Threatened with a lawsuit brought under the auspices of the California Voter Rights Act it very likely would have prevailed upon had it chosen to go to court, the Victorville City Council this week opted out of having the city defend itself against charges that a number of its voters have been and will continue to be disenfranchised.
Instead the city will arrange to end its 59-year tradition of holding at-large elections and move to an electoral ward system through which its council members will represent what has yet to be determined will either be one-fourth or one-fifth of the city’s residents.
Victorville had survived what was a wave of transitions to by-district elections in San Bernardino County over the last five years, in which Chino Hills, Chino, Upland, Rancho Cucamonga, Fontana, Redlands, Highland, Hesperia, Yucca Valley, Barstow, Twentynine Palms and Yucaipa ceased holding at-large city council elections. In at-large contests, would-be and/or incumbent civic leaders are deemed eligible to compete for office by virtue of simply living within the city limits and being registered to vote. All of those eligible candidates run in the same race to select the number of positions on the council up for election that particular year. After being challenged, Chino Hills, Chino, Upland, Rancho Cucamonga, Fontana, Redlands, Highland, Hesperia, Yucca Valley, Barstow, Twentynine Palms and Yucaipa formed districts or wards, such that the only individuals eligible to run for office to represent any particular ward or district must be a resident of that ward or district, and residents of each ward or district can vote only in the balloting for the district in which they live and not in any city council race outside their district, with the lone exception being those cities which hold mayoral elections. Mayors are yet chosen in at-large races.
The root of the change being foisted upon Victorville lies within the California Voting Rights Act, passed by the California Legislature in 2001.
Under the California Voting Rights Act, a plaintiff or plaintiffs can file legal action against a governmental jurisdiction alleging polarized voting has taken place in its past elections and seek the remedy of having that jurisdiction switch from at-large elections to ones involving ward or district systems. The theoretical justification for having a city or governmental jurisdiction form such districts is the perceived likelihood that it will create political subdivisions in which the election of a member of an ethnic or racial minority is more likely to take place than in an at-large election. Upon proof being presented that such polarized voting exists, the courts will then require that the governmental entity in question adopt the ward/district system and require that the governmental entity pay the legal fees for the attorney or attorneys representing the plaintiff[s].
Polarized voting can be defined as a circumstance in which the number of registered voters belonging to a protected ethnic or racial minority within a specific jurisdiction exceeds, in comparison to the total number of registered voters in that jurisdiction, the ratio represented by a single member of that city’s or town’s council to the total number of members of that particular panel, when no members of that protected minority are counted among that council’s members. Thus, if any one of those protected minorities make up more than 20 percent of a municipality’s population but that city’s or town’s five-member council does not feature a member of that minority, then racially-polarized or ethnically-polarized voting is said to have occurred in that jurisdiction. Polarized voting can also be established as existing when a candidate who is a member of a protected minority receives more votes in a precinct wherein there is a high concentration of voters who are members of the same protected minority than he or she receives in a precinct where the predominate number of voters are not members of the same same protected minority as the candidate. Protected minorities include African-Americans, Hispanics, Native Americans, Pacific Islanders and Asians.
The California Voting Rights Act conferred upon the plaintiffs in cases brought under its provisions an overwhelming advantage in that though the plaintiff[s] stand to recover from the defendant all money expended or owed in the matter to pay for the plaintiff’s or plaintiffs’ attorney’s efforts if the suit succeeds either in whole or part, the cities or towns sued under the voting rights act are not eligible to recover their fees if they prevail in the litigation by succeeding in demonstrating that racially-polarized or ethnically-polarized voting has not occurred in their jurisdictions. Thus, the plaintiff[s] and the lawyers representing them in these legal actions brought under the California Voting Rights Act run no risk. On the other side of the plaintiff/defendant divide, the cities challenged in this way have to defray their own legal expenses if they chose to put on a defense at trial. Thus, even if a city prevails, it sustains unrecoverable legal costs, and if it loses, it stands to suffer costs of tens of thousands of dollars, hundreds of thousands of dollars and perhaps, depending upon how spirited of a defense the city puts on and the outcome of the legal proceedings, beyond a million dollars in legal fees to be paid to the prevailing party.
The California Election Code provides a city alleged to have engaged in racially-polarized voting a so-called “safe harbor” process by which it can simply refuse to contest the accusation of racially-polarized voting after receiving a letter from a prospective plaintiff charging it with being in violation of the California Voting Rights Act, make known its intention to transition to district-based elections by adoption of an ordinance within 45 days of having received the letter, sidestep the lawsuit, and pay the attorney who sent the letter $30,000 to $45,000.
Beginning in 2014, a bevy of opportunistic attorneys seeking a major payday through threatened or actual lawsuits under the California Voters Rights Act to ostensibly counteract racially-polarized or ethnically-polarized voting turned their attention to San Bernardino County.
Working as a team, Lancaster-based R. Rex Parris, Malibu-based Kevin Shenkman and Los Angeles-based Milton C. Grimes surveyed the San Bernardino County landscape and selected what what they considered to be the county’s most vulnerable jurisdiction among a handful of cities perceived to have foreclosed minority rights because of the relative scarcity or complete lack of elected Hispanic officeholders in those jurisdictions, even though they had a substantial Latino population.
Parris, Shenkman and Grimes settled upon the City of Highland, where despite more than 39 percent of the residents of that city being Latino, no Hispanics were serving on the city council. Highland thus became the first San Bernardino County city served with a demand that it alter the way it elects its council members. Thereafter, a lawsuit was filed July 18, 2014 in San Bernardino Superior Court by Parris, in conjunction with the law firm of Shenkman & Hughes and Milton C. Grimes, on behalf of Lisa Garrett, a Latino resident of Highland. In response, the city put an initiative on the November 2014 ballot, Measure T, asking if the city’s residents were in favor of a ward system. Measure T went down to defeat, with 2,862 votes or 43.01 percent in favor and 3,793, or 56.99 percent opposed. The lawsuit proceeded and the city sought to assuage the demand by proposing to allow cumulative voting, in which each voter is given one vote for each contested position and is allowed to cast any or all of those votes for any one candidate, or spread the votes among the candidates. When the matter went to trial, despite making a finding that the socioeconomic-based rationale presented by the plaintiff’s attorneys to support the need for ward elections was irrelevant and that the plaintiff’s assertion that district voting was the only way to cure the alleged violation of the Voting Rights Act was false, San Bernardino Superior Court Judge David Cohn mandated that Highland adopt a ward system.
Thereafter, Parris, Shenkman, Grimes and Matthew Barragan, who was then the staff attorney representing the Mexican American Legal Defense Fund known by the acronym MALDEF, threatened lawsuits under the California Voter Rights Act against the cities of Barstow, Big Bear Lake, Chino Hills, Chino, Fontana, Hesperia, Rancho Cucamonga, Redlands, Twentynine Palms, Upland and Yucaipa, as well as the towns Apple Valley and Yucca Valley. Despite the consideration that Barstow, Chino Hills, Chino and Redlands historically had fielded or at that point included Hispanic members on their city councils and that Upland, Rancho Cucamonga and Fontana historically or at that point had both Latino and African-American members of their city councils, all of those cities and all of those towns complied with the demands for shifts to district or ward systems, with those municipalities in many cases paying the lawyers the $30,000-to-$45,000 cost those attorneys were entitled to under the California Voters Rights Act and which those attorneys sought for forcing those cities and towns into compliance.
At that point, Parris, Shenkman, Grimes and Barragan checked out of the process, whereupon the cities or towns used consultants such as the National Demographics Corporation to draw up district or ward lines. Chino Hills, after consulting with the National Demographics Corporation, opted to utilize a different map, one drawn by two of that city’s residents, Brian Johsz and Richard Austin.
In case after case, the cities and towns adopted district voting or ward maps that were gerrymandered to provide the incumbent council members an advantage by placing them into districts that did not include other incumbents, and by timing the elections in such a way that their districts held elections at the end of the electoral cycle terminating with the elapsing of the close of the term the incumbents held as a result of their most recent at-large elections. One exception to this was in Chino Hills, where the Johsz/Austin map put three of the incumbents in separate districts and created two other districts, including one in which none of the then-current council members resided and one in which two members were living. Nevertheless, in the case of Chino Hills, the manner in which the districts were drawn up disadvantaged and disenfranchised a one-time Hispanic member member of the city council Roseana Mitchell-Arrieta. And ultimately, Johsz was himself elected to the council as the representative of one of the districts he had drawn up.
In none of those cases where the gerrymandering took place did Parris, Shenkman, Hughes, Grimes or Barragan raise any objections to how those district lines were drawn, even when they appeared to perpetuate the racially-polarized or ethnically-polarized voting that their threatened lawsuits were ostensibly aimed at curing.
Many of those observing that element of what occurred in those 13 cities that were forced into by-district elections after the lawsuit between Garrett and Highland concluded have independently remarked that it appears that Parris, Shenkman, Grimes and Barragan were not truly committed to redressing so-called polarized voting but rather shaking cities down in looking for a lucrative payday on the cheap by threatening a lawsuit and then accepting the $30,000-to-$45,000 payments that came their ways from the cities.
In the meantime, a handful of San Bernardino County cities had eluded the efforts of attorneys to bring about their conversion to by-district elections. Among those was the City of Victorville, which over the previous three decades had organically evolved to embodying, without any outside interference or the intervention of the California Voters Rights Act, both the spirit and intent of what is inherent in the California Voter Rights Act.
Beginning in 1991 and by 2014, the Victorville City Council counted among its members Felix Diaz, Jim Busby, Rudy Cabriales, Angela Valles, Gloria Garcia and Eric Negrete, all of whom qualified as protected minorities as defined by the California Voter Rights Act. Thereafter, again under the at-large voting system in place, Blanca Gomez, was elected to the council in 2016 and reelected in 2020, Rita Ramirez was elected to the city council in 2018, and Elizabeth Becerra and Leslie Irving were elected to the city council in 2020. Gomez, Ramirez, Becerra and Irving are all protected minorities under the California Voter Rights Act. After the 2020 election, all five members of the city council were women; and four of its five members – Gomez, Ramirez, Becerra and Irving – were protected minorities.
In the late winter of 2021, Becerra, a member of a protected minority, led the charge in having Ramirez, a member of a protected minority, removed from the council for what Becerra alleged was Ramirez’s failure to maintain her residency in Victorville. After Ramirez, a Democrat, had been removed from the council, the remaining members of the council – Gomez and Irving, who are Democrats, and Becerra and Mayor Debra Jones, who are Republicans, could not come to an agreement on an appointment to replace Ramirez. The position has remained unfilled since Ramirez was deposed in March.
On August 12, 2021, the City of Victorville received a certified letter from attorney Scott J. Rafferty, based in Walnut Creek, some 401 miles from Victorville. Rafferty claimed to be representing the group Neighborhood Elections Now along with “individual Latino electors residing in Victorville.” In his letter, Rafferty stated that Victorville’s existing at-large election system violated the California Voting Rights Act by “diluting the influence of Latino voters,” and threatened litigation if the city did not adopt a district-basted electoral system.
“The life experience and values of Latinos as a group (and of other minorities) is often distinct from the rest of the electorate,” Rafferty propounded. “Districting equalizes the voting power of minority neighborhoods.”
Because, Rafferty asserted, “the group of Latino candidates who ran in the 2018 election were disproportionately preferred by their own community,” proof existed that Victorville had, he claimed, engaged in racially polarized voting.
Without acknowledging or in any way mentioning that of the five most recently elected members of the city council three are Latina and one is an African-American woman, Rafferty insisted that “a single high-Latino district improves representation for Latinos throughout the city. Eliminating winner-take-all slates makes the council more representative of all constituencies.”
Again, without making any reference to the consideration that three of the city’s five most recently elected members of the council are Latina, Rafferty wrote, “[I]t is clearly possible to draw at least one council district in which Latinos are a majority of eligible voters.”
Rafferty called upon the city to immediately draw up an electoral district map and move to by-district elections.
Moving into dictatorial mode, Rafferty wrote, “The city has 45 days from its receipt of this letter to resolve its intent to comply before the next regular election in November 2022, and any special elections that may occur after the map is drawn.”
With the 45th day after the letter had been delivered to City Clerk Charlene Robinson falling on September 26, the city council was a day late in getting to the matter on Monday, September 27.
In his report to the council, City Attorney Andre de Bortnowsky wrote, “Although the city has asserted and believes that Mr. Rafferty’s allegations of a California Voting Rights Act violation lack evidentiary support for any Latino or other racially polarized voting in the city, absent the city’s adoption of a resolution of intention to initiate the transition to a district-based electoral system tonight, Mr. Rafferty can embroil the city in expensive litigation to force a district-based electoral system, leaving the city’s electoral system in the hands of a court. [A]ccordingly, the city council must decide tonight whether to adopt the resolution of intent.”
de Bortnowsky recommended that the city council “adopt [the resolution] declaring its intention to transition from at-large to district-based elections for members of the city council under Elections Code Section 10010. The basis for recommending adoption of [the resolution] is not a concession or admission that the city has or would ultimately be found to have violated the California Voting Rights Act. Instead, the recommendation stems from a determination that the public interest is better served, and taxpayer dollars better spent, by making a voluntary transition to by-district elections, given the uncertainty in defending such litigation and the extraordinary cost of such a lawsuit, even if the city were to prevail.”
de Bortnowsky said the city should be prepared to bear the cost of hiring a demographer and other consultants needed to draw the electoral district map, conduct public hearings, engage in community outreach, prepare and publish notices and related district map materials for the hearings related to the drawing of the districts and cover the cost of paying Rafferty $30,000.
de Bortnowsky said the city will need to meet a 90-day deadline for the adoption of an election district map and election sequence by means of an ordinance on or before December 27, 2021, unless Rafferty finds it in his soul to allow the city to perform under a 180-day deadline, such that the city will need to adopt the district-voting ordinance on or before March 28, 2022.
The city council, after hearing from residents on Monday night during the hearing relating to the item pertaining to the action Rafferty is forcing the city to take, adopted a resolution of intent by a 4-to-0 vote.
Unknown at this point is whether the city will form five districts or wards with each embodying as close as possible one fifth of the city’s 123,251 population with the selection of the mayor continuing to rotate among the council’s five members or whether Victorville will form four council districts, each composed of one-fourth of the city’s residents, augmented by a mayor’s post to be filled by a candidate elected at-large.
In response to questions emailed to him by the Sentinel, Rafferty, without being specific, implied that at least one of the Latino council members in Victorville over the last three decades – Diaz, Cabriales, Valles, Garcia, Negrete, Gomez, Ramirez and Becerra – did not adequately represent the members of the same protected minority of which he or she was himself or herself a member.
“Not every Latino office-holder on your list was an authentic candidate-of-choice of the Latino community,” he said, without explaining how he knew that to be the case or even how it was possible that it was the case.
Pushing the City of Victorville toward by-district elections even though four-fifths of those most recently elected are members of a protected minority under the California Voting Rights Act did not constitute a perversion of the intent of the California Voting Rights Act and was in some measure justified by the council’s vote to remove Ramirez from the council, Rafferty said.
“It is curious that you include Rita Ramirez, who received a vote from almost every Latino casting a ballot in 2018, but was removed without the benefit of a charter provision, ordinance or quo warranto proceeding, and was not replaced within the timeframe required by state law,” Rafferty said. “This is not evidence of equal influence by the Latino community.”
Rafferty made no reference or acknowledgment that Becerra was a prime mover in the removal of Ramirez from office.
Nonetheless, he implied that the current incumbents, three-quarters of whom are members of protected minorities and one-half of whom are Hispanic, were in some fashion responsible for the continuing political disenfranchisement of Latinos in Victorville.
“[T]he incumbents… know my clients’ concern about the continuing failure to replace member Ramirez and the prospect that an incomplete council could draw lines for an entire decade, especially since the immigrant communities of southeast Victorville are not represented,” he said.
Rafferty declined to identify his clients in Victorville, but did say that some of them were among those who spoke before the city council on September 27 urging the council to adopt a by-district voting system.
“Because of the potential for retaliation, I generally do not disclose individual clients until and unless it is necessary to sue,” he said. “But community support for districting was almost unanimous at the last council meeting.”
Rafferty offered something of a defense for seeking to move Victorville to by-district elections, even though four-fifths of those most recently elected are members of a protected minority as defined by the California Voting Rights Act.
“I am very selective in the jurisdictions to which I am willing to send notices,” he said. “Victorville is the largest city in California with a significant minority community that still elects at-large.”
As to the recurrent, indeed almost universal, pattern of gerrymandering protecting the political status quo and incumbents that occurred in San Bernardino County with the switch to by-district elections in the last half-decade, Rafferty said, “The voters in jurisdictions that I work with have a pretty good track record for increasing the number of minority officeholders and minority candidates-of-choice. This is about voters, not incumbents or candidates.” Then, without saying how he had information to make such a pronouncement, Rafferty claimed, “When officeholders who are members of a protected class are defeated in district elections, it is usually because they are not the minority’s candidate of choice. But you can’t engineer democracy, and minority communities are not always instantly empowered. It can take a few cycles to see the effects of this reform.”
-Mark Gutglueck

