger side of the vehicle to change his diaper when she was attacked from behind.
“I fell on the floor, and when I got up, I couldn’t find my son,” she said. Continue reading →

Students and faculty members at Fontana Middle School were exposed to potentially harmful levels of asbestos during the first two weeks of the current school year, the district has reluctantly acknowledged.
The exposure came a bout as a consequence of the district failing to complete the demolition and removal of the schools L Building by the start of the current school year on August 7.
Asbestos is a naturally occurring fibrous silicate mineral previously prized for its insulating and fireproofing qualities. Asbestos is composed of particulate fibers that are substantially longer than they are wide, which are friable, meaning they have a tendency to break into smaller pieces under pressure, rubbing or abrasion, becoming airborne. These microscopic fibrils if inhaled can be highly damaging to the lungs of mammals, reptiles and birds, causing dangerous lung conditions, including mesothelioma, asbestosis and lung cancer. In the 19th Century, manufacturers and builders began using asbestos as a thermal and electrical insulator as well as a fire retardant widely incorporated into building materials. Beginning in the 1960s, its adverse on human health began to be recognized and were more generally acknowledged in the 1970s. A substantial number of buildings constructed before the 1980s contained asbestos.
Insulation, flooring, roofing materials, ceiling tiles, drywall, joint compounds and pipes commonly were partially composed of asbestos. Left intact, those items would not result in asbestos fibers being liberated in dangerous quantities, but upon being disturbed, asbestos fibers can be lofted into the air. Consequently, upon the demolition of old buildings, it is advisable to confine the debris beneath coverings such as tarps until it is removed and buried underground in a landfill and for those surfaces where the materials have lain to be wet-wiped and the material capturing the fibers to be likewise deposited and buried in a landfill. Continue reading →

By Mark Gutglueck
Clear contradictions have emerged in the versions of events provided by one of the most recently elected members of the San Bernardino City Council and the city’s police department over what the councilwoman says was the police officers’ union’s use of information that is supposed to be restricted for law enforcement operations against her during her political campaigns.
Ortiz who is now a professor of public administration at California State University San Bernardino, has for years been involved in local political and governmental affairs, having vied unsuccessfully in 2018 for appointment to the San Bernardino County Third District supervisorial post in the aftermath of James Ramos’s departure for the California Assembly, in 2019 unsuccessfully for election to the vacant San Bernardino City Third Ward council position in the aftermath of John Valdivia’s resignation to become San Bernardino mayor and in 2022 unsuccessfully in the race for San Bernardino Mayor when Valdivia was ousted and ultimately replaced by Helen Tran. In 2024, Ortiz, having moved into San Bernardino 7th Ward, ran for election there, capturing first in the March primary and defeating former San Bernardino City Attorney James Penman in the November run-off.
On November 8, 2023, around the time of the opening of the candidate filing period for the March 2024 primary election, Ortiz and Penman met in what by varying accounts was originally scheduled as a friendly meeting that would give either of the two, who by that point had made clear their intentions to challenge then-Seventh Ward City Councilman Damon Alexander in the upcoming race, in which they could discuss one or the other stepping aside so that a concerted effort to defeat the incumbent could take place. During the exchange, Penman told her the Police Officers Association was backing him and that one or more of the police officer had used CLETS, the database shared by California’s law enforcement agencies, to carry out a search of her criminal history and had retrieved information with regard to an incident of domestic violence she had been engaged in some two decades earlier when they ran her name. According to Ortiz, Penman told her the police union, in support of his candidacy, was prepared to use her arrest on the domestic violence charge to launch an attack her during council campaign if she were a candidate. Continue reading →

Fontana’s ordinances regulating street vending, one of which has been in place since 2019 and the most recently revised of which has been in place for a 21-month duration, are being challenged in federal court based upon novel constitutional challenges of the municipal authority to license and control local businesses that have evolved in California for well over a century.
Fontana’s first effort to regulate street/sidewalk vending, in the form of Ordinance 1789, was approved by the city council in 2019.
Over the course of two meetings in October and November 2023, the Fontana City Council, gave first and second readings and both preliminary and final approval on identical 4-to-1 votes to a revamped set of street/sidewalk vending regulations, Ordinance 1925. The discussion took place in a fiery atmosphere in which four members of the city council, sympathetic to the challenges faced by traditional brick-and-mortar businesses and restaurants and those concerned about specific public health considerations, were challenged by the advocates for mobile and transitory businesses, such as sidewalk vendors, street vendors and food truck operators.
Those lobbying the council on behalf of the street and sidewalk vendors, who employed excessively aggressive tactics which included efforts to intimidate and physically assault operators of local businesses and members of the Fontana Area and Hispanic chambers of commerce who were encouraging the city council to adopt the ordinance, filed to achieve their goal. Ultimately, nine individuals, most of them residents from outside of Fontana, were arrested as the result of what the Fontana Police Department said were illegal protests mounted on the street where Fontana Mayor Acquanetta Warren lived after the meetings and in the ordinance’s opponents’ expletive-laced verbal encounters with others present in the council chamber and the parking lot at City Hall when the final approval of the ordinance took place. Continue reading →

The developmental imperative in Redlands continued unabated this week as the planning commission gave go-ahead to a mixed-use development proposal along the unimproved stretch of the 900 block of California Street.
The project in question, proposed by JD FUEL, LLC., will be located at 913 California Street, and is to consist of a hotel, coffee shop and car wash. Despite expressed concerns the project’s completion will have on traffic circulation in the area and its potential environmental impact, the project was given approval during the commission’s August 12 meeting, with no dissension, though Commissioner Mat Endsley was not present for the hearing.
According to Redlands Principal Planner Sean Riley, J.D. Fuel had applied for an entitlement to proceed with an energetic project on approximately five-acre site located at 913 California Street, which lies west of California Street, approximately 500 feet south of Interstate 10. The property falls within the property zoned for general commercial in the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan area.
JD Fuel asked for, and Reilly recommended that the planning commission grant, a mitigated negative declaration prepared for the proposed project in accordance with Section 15074 of the California Environmental Quality Act guidelines.
Under the California Environmental Quality Act, an examination of the environmental impacts of a project must be made for it to be given environmental certification. Some discretion is left to the governmental decision-making body that oversees land use issues and possesses approval and/or denial authority regard to a development project as to what type of analysis of the environmental issues is to be carried out and what mitigations of the impacts are to be required. Continue reading →

Detectives and deputies with the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department arrested 52 men and four women and seized 3,500 birds, twelve firearms $259.000 in cash and significant amounts of fentanyl, methamphetamine and cocaine during a more than six-week long investigation into a massive cockfighting ring in San Bernardino County.
The operation, known as “Crowing Rooster,” lasted from June 14 to August 1. It involved the obtaining and serving 26 search warrants at separate locations that were tied to the individuals and activities involved, according to the department.
Of those arrested, ten were charged with felonies. The lion’s share, 48, are San Bernardino County residents, while eight lived in Riverside, Los Angeles or Ventura counties. They ranged in age from 16 to 73 years old.
The San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department’s Rural Crimes Task Force, consisting of deputies from Victor Valley Station Rural Crimes, Victor Valley Station, Twin Peaks Station, San Bernardino County Probation, San Bernardino County District Attorney’s Office, and San Bernardino County Code Enforcement, conducted the operation from June 14, 2025, through August 1, 2025. In addition, San Bernardino County Animal Care Services, Hesperia Animal Control, Hesperia Code Enforcement, and Highland Code Enforcement assisted with the operation. Continue reading →