Norse Atlantic Airlines, a Norwegian start-up headquartered in Arendal, Norway launched in March that will begin operations next summer, will include an Oslo-to-Los Angeles route in its flights to the United States.
Described as the international flight replacement of Norwegian Airlines, which was forced into bankruptcy in 2020 and which discontinued its trans-Atlantic flights as an element of its recovery plan, Norse Atlantic ASA is a publicly traded company listed on the Euronext Growth Exchange in Oslo, Norway. 53-year-old Bjørn Tore Larsen, is the airline’s founder, CEO, and major shareholder. He is seeking to obtain for Norse Atlantic a Norwegian air operator’s certificate, which is on a trajectory to be granted by November, as well as a British air operator’s certificate the company hopes to have secured by January or February.
“Inspired by the Norsemen who traveled and explored the world with their state-of-the art longships, Norse Atlantic Airways will give people the opportunity to explore other continents by offering affordable flights on board modern and more environmentally friendly Boeing 787 Dreamliners,” Larsen said. “Norse Atlantic Airways will serve the intercontinental market with fuel-efficient planes. It will among other destinations serve New York, Florida, Paris, London and Oslo.”
It is anticipated that by summer 2022, Norse will have 1,600 employees.
At present, Norse has acquired 18 Boeing 787 Dreamliners, In March, the company signed lease agreements with affiliates of AerCap Holdings NV for a 12-year lease of six Boeing 787-9s and an eight-year lease of three Boeing 787-8 aircraft. The Company anticipates taking delivery of the first of those nine aircraft no later than the first week of December 2021, with the delivery of the remaining aircraft no later than the end of March 2022. In August, it entered into a 16-year lease of six Boeing 787-9 Dreamliners from BOC Aviation Limited. Norse Airlines expects to take delivery of the aircraft in December 2021. The company is in the end stages of purchasing three 787-9s owned by Norwegian Airlines that were grounded in March 2020 due to COVID-19-related travel restrictions and then moth-balled shortly thereafter as a consequence of that airline’s bankruptcy.
The berthing of Norse Atlantic Airlines at Ontario International Airport will represent an historic step, as the airline will be the first to offer regularly scheduled flights into Ontario from Europe.
There have been occasional flights from and to Ontario via European destinations and points of departure, which were generally emergency landings, specialty flights carrying dignitaries or promotional flights such as that of the Concorde from London to Ontario and back in the 1980s. There was some discussion of regular Concorde flights to and from Ontario, but that did not come about after the Los Angeles Department of Airports Board of Commissioners, which then oversaw operations at Ontario Airport, bowed to a request by the Ontario City Council, which at that time had unanimously voted to prevent the Concorde from staging out of Ontario because its engines were too loud.
In September Norse Atlantic Airways filed an application with the Federal Aviation Administration for authorization to fly from Oslo Airport, located some 22 miles northeast of Oslo in Gardermoen, initially to three destinations in the United States – Ontario International Airport, Fort Lauderdale/Hollywood International Airport in Florida and Stewart International Airport in Orange County, New York, roughly 60 miles from New York City.
“We strongly believe that there is a need for a new and innovative airline serving the low-cost intercontinental market with modern, more environmentally friendly and fuel-efficient aircraft as the world gradually reopens,” Larsen said. “Our plans are on track and operations will commence when travel restrictions are lifted and demand for transatlantic travel is back. Based on the current situation, we anticipate that all our Dreamliners will be flying customers between Europe and the U.S. next summer. We will launch our ticket sales approximately three months prior to first flight and will offer exciting destinations that have proven to be attractive.”
The addition of Norse Atlantic to the airlines now functioning out of Ontario International Airport will lend greater credibility to the aerodrome’s billing as an international airport.
At present, the airport’s foreign destination smorgasbord is rather limited.
China Airlines and Volaris offer direct flights to Taiwan and Mexico, respectively, while AeroMexico has discontinued its previous regular connections to and from Ontario, although there are still some codeshare flights into Ontario operated by other airlines that use the AeroMexico name. Multiple connection flights to foreign destinations from Ontario are available.
Ontario, like virtually all other airports, took a hit during the COVID-19 pandemic. In 2019, 5,583,732 passengers came through its gates. In 2020, that number had dwindled to 2,538,482.
Airport officials, however, reported that in July of this year, ridership at the airport increased to roughly 478,000 passengers, which was just about 97 percent of the 493,000 passengers that flew into and out of the airport in July 2019, prior to the coronavirus crisis.
-Mark Gutglueck

In an apparent effort to prove they have not been chastened by action the California Attorney General took against them and the city the last time they did the same thing, four members of the Fontana City Council this week turned back a citizen appeal of the planning commission’s approval of a warehouse to be built in south Fontana.
In this case, the project in question involves Manhattan-Beach-based 9th Street Partners’ proposed warehouse building totaling 92,433 square feet to be developed on a 4.07-acre site located on the northwest corner of Valley Boulevard and Catawba Avenue at 15894 Valley Boulevard that was given go-ahead and an endorsement of its design review by the planning commission on July 6, 2021.
The project site lies within a district zoned for light industrial uses. According to the city, based on the consideration that the warehouse will be an example of so-called in-fill development, “The project qualifies for a categorical exemption, pursuant to Section 15332, Class 32, of the California Environmental Quality Act.”
It is this skimping on environmental examination when it comes to warehouses that in the case of the Valley Boulevard/Catawba Avenue project led to the appeal heard this week and which subjected the city to the action of and scrutiny by the California Attorney General’s Office with regard to another development proposal.
Janet Meza, who lives in a home adjacent to the Valley Boulevard Catawba Avenue project site, appealed the planning commission’s decision to the city council on behalf of herself and her family.
“We believe that this approval is improper because an environmental report was not completed for the project, and the California Environmental Quality Act exemption the city has used does not apply to this project,” Meza wrote in her appeal. “Along with zone changes, the manipulation of the California Environmental Quality Act has dealt an environmental blow to the young people of the Inland Empire. The California Environmental Quality Act exemption is not appropriate because regardless of the size of the project, not doing a California Environmental Quality Act review means that the city would not adequately address the cumulative environmental, safety, and traffic impacts that this project will bring to Fontana and San Bernardino County. As stated by the court in [the case of] Center for Biological Diversity v. California Department of Fish and Wildlife, environmental decisions must be ‘supported by a reasoned explanation based on substantial evidence.’”
Meza asserted “the basic threshold has not been met” to exempt the project from environmental review. “This appeal demands that threshold be met either with the reasonable equivalent of a California Environmental Quality Act [requirement] to ‘support a reasoned explanation based on substantial evidence,’” her appeal states. “Here, the developer is allowed to avoid the California Environmental Quality Act, due to exemptions that can be argued for based on size (a mere 92,000 square feet, with proximity to both long-standing Fontana neighborhoods and an elementary school). We demand to have the city council ask the city attorney to take the community step-by-step through their California Environmental Quality Act due process workarounds that are in use by the developer.”
Meza’s challenge was in some measure a repetition of the appeal Elizabeth Sena had made of the planning commission’s April 20, 2021 approval of Duke Realty’s proposal to build a 205,949-square foot warehouse on an 8.61-acre seven-parcel piece of ground at the southwest corner of Slover Avenue and Oleander Avenue. The project, which was designed to feature 22 truck docks, 40 truck parking spaces, and 95 standard parking spaces, was slated for a site immediately adjacent to Jurupa Hills High School.
On June 22, 2021, the Fontana City Council denied Sena’s appeal and upheld the planning commission on its decision to allow the warehouse to be built.
In July of this year, California Attorney General Rob Bonta sued the City of Fontana over the approval of the Slover and Oleander warehouse project. Bonta took issue with the lax environmental safeguards the city adhered to in giving Duke Realty go-ahead. The city allowed the planning commission to utilize one of the least exacting forms of environmental certification for the project, a mitigated negative declaration. In the lawsuit, Bonta argued that the city’s limited environmental review of the project and its failure to appropriately analyze, disclose, and mitigate the project’s environmental impacts violates the California Environmental Quality Act.
“Under the California Environmental Quality Act, the City of Fontana is required to implement all feasible mitigation measures to reduce harmful air pollution and other significant environmental impacts of the Slover and Oleander Warehouse project,” Bonta said. “Plain and simple: Everyone has the right to breathe clean air where they live and where they work. As attorney general, I have a responsibility to enforce the state’s environmental laws, and as the people’s attorney, I am committed to standing up for communities who live at the intersection of poverty and pollution. Fontana residents shouldn’t have to choose between economic development and clean air. They deserve both. Unfortunately, the City of Fontana cut corners when it approved the Slover and Oleander Warehouse Project. We’re going to court to compel the city to go back and take a hard look at the environmental impacts of this project – and do all it can to mitigate the potential harms to local residents and workers – before moving forward.”
According to Bonta, “The Slover and Oleander Warehouse Project will be constructed in a low-income south Fontana neighborhood that suffers from some of the highest pollution levels in all of California. Over 20 warehouses have already been built within a mile of the project site, in an area that encompasses two public high schools and serves as home to hundreds of Californians. Collectively, these warehouses generate thousands of daily heavy-duty diesel truck trips. As a result, local residents and workers suffer from some of the highest exposures statewide to fine particulate matter, which are inhalable microscopic particles that travel deep into human lungs and are linked to increased risk of premature death, cardiovascular disease, lung cancer, and asthma attacks. They are also heavily exposed to ozone and toxic chemicals that can cause a wide array of other concerning health problems.”
In the lawsuit, Bonta maintains the City of Fontana violated the California Environmental Quality Act in its approval of the Slover and Oleander warehouse project by failing to prepare an environmental impact report despite substantial evidence that the project will have significant environmental impacts, and that the city did not disclose the existence of dozens of other industrial warehouses in the area. The city further did not disclose, Bonta asserted, that the city has approved and is planning additional warehouse developments within blocks of the project, and it did not account for those nearby warehouses in its cumulative air quality analysis.
A prime mover in the proliferation of warehouses in Fontana, which has grown to a population 217,000, has been Mayor Acquanetta Warren, who has held the mayoralty in the city since 2010. A recipient of substantial political donations by landowners, land speculators and developers to the point that she has accumulated a political campaign war chest of more then $350,000, Warren has continuously ruled Fontana over the last decade with an iron fist based upon her alliances with the council members who have served in the course of several election cycles, including John Roberts, Jesse Armendarez, Phil Cothran, Jr. and Peter Garcia.
Warren has ignored those who have questioned whether building devoted to the logistics industry constitutes the highest and best use of the property available for development in the region, and have inveighed against warehouses on the basis of the relatively poor pay and benefits provided to those who work in distribution facilities, the large diesel-powered semi-trucks that are part of those operations with their unhealthy exhaust emissions, together with the bane of traffic gridlock they create. Warren has insisted that they represent economic development that will provide needed employment to much of Fontana’s indigenous poorly-educated, unskilled and unemployed population.
So committed, indeed, has Warren been to warehouse development that she has become known, both derisively by her political opponents and admiringly by her supporters, as “Warehouse Warren.”
Many of her detractors believe that Warren is disingenuous in her pro-warehouse development crusade in that she recognizes that better use could be made of Fontana’s undeveloped commercial/industrially zoned properties, but that she has encouraged warehouse development because of the willingness of those profiting by the accelerated development of warehouse/distribution/logistics-related projects to provide her with money, either as campaign donations or in other forms, what a growing number of people see as either tantamount to bribes or outright payoffs.
In her appeal letter relating to the 15894 Valley Boulevard/Catawba Avenue warehouse project, Meza joined that chorus.
“It’s no secret that developers and their government henchmen have been playing fast and loose with California Environmental Quality Act laws over the past decade, especially here in Fontana in regards to warehouse distribution centers,” Meza wrote.
Given Bonta’s lawsuit, the consideration that Bonta has a crew of investigators who are reportedly going closely over the votes of both the Fontana City Council and the Fontana Planning Commission relating to the glut of warehouse development in the city and the seeming nonchalance with which Fontana residents such as Meza reference their perception that Fontana officials are the recipients of illicit inducements that explain their embrasure of warehouse development in the city, there were some who believed that when the appeal of the planning commission’s approval of the 15894 Valley Boulevard/Catawba Avenue warehouse project came before the city council on Tuesday night, Warren and her allies on the council would exercise a degree of caution.
As the hearing on the appeal began, Deputy City Clerk Ashton Rene Gout stated that there had been 75 letters received in opposition to the project and one letter in favor of it.
The council heard a report on the matter from Senior Planner Paul Gonzales.
“The project is consistent with the applicable general plan designations,” said Gonzales. “There was no general plan amendment or zone change. It met the designations for zoning and the general plan. The project site has no value for habitat for endangered species. The site is paved over and completely disturbed. Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects on traffic, noise, air quality or water quality. The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and services, sewer, water and everything else.”
Gonzales quoted and endorsed the response of 9th Street Partners to the challenge of the project on the basis of its air quality impacts. That response held that the time to challenge the general plan environmental impact report had long since elapsed.
“Staff recommends denial of Appeal Number 21-003, therefore upholding the planning commission’s decision on July 6, 2021, approving Design Review Number 21-003,” Gonzales said.
A multitude of speakers weighed in on the project, including ones who spoke both in support of the project and against it.
After the public comments concluded, the council held no discussion, with Mayor Warren stating directly, “May I have a motion to approve staff recommendation?”
“I’ll make the motion, Mayor,” Councilman John Roberts said.
“And I have a second?” Warren inquired.
“Second,” said Councilman Pete Garcia.
A vote then ensued, with the council voting 4-to-1 to uphold the planning commission and reject Meza’s appeal, with Warren, Roberts, Garcia and Cotharn prevailing over Councilman Jesse Sandoval.
At the end of meeting, during the portion of the proceedings reserved for council comments, Councilman Garcia, who like the rest of his colleagues had engaged in no discussion when the warehouse approval appeal was before them, offered a statement that made it seem as if he was a bit self-conscious about the way the council had steamrolled over the opposition to the project without any serious rumination over the issues the appeal had raised.
“I want to thank everyone for their participation this evening,” Garcia said. “As everyone can tell, there was a large diversity of opinions. It’s always nice to hear from various community members on the issues. At the end of the day, we have to make our decisions based on some of the facts. Everyone might not be happy, but their opinions are always welcome. I think we always do what’s best, in the best interest of the city.”
Mayor Warren reacted to the suggestions by some of the crowd that she is on the take.
“I tell you, we definitely as a council had our challenges in so many ways, but they are good challenges,” she said. “A couple of comments tonight I was listening to, all these young people particularly. It was just good to hear everyone’s opinion, but people need to understand, this is where we do the people’s business. No cursin’, no hollerin’ out, no clownin’, and that goes for us up here at the dais. You’re either – How do they say it? – on the menu or you are the menu. That’s why I’m the cook. I’ll decide the ingredients, and I’ll put it in the pot, and I’ll finish it, because this town deserves representation. Tonight we heard so many comments. I tell you, it has become a cliché: ’Money in your pocket.’”
She enunciated a defense of the way in which a majority of the council came to what appeared to be a preset conclusion to uphold the planning commission.
“Tonight you saw everyone get a chance to put their viewpoint in, but what a lot of people don’t understand is we don’t have a condition or a reason to deny a project that has met all the state and federal standards. Then we open ourselves up to lawsuits. Our standards are high here. They’re very high,” she said.
-Mark Gutglueck

By Grace Bernal
Negotiations ongoing for nearly three months between Frontier Communications and the Communications Workers of America District 9 continue with little prospect of being concluded anytime soon, employees with Frontier have told the Sentinel.
CWA District 9 represents over 2,000 non-management employees with Frontier Communications employed in Southern California, including San Bernardino County.
In 2010, Verizon’s landline operations in Arizona, Nevada, and along the California border were sold to Frontier Communications, which resulted in the creation of the company Frontier Communications of the Southwest. In San Bernardino County at that time, the City of Needles and its outlying community was the sole area serviced by Frontier.
In late 2014, Frontier Communications began to explore the acquisition of Verizon’s landline assets in California, including its internet and cable service customer base. In December 2015, Frontier obtained clearance from the California Public Utilities Commission to acquire Verizon’s landline operations in Southern California, and that takeover was consummated in April 2016.
Verizon had reached an accord with its non-management employees in 2013 after collective bargaining sessions, and that agreement was in place at the time of the Verizon/Frontier transition.
Frontier made, according to CWA District 9 members, a number of commitments at the time of the acquisition, which included agreeing that all employees hired going forward would be inducted into Communication Workers of America, and that specified repairs would be made to the former Verizon buildings and plants that had been neglected for some time, as the condition of the company facilities in at least some cases presented safety hazards to the company’s workforce.
When that contract with the union expired in 2017, Frontier and Communications Workers of America District 9 extended the existing terms of the contract for non-management employees. Between 2017 and 2018, no serious negotiations between Frontier and CWA 9 took place, and in 2018, another extension of the 2013 contract was made.
In 2019, Frontier offered, and the union accepted, in the face of Frontier’s claims of corporate financial hardship, a two percent wage increase.
In April 2020, listing a total debt of $21.9 billion against $7.155 billion in annual revenue, Frontier Communications filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection from its creditors.
In 2020, Frontier negotiators cited serious financial issues in successfully convincing CWA 9 to extend the existing contract. Shortly thereafter, CWA District 9 learned that Frontier had paid out $63 million in raises, bonuses and incentive pay to the management and senior administrative echelon of the company.
Frontier, which has been in existence since 1935, has operations in Alabama, Arizona, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Texas, Utah, West Virginia, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, South Carolina, Tennessee, Mississippi, Nebraska, Nevada, Iowa and Michigan.
Frontier’s top executives have indicated they believe the company’s future hinges upon its thorough transition to fiber optics, which is a capital-intensive undertaking the company maintains will ultimately redound to its benefit but which will greatly reduce its profitability over the next six to nine years.
This year, CWA District 9 renewed negotiations with Frontier with an intensified vigor. It was met with the company’s proposed one percent raise, which then increased to 1.25 percent. Simultaneously, the company is seeking to decrease the employer match made to employees’ 401K retirement accounts from a maximum of 6 percent of the participating employees’ annual income to 2 percent.
In the meantime, Communication Workers of America finds itself in an existential struggle insofar as remaining as the employee representative at Frontier. CWA District 9 is in active bargaining mode with Frontier in California, based in Norwalk, while other locals have either concluded negotiations, have pending negotiations or are in the midst of extensions of previous contracts. In defiance of the agreement that CWA claims was made at the time of the Frontier takeover of Verizon, the company continues to hire new workers who are allowed to opt out of being union members. Thus, the unionized employees at Frontier in Southern California are dwindling. While the union yet has leverage, CWA representatives are concerned that if the company continues to, in the words of CWA officials, “stonewall,” within the next decade the union at Frontier will be broken.
The circumstance at present is pushing CWA District 9 ever closer toward the brink of a strike, which would hamper the continued smooth delivery of service – landline, cable and internet – to over 300,000 customers in Southern California and an estimated 70,000 customers in San Bernardino County.
A Sentinel phone call placed to Nick Jeffery, the chief executive officer with Frontier Communications at the Frontier corporate office headquarters in Stamford, Connecticut did not elicit a response by press time.
The Sentinel spoke with Don Ruiz, the chief bargaining representative of CWA 9 in Southern California, to see if he could give a window on how dire the circumstance is and whether it will entail an interruption of communication services in the region.
“We are still in contract negotiations,” Ruiz said. “What I can say is we have multiple differences. I can’t get into specifics, since I am the chief bargaining person. There’s a lot of ancillary articles that have minimal meaning we have been able to put behind us, but on the main points of real substance we are miles apart, right now.”
Asked about the prospect that the union and the company will remain at loggerheads for another three months, or that the differences will trigger a strike, Ruiz said, “I certainly hope we get done before the end of the year.”
Ruiz said the gist of the dispute relates less to money and more to corporate loyalty down the chain of employment.
“The company’s position is it wants to get rid of job security and it wants the ability to outsource,” Ruiz said. “Those are the things we are fighting, to keep jobs in California and the United States. We don’t want them to outsource to places like Mexico City and other areas. We’re fighting for the employees, but also on behalf of Frontier’s customers. We don’t want the company contracting out our work to be done by individuals who are essentially unknown. Our employees go through extensive background checks. As it stands, when you have a Frontier employee coming out to your home, you know that person has been through a vetting regimen and a security process. We are bargaining right now for our employees, but also to keep the company’s customers safe. Our position is let us do our work.”
The Sentinel asked Ruiz how close the company and union are to an impasse and what the prospects for a strike action are.
“There is a process for both,” Ruiz said. “The company can’t just declare an impasse. It is the same thing for a strike. There are various steps you have go through before we get to that. We are not at our bottom line. You have to play the game of incremental proposals and counter-proposals with them so we are not bargaining against ourselves. We are doing that, and will continue to do that, but as I said, we are miles apart on the matters that are most important.”
If push comes to shove and no accommodation is reached between the company and the union, Ruiz said the CWA District 9 is prepared to go to the next level.
“The membership has already taken a vote, and they voted overwhelmingly in favor of going on strike,” Ruiz said.
Ruiz said the employees have shown far more loyalty to Frontier than Frontier has displayed good faith toward them.
“The employees not only went through a bankruptcy with this company, they have lasted through the COVID situation,” Ruiz said. “This was a bankruptcy that was not the workers’ fault but the consequence of the failure of the company’s past leadership. There were three hedge funds that lent the company money to purchase the assets from Verizon. Now that the company is out of bankruptcy, we feel it is important that the employees who made that possible are recognized and get the job security and other things they deserve. The employees have stood by the company through and through with the difficulties it had, and there has been very little reward. All we are asking for is a show of appreciation.”

U.S. Congressman Jay Obernolte (R-Hesperia) introduced House Resolution 5355, the Desert Community Lands Act, on September 23, which if passed into law would convey approximately 8,200 surface acres of land owned by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to the Town of Apple Valley and the cities of Twentynine Palms, Barstow, and Victorville. The conveyances would be at no cost and will give these communities at present landlocked by federal land increased space and control over their surroundings.
“Currently, over 90 percent of the land mass in California’s 8th District is owned by government agencies,” said Obernolte. “As a result, many of our small communities face problems ranging from a lack of control over recreational opportunities to growing pains resulting from a lack of space, including housing, traffic congestion, insufficient wastewater treatment, and lagging development. This bill would bring control of local lands back to our communities so the needs of our citizens can be met.”
Under House Resolution 5355, the Bureau of Land Management is to convey approximately 3,200 acres to Victorville, land located either within the city limits or its sphere of influence within one year of enactment.
Apple Valley would receive roughly 4,630 surface acres of BLM-managed land located north and east of the town center to be managed as the Apple Valley Off-Highway Vehicle Recreation Area. This conveyance would occur within five years of the bill’s enactment.
Within one year of enactment, Barstow would be given approximately 320 surface acres of BLM-managed land located entirely within the incorporated city limits and adjacent to the I-15 Freeway..
Twentynine Palms is to receive approximately 80 surface acres east of the city within one year to allow for more publicly accessible race events at the Twentynine Palms Motorsports Arena, host to the annual Hilltoppers Motorcycle Club Grand Prix and its 6,200 attendees.

The Sentinel has received a report that migrant children, who apparently were not in the custody of nor accompanied by their parents, were being flown out of Ontario International Airport this week.
On September 28, a passenger on a flight out of Ontario Airport saw multiple groups of Hispanic children with what appeared to be chaperones waiting for and boarding flights.
The children, who were communicating in Spanish, were in separate groups of three to six.
There was some level of interchange ongoing between the adults serving as chaperones, the Sentinel was told.
Another indication was that at least some of the children were en route to Baltimore.
There was some speculation that the children originated at the Fairplex grounds in Pomona, which in April the Joseph Biden Administration designated as a holding area/emergency shelter for unaccompanied children who had crossed the border into the United States
There was an influx of immigrants from Mexico and Central America through several border crossings earlier this year, prompted by what was presumed to be the willingness of the Biden Administration to welcome immigrants into the United States. While many of those arriving were intact families, over time some children were separated from their parents or became lost. In some cases, parents dropped their children over or pushed them past border boundaries, leaving them unaccompanied on the American side of the international divide.
Efforts by the Sentinel to learn from Ontario International Airport officials as well as those with the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service who the children were and what is to become of them were unsuccessful.

NOTICE OF SALE OF AUTOMOBILE
Notice is hereby given pursuant to Sections 3071 of the Civil Code of the State of California the undersigned will sell the following vehicle(s) at lien sale at said address below on: 10/15/2021 09:00 AM
Year of Car / Make of Car / Vehicle ID No. / License No. (State)
05 GMC / 1GDHC242X5E243578 /7X78948CA
To be sold by IE AUTOMOTIVE 628 S BONVIEW AVE ONTARIO CA 91761
Said sale is for the purpose of satisfying lien for together with costs of advertising and expenses of sale.
Published: 10/01/21
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT FILE NO-20210008879
The following person(s) is(are) doing business as: Rose and Chalice; Rose & Chalice, 1153 East Highland Court, Ontario, CA 91764, Mailing Address: 305 North 2nd Ave, Unit 183, Upland. CA 91786, Serene D. Plant, 1153 E Highland Ct, Ontario, CA 91764
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/ Serene D Plant
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 08/26/21
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/ 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).
09/10/21, 09/17/21, 09/24/21, 10/01/21

FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT FILE NO-20210008980
The following person(s) is(are) doing business as: HHK Designs, 2188 Lorraine Dr, Upland, CA 91784, Mark K Fitzpatrick, 2188 Lorraine Dr, Upland, CA 91784
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/ Mark K Fitzpatrick
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 08/30/21
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/ 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).
09/10/21, 09/17/21, 09/24/21, 10/01/21

FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT FILE NO-20210008317
The following person(s) is(are) doing business as: Fangear4u, 1495 W 9th St, Unit 607, Upland, CA 91786, Seung Don Kim, 14760 Moon Crest Ln, Unit B, Chino Hills, CA 91709
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/ Seung Don Kim
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 08/11/21
I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office.
Began Transacting Business: 09/01/2019
County Clerk, s/ 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).
09/10/21, 09/17/21, 09/24/21, 10/01/21

FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT FILE NO-20210007242
The following person(s) is(are) doing business as: On Time Home Inspections, 10123 Hampshire St., Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730, Mailing Address: 10123 Hampshire St., Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730, Juan J. Tojin, 10123 Hampshire St., 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/Juan J Tojin
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 07/14/21
I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office.
Began Transacting Business: 07/01/21
County Clerk, s/ 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).
08/06/21, 08/13/21, 08/20/21, 08/27/21 & Corrected on: 09/10/21, 09/17/21, 09/24/21, 10/01/21

FBN20210009200
The following persons are doing business as TED’S SHIRTS & SHYTT
13231 YAKIMA RD. APPLE VALLEY, CA 92308:
TAILOR L. TITUS 13231 YAKIMA RD. APPLE VALLEY, CA 92308 [and] DIXIE BOLAN 14466 IROQUOIS ROAD APPLE VALLEY, CA 92307
This Business is Conducted By: A GENERAL PARTNERSHIP
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/ TAILOR L. TITUS
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 9/08/2021
I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office.
Began Transacting Business: AUGUST 31, 2021
County Clerk, Deputy D511
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 September 10, 17, 24 & October 1, 2021.

T.S. No. 21-20339-SP-CA Title No. 210278435-CA-VOI A.P.N. 1089-201-16-0-000 NOTICE OF TRUSTEE’S SALE. YOU ARE IN DEFAULT UNDER A DEED OF TRUST DATED 11/21/2005. UNLESS YOU TAKE ACTION TO PROTECT YOUR PROPERTY, IT MAY BE SOLD AT A PUBLIC SALE. IF YOU NEED AN EXPLANATION OF THE NATURE OF THE PROCEEDING AGAINST YOU, YOU SHOULD CONTACT A LAWYER. A public auction sale to the highest bidder for cash, (cashier’s check(s) must be made payable to National Default Servicing Corporation), drawn on a state or national bank, a check drawn by a state or federal credit union, or a check drawn by a state or federal savings and loan association, savings association, or savings bank specified in Section 5102 of the Financial Code and authorized to do business in this state; will be held by the duly appointed trustee as shown below, of all right, title, and interest conveyed to and now held by the trustee in the hereinafter described property under and pursuant to a Deed of Trust described below. The sale will be made in an “as is” condition, but without covenant or warranty, expressed or implied, regarding title, possession, or encumbrances, to pay the remaining principal sum of the note(s) secured by the Deed of Trust, with interest and late charges thereon, as provided in the note(s), advances, under the terms of the Deed of Trust, interest thereon, fees, charges and expenses of the Trustee for the total amount (at the time of the initial publication of the Notice of Sale) reasonably estimated to be set forth below. The amount may be greater on the day of sale. Trustor: Jamal Elyazal, a single man Duly Appointed Trustee: National Default Servicing Corporation Recorded 12/06/2005 as Instrument No. 2005-0911247 (or Book, Page) of the Official Records of San Bernardino County, CA. Date of Sale: 10/19/2021 at 1:00 PM Place of Sale: At the Main (South) Entrance to the City of Chino Civic Center, 13220 Central Avenue, Chino, CA. 91710 Estimated amount of unpaid balance and other charges: $679,799.29 Street Address or other common designation of real property: 6731 Florence Place Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91701-8612 A.P.N.: 1089-201-16-0-000 The undersigned Trustee disclaims any liability for any incorrectness of the street address or other common designation, if any, shown above. If no street address or other common designation is shown, directions to the location of the property may be obtained by sending a written request to the beneficiary within 10 days of the date of first publication of this Notice of Sale. If the Trustee is unable to convey title for any reason, the successful bidder’s sole and exclusive remedy shall be the return of monies paid to the Trustee, and the successful bidder shall have no further recourse. The requirements of California Civil Code Section 2923.5(b)/2923.55(c) were fulfilled when the Notice of Default was recorded. NOTICE TO POTENTIAL BIDDERS: If you are considering bidding on this property lien, you should understand that there are risks involved in bidding at a trustee auction. You will be bidding on a lien, not on the property itself. Placing the highest bid at a trustee auction does not automatically entitle you to free and clear ownership of the property. You should also be aware that the lien being auctioned off may be a junior lien. If you are the highest bidder at the auction, you are or may be responsible for paying off all liens senior to the lien being auctioned off, before you can receive clear title to the property. You are encouraged to investigate the existence, priority, and size of outstanding liens that may exist on this property by contacting the county recorder’s office or a title insurance company, either of which may charge you a fee for this information. If you consult either of these resources, you should be aware that the same lender may hold more than one mortgage or deed of trust on the property. NOTICE TO PROPERTY OWNER: The sale date shown on this notice of sale may be postponed one or more times by the mortgagee, beneficiary, trustee, or a court, pursuant to Section 2924g of the California Civil Code. The law requires that information about trustee sale postponements be made available to you and to the public, as a courtesy to those not present at the sale. If you wish to learn whether your sale date has been postponed, and, if applicable, the rescheduled time and date for the sale of this property, you may call or visit this Internet Web site www.ndscorp.com/sales, using the file number assigned to this case 21-20339-SP-CA. Information about postponements that are very short in duration or that occur close in time to the scheduled sale may not immediately be reflected in the telephone information or on the Internet Web site. The best way to verify postponement information is to attend the scheduled sale. Date: 09/10/2021 National Default Servicing Corporation c/o Tiffany & Bosco, P.A., its agent, 1455 Frazee Road, Suite 820 San Diego, CA 92108 Toll Free Phone: 888-264-4010 Sales Line 855-219-8501; Sales Website: www.ndscorp.com By: Rachael Hamilton, Trustee Sales Representative 09/17/2021, 09/24/2021, 10/01/2021 CPP351412

T.S. No. 21-20046-SP-CA Title No. 210047684-CA-VOI A.P.N. 1047-191-32-0-000 NOTICE OF TRUSTEE’S SALE. YOU ARE IN DEFAULT UNDER A DEED OF TRUST DATED 06/26/2006. UNLESS YOU TAKE ACTION TO PROTECT YOUR PROPERTY, IT MAY BE SOLD AT A PUBLIC SALE. IF YOU NEED AN EXPLANATION OF THE NATURE OF THE PROCEEDING AGAINST YOU, YOU SHOULD CONTACT A LAWYER. A public auction sale to the highest bidder for cash, (cashier’s check(s) must be made payable to National Default Servicing Corporation), drawn on a state or national bank, a check drawn by a state or federal credit union, or a check drawn by a state or federal savings and loan association, savings association, or savings bank specified in Section 5102 of the Financial Code and authorized to do business in this state; will be held by the duly appointed trustee as shown below, of all right, title, and interest conveyed to and now held by the trustee in the hereinafter described property under and pursuant to a Deed of Trust described below. The sale will be made in an “as is” condition, but without covenant or warranty, expressed or implied, regarding title, possession, or encumbrances, to pay the remaining principal sum of the note(s) secured by the Deed of Trust, with interest and late charges thereon, as provided in the note(s), advances, under the terms of the Deed of Trust, interest thereon, fees, charges and expenses of the Trustee for the total amount (at the time of the initial publication of the Notice of Sale) reasonably estimated to be set forth below. The amount may be greater on the day of sale. Trustor: Francisco Sandoval, a single man Duly Appointed Trustee: National Default Servicing Corporation Recorded 07/13/2006 as Instrument No. 2006-0474939 (or Book, Page) of the Official Records of San Bernardino County, CA. Date of Sale: 10/25/2021 at 12:00 PM Place of Sale: At the North Arrowhead Avenue entrance to the County Courthouse, 351 North Arrowhead Avenue, San Bernardino, CA 92401 Estimated amount of unpaid balance and other charges: $672,603.71 Street Address or other common designation of real property: 959 Sycamore Court Upland, CA 91786 A.P.N.: 1047-191-32-0-000 The undersigned Trustee disclaims any liability for any incorrectness of the street address or other common designation, if any, shown above. If no street address or other common designation is shown, directions to the location of the property may be obtained by sending a written request to the beneficiary within 10 days of the date of first publication of this Notice of Sale. If the Trustee is unable to convey title for any reason, the successful bidder’s sole and exclusive remedy shall be the return of monies paid to the Trustee, and the successful bidder shall have no further recourse. The requirements of California Civil Code Section 2923.5(b)/2923.55(c) were fulfilled when the Notice of Default was recorded. NOTICE TO POTENTIAL BIDDERS: If you are considering bidding on this property lien, you should understand that there are risks involved in bidding at a trustee auction. You will be bidding on a lien, not on the property itself. Placing the highest bid at a trustee auction does not automatically entitle you to free and clear ownership of the property. You should also be aware that the lien being auctioned off may be a junior lien. If you are the highest bidder at the auction, you are or may be responsible for paying off all liens senior to the lien being auctioned off, before you can receive clear title to the property. You are encouraged to investigate the existence, priority, and size of outstanding liens that may exist on this property by contacting the county recorder’s office or a title insurance company, either of which may charge you a fee for this information. If you consult either of these resources, you should be aware that the same lender may hold more than one mortgage or deed of trust on the property. NOTICE TO PROPERTY OWNER: The sale date shown on this notice of sale may be postponed one or more times by the mortgagee, beneficiary, trustee, or a court, pursuant to Section 2924g of the California Civil Code. The law requires that information about trustee sale postponements be made available to you and to the public, as a courtesy to those not present at the sale. If you wish to learn whether your sale date has been postponed, and, if applicable, the rescheduled time and date for the sale of this property, you may call or visit this Internet Web site www.ndscorp.com/sales, using the file number assigned to this case 21-20046-SP-CA. Information about postponements that are very short in duration or that occur close in time to the scheduled sale may not immediately be reflected in the telephone information or on the Internet Web site. The best way to verify postponement information is to attend the scheduled sale. Date: 09/10/2021 National Default Servicing Corporation c/o Tiffany & Bosco, P.A., its agent, 1455 Frazee Road, Suite 820 San Diego, CA 92108 Toll Free Phone: 888-264-4010 Sales Line 855-219-8501; Sales Website: www.ndscorp.com By: Rachael Hamilton, Trustee Sales Representative 09/17/2021, 09/24/2021, 10/01/2021 CPP351411

NOTICE OF PETITION TO ADMINISTER ESTATE OF: JUVENTINO MARTINEZ SAUCEDO
CASE NO. PROSB2100503
To all heirs, beneficiaries, creditors, contingent creditors, and persons who may otherwise be interested in the will or estate, or both of JUVENTINO MARTINEZ SAUCEDO :
A PETITION FOR PROBATE has been filed by MARIA GUADALUPE CHAIDEZ in the Superior Court of California, County of SAN BERNARDINO.
THE PETITION FOR PROBATE requests that MARIA GUADALUPE CHAIDEZ be appointed as personal representatives to administer the estate of the decedent.
THE PETITION requests the decedent’s wills and codicils, if any, be admitted to probate. The will and any codicils are available for examination in the file kept by the court.
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-35 at 9:00 a.m. on OCTOBER 4, 2021 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.
Attorneys for the Petitioners: MICHAEL C. MADDUX, ESQ.
1894 COMMERCENTER WEST, SUITE 108
SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92408
Telephone No: (909) 890-2350
Fax No: (909) 890-0106
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel on 9/17 9/24 & 10/01, 2021.

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE FOR CHANGE OF NAME
CIV SB 2123259
TO ALL INTERESTED PERSONS:
Petitioner BRUCE THOMAS GILSTRAP  filed with this court for a decree changing names as follows:
BRUCE THOMAS GILSTRAP to BRUCE THOMAS BLACK
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: October 15, 2021
Time: 9:00 a.m.
Department: S16
The address of the court is Superior Court of California, County of San Bernardino, 247 West Third Street, San Bernardino, CA 92415
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 3, 2021
Lynn M. Poncin
Judge of the Superior Court.
The attorney for Bruce Thomas Gilstrap is:
Cory Briggs
Briggs Law Corporation
99 East C Street, Suite 111
Upland, CA 91786
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel September 17, 24, and October 1 & 8, 2021
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME
STATEMENT FILE NO-20210008140
The following person(s) is(are) doing business as: Motel 6 Barstow Lenwood, 2551 Commerce Parkway, Barstow, CA 92311, Mailing Address: 3237 Vista Pointe, Riverside, CA 92503, Lenwood Lodging LLC, 3237 Vista Pointe, Riverside, CA 92503
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/ Mahendra Desai
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 08/06/21
I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office.
Began Transacting Business: 07/20/2021
County Clerk, s/ I7122
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 09/03, 09/10, 09/17 & 09/24, 2021
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME
STATEMENT FILE NO-20210008935
The following person(s) is(are) doing business as: Certified Selections, 951 Feather Hollow Court, Chino Hills, CA 91709, Z&S Enterprises Inc, 951 Feather Hollow Court, Chino Hills, CA 91709
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/ Siddique Rahman
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 08/27/21
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/ 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 09/17/21, 09/24/21, 10/01/21, 10/08/21
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME
STATEMENT FILE NO-20210008897
The following person(s) is(are) doing business as: SG Metal Works LLC, 522 W. 1ST Street., Suit F, Rialto, CA 92376, Mailing Address: 8034 Alder Ave, Fontana, CA 92336, SG Metal Works LLC, 8034 Alder Ave, Fontana, CA 92336
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/ Angelica Arellano
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 08/26/21
I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office.
Began Transacting Business: 02/26/21
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).
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel on 09/17/21, 09/24/21, 10/01/21, 10/08/21

FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME
STATEMENT FILE NO-20210009057
The following person(s) is(are) doing business as: XSA Investigative Services, 1535 N Third Ave, Upland, CA 91786, Mailing Address: 154 W. Foothill Blvd, STE A355, Upland, CA 91786, Kurt Donham, 1535 N Third Ave, Upland, CA 91786
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/ Kurt Donham
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 09/01/21
I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office.
Began Transacting Business: 08/30/21
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).
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel on 09/17/21, 09/24/21, 10/01/21, 10/08/21
NOTICE OF PETITION TO ADMINISTER ESTATE OF: BERNARD ANTHONY SIOW
CASE NO. PROSB2100583
To all heirs, beneficiaries, creditors, contingent creditors, and persons who may otherwise be interested in the will or estate, or both of BERNARD ANTHONY SIOW:
A Petition for Probate has been filed by STEPHANIE L. SIOW in the Superior Court of California, County of SAN BERNARDINO,
THE PETITION FOR PROBATE requests that STEPHANIE L. SIOW be appointed as personal representative to administer the estate of the decedent.
THE PETITION requests the decedent’s wills and codicils, if any, be admitted to probate. The will and any codicils are available for examination in the file kept by the court.
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 OCTOBER 12, 2021 2021 at 9:00 a.m. in Dept. No. S35 at Superior Court of California, County of San Bernardino, 247 West Third Street, San Bernardino, CA 92415, San Bernardino District.
SEPTEMBER 3, 2021
Kimberly Tilley, Deputy
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: September 3, 2021
Attorney for Stephanie M. Brown
R. SAM PRICE SBN 208603
PRICE LAW FIRM, APC
300 E STATE STREET SUITE 620
REDLANDS, CA 92373
(909) 328 7000
sam@pricelawfirm.com
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel September 24, October 1 & October 8, 2021.

T.S. No. 19-20763-SP-CA Title No. 191072098-CA-VOI A.P.N. 1061-201-33-0-000 NOTICE OF TRUSTEE’S SALE. YOU ARE IN DEFAULT UNDER A DEED OF TRUST DATED 04/04/2005. UNLESS YOU TAKE ACTION TO PROTECT YOUR PROPERTY, IT MAY BE SOLD AT A PUBLIC SALE. IF YOU NEED AN EXPLANATION OF THE NATURE OF THE PROCEEDING AGAINST YOU, YOU SHOULD CONTACT A LAWYER. A public auction sale to the highest bidder for cash, (cashier’s check(s) must be made payable to National Default Servicing Corporation), drawn on a state or national bank, a check drawn by a state or federal credit union, or a check drawn by a state or federal savings and loan association, savings association, or savings bank specified in Section 5102 of the Financial Code and authorized to do business in this state; will be held by the duly appointed trustee as shown below, of all right, title, and interest conveyed to and now held by the trustee in the hereinafter described property under and pursuant to a Deed of Trust described below. The sale will be made in an “as is” condition, but without covenant or warranty, expressed or implied, regarding title, possession, or encumbrances, to pay the remaining principal sum of the note(s) secured by the Deed of Trust, with interest and late charges thereon, as provided in the note(s), advances, under the terms of the Deed of Trust, interest thereon, fees, charges and expenses of the Trustee for the total amount (at the time of the initial publication of the Notice of Sale) reasonably estimated to be set forth below. The amount may be greater on the day of sale. Trustor: Monica C Banacky, a widow Duly Appointed Trustee: National Default Servicing Corporation Recorded 04/14/2005 as Instrument No. 2005-0260110 (or Book, Page) of the Official Records of San Bernardino County, CA. Date of Sale: 10/28/2021 at 12:00 PM Place of Sale: At the North Arrowhead Avenue entrance to the County Courthouse, 351 North Arrowhead Avenue, San Bernardino, CA 92401 Estimated amount of unpaid balance and other charges: $601,414.96 Street Address or other common designation of real property: 5070 Via Serena Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91701 A.P.N.: 1061-201-33-0-000 The undersigned Trustee disclaims any liability for any incorrectness of the street address or other common designation, if any, shown above. If no street address or other common designation is shown, directions to the location of the property may be obtained by sending a written request to the beneficiary within 10 days of the date of first publication of this Notice of Sale. If the Trustee is unable to convey title for any reason, the successful bidder’s sole and exclusive remedy shall be the return of monies paid to the Trustee, and the successful bidder shall have no further recourse. The requirements of California Civil Code Section 2923.5(b)/2923.55(c) were fulfilled when the Notice of Default was recorded. NOTICE TO POTENTIAL BIDDERS: If you are considering bidding on this property lien, you should understand that there are risks involved in bidding at a trustee auction. You will be bidding on a lien, not on the property itself. Placing the highest bid at a trustee auction does not automatically entitle you to free and clear ownership of the property. You should also be aware that the lien being auctioned off may be a junior lien. If you are the highest bidder at the auction, you are or may be responsible for paying off all liens senior to the lien being auctioned off, before you can receive clear title to the property. You are encouraged to investigate the existence, priority, and size of outstanding liens that may exist on this property by contacting the county recorder’s office or a title insurance company, either of which may charge you a fee for this information. If you consult either of these resources, you should be aware that the same lender may hold more than one mortgage or deed of trust on the property. NOTICE TO PROPERTY OWNER: The sale date shown on this notice of sale may be postponed one or more times by the mortgagee, beneficiary, trustee, or a court, pursuant to Section 2924g of the California Civil Code. The law requires that information about trustee sale postponements be made available to you and to the public, as a courtesy to those not present at the sale. If you wish to learn whether your sale date has been postponed, and, if applicable, the rescheduled time and date for the sale of this property, you may call or visit this Internet Web site www.ndscorp.com/sales, using the file number assigned to this case 19-20763-SP-CA. Information about postponements that are very short in duration or that occur close in time to the scheduled sale may not immediately be reflected in the telephone information or on the Internet Web site. The best way to verify postponement information is to attend the scheduled sale. Date: 09/16/2021 National Default Servicing Corporation c/o Tiffany & Bosco, P.A., its agent, 1455 Frazee Road, Suite 820 San Diego, CA 92108 Toll Free Phone: 888-264-4010 Sales Line 855-219-8501; Sales Website: www.ndscorp.com By: Rachael Hamilton, Trustee Sales Representative 09/24/2021, 10/01/2021, 10/08/2021 CPP351474
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE FOR CHANGE OF NAME CASE
NUMBER CIVSB2123514
TO  ALL INTERESTED PERSONS: Petitioner:  Ashley Williams; Dewayne Cannon filed with this court for a decree changing names as follows:
Elijah harlem Williams to Dewayne Kevin Cannon Jr.
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: 11/8/2021
Time: 9:00 AM
Department: S16
The address of the court is Superior Court of California,County of San Bernardino, 247 West Third Street, San Bernardino, CA 92415
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: 9/8/2021
Lynn M. Poncin
Judge of the Superior Court.
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel on 9/24/2021, 10/1/2021, 10/8/2021, 10/15/2021
SUMMONS – (CITACION JUDICIAL)
CASE NUMBER (NUMERO DEL CASO) CVMV2000661
NOTICE TO JASLAYA EBONY WALKER; JESSICA WALKER; and Does 1 to 10
YOU ARE BEING SUED BY PLAINTIFF:
(LO ESTA DEMANDANDO EL DEMANDANTE):
DANIEL KINCAID
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):
RIVERSIDE SUPERIOR COURT
13800 HEACOCK ST., STE D201, MORENO VALLEY, CA 92553
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):
WILLIAM C. KENNEDY, ESQ., SBN: 076992 LAW OFFICE OF KENNEDY & ASSOCIATES 3576 ARLINGTON AVENUE, SUITE 304
RIVERSIDE, CA 92506
Telephone: 951-784-8920
DATE (Fecha): 12/3/2020
Clerk (Secretario), by V. Reyes
Published in the The San Bernardino County Sentinel on: 9/24/2021, 10/1/2021, 10/8/2021, 10/15/2021

FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME
STATEMENT FILE NO-20210009661
The following person(s) is(are) doing business as: ETE Solar, 1155 S. Milliken Ave, Suite E, Ontario, CA 91761, Earthtech Enterprise Inc, 3400 Cottage Way, Ste G2 3450, Sacramento, CA 95825
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/ Vanessa Pan
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 09/23/21
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).
09/24/21, 10/01/21, 10/08/21, 10/15/21

FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME
STATEMENT FILE NO-20210009528
The following person(s) is(are) doing business as: ANOKI, 12824 Coriander Ct, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739, Natively Inc, 12824 Coriander Ct, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739
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/ Dana Green
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on:09/20/21
I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office.
Began Transacting Business: 08/30/21
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).
09/24/21, 10/01/21, 10/08/21, 10/15/21

FBN 20210009751
The following person is doing business as: BLUE SKY MASSAGE 1964 W. NINTH ST. SUITE C UPLAND, CA 91786: MING LI 1962 CANOPY LANE LA VERNE, CA 91750
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/ MING LI
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 09/241/2021
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 09/24/2021, 10/01/2021, 10/08/2021, 10/15/2021
APN: 0225-391-01-0-000 T.S. No.: 20-60065-ca Property Address: 6116 ROBERTS PL, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91739 NOTICE OF TRUSTEE’S SALE YOU ARE IN DEFAULT UNDER A DEED OF TRUST DATED 2/22/2007. UNLESS
YOU TAKE ACTION TO PROTECT YOUR PROPERTY, IT MAY BE SOLD AT A PUBLIC SALE. IF YOU NEED AN EXPLANATION OF THE NATURE OF THE PROCEEDING AGAINST YOU, YOU SHOULD CONTACT A LAWYER. A public auction sale to the highest bidder for cash, cashier’s check drawn on a state or national bank, check drawn by a state or federal credit union, or a check drawn by a state or federal savings and loan association, or savings association, or savings bank specified in Section 5102 of the Financial Code and authorized to do business in this state will be held by the duly appointed trustee as shown below, of all right, title, and interest conveyed to and now held by the trustee in the hereinafter described property under and pursuant to a Deed of Trust described below. The sale will be made, but without covenant or warranty, expressed or implied, regarding title, possession, or encumbrances, to pay the remaining principal sum of the note(s) secured by the Deed of Trust, with interest and late charges thereon, as provided in the note(s), advances, under the terms of the Deed of Trust, interest thereon, fees, charges and expenses of the Trustee for the total amount (at the time of the initial publication of the Notice of Sale) reasonably estimated to be set forth below. The amount may be greater on the day of sale.

Trustor: TRACIE GREATHOUSE Duly Appointed Trustee: DIRECT DEFAULT SERVICES, LLC Recorded 2/23/2007 as Instrument No. 2007-0117710 in book , page of Official Records in the office of the Recorder of San Bernardino County, California, Date of Sale: 10/25/2021 at 1:00 PM Place of Sale: Near the front steps leading up to the City of Chino Civic Center, 13220 Central Avenue, Chino, CA 91710 Amount of unpaid balance and other charges: $114,929.09 Street Address or other common designation of real property: 6116 ROBERTS PL RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91739 A.P.N.: 0225-391-01-0-000 The undersigned Trustee disclaims any liability for any incorrectness of the street address or other common designation, if any, shown above. If no street address or other common designation is shown, directions to the location of the property may be obtained by sending a written request to the beneficiary within 10 days of the date of first publication of this Notice of Sale.
NOTICE TO POTENTIAL BIDDERS: If you are considering bidding on this property lien, you should understand that there are risks involved in bidding at a trustee auction. You will be bidding on a lien, not on the property itself. Placing the highest bid at a trustee auction does not automatically entitle you to free and clear ownership of the property. You should also be aware that the lien being auctioned off may be a junior lien. If you are the highest bidder at the auction, you are or may be responsible for paying off all liens senior to the lien being auctioned off, before you can receive clear title to the property. You are encouraged to investigate the existence, priority, and size of outstanding liens that may exist on this property by contacting the county recorder’s office or a title insurance company, either of which may charge you a fee for this information. If you consult either of these resources, you should be aware that the same lender may hold more than one mortgage or deed of trust on the property. NOTICE TO PROPERTY OWNER: The sale date shown on this notice of sale may be postponed one or more times by the mortgagee, beneficiary, trustee, or a court, pursuant to Section 2924g of the California Civil Code. The law requires that information about trustee sale postponements be made available to you and to the public, as a courtesy to those not present at the sale. If you wish to learn whether your sale date has been postponed, and, if applicable, the rescheduled time and date for the sale of this property, you may call (714) 986-9342 or visit this Internet Website www.superiordefault.com, using the file number assigned to this case 20-60065-CA. Information about postponements that are very short in duration or that occur close in time to the scheduled sale may not immediately be reflected in the telephone information or on the Internet Web site. The best way to verify postponement information is to attend the scheduled sale. For sales conducted after January 1, 2021: NOTICE TO TENANT: You may have a right to purchase this property after the trustee auction pursuant to Section 2924m of the California Civil Code. If you are an “eligible tenant buyer,” you can purchase the property if you match the last and highest bid placed at the trustee auction. If you are an “eligible bidder,” you may be able to purchase the property if you exceed the last and highest bid placed at the trustee auction. There are three steps to exercising this right of purchase. First, 48 hours after the date of the trustee sale, you can call (714) 986-9342, or visit this internet website www.superiordefault.com, using the file number assigned to this case 20-60065-CA to find the date on which the trustee’s sale was held, the amount of the last and highest bid, and the address of the trustee. Second, you must send a written notice of intent to place a bid so that the trustee receives it no more than 15 days after the trustee’s sale. Third, you must submit a bid so that the trustee receives it no more than 45 days after the trustee’s sale. If you think you may qualify as an “eligible tenant buyer” or “eligible bidder,” you should consider contacting an attorney or appropriate real estate professional immediately for advice regarding this potential right to purchase. Date: 9/13/2021 Trustee Sales Information: Sale Line: (714) 986-9342 www.superiordefault.com by: Gisela Clark, Authorized Signatory for Trustee Direct Default Services 3670 N Rancho Drive, Suite 101 Las Vegas, NV 89130 TS# 20-60065-ca SDI-21894) Published: 10/01/21, 10/08/21, 10/15/21
OTICE OF PETITION TO ADMINISTER ESTATE OF:
AGNOLIA DAVIS
Case NO. PROSB2100347
To all heirs, beneficiaries, creditors, contingent creditors, and persons who may otherwise be interested in the will or estate, or both of AGNOLIA DAVIS
A PETITION FOR PROBATE has been filed by WHITNEY DAVIS in the Superior Court of California, County of San Bernardino.
THE PETITION FOR PROBATE requests that WHITNEY DAVIS 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. S37 at 9:00 a.m. on October 28, 2021 at Superior Court of California, County of San Bernardino, 247 West 3rd St, San Bernardino, CA 92415-0212, Branch Name: San Bernardino Justice Center
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 Petitioner:
THOMAS M. ALEXANDER, JR.
THOMAS ALEXANDER LAW OFFICES
226 E. SIXTH STREET,
BEAUMONT, CA 92223
Telephone No: (310) 860-7678
Published in the SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL on:
10/01/21, 10/08/21, 10/15/21

NOTICE OF PETITION TO ADMINISTER ESTATE OF: BERNARD ANTHONY SIOW SR.
CASE NO. PROSB2100583
To all heirs, beneficiaries, creditors, contingent creditors, and persons who may otherwise be interested in the will or estate, or both of BERNARD ANTHONY SIOW SR.:
A PETITION FOR PROBATE has been filed by TAYLOR FRANCES SIOW in the Superior Court of California, County of SAN BERNARDINO.
THE PETITION FOR PROBATE requests that TAYLOR FRANCES SIOW be appointed as personal representatives to administer the estate of the decedent.
THE PETITION requests the decedent’s wills and codicils, if any, be admitted to probate. The will and any codicils are available for examination in the file kept by the court.
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-35 at 9:00 a.m. on NOVEMBER 22, 2021 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: MICHAEL C. MADDUX, ESQ.
1894 COMMERCENTER WEST, SUITE 108
SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92408
Telephone No: (909) 890-2350
Fax No: (909) 890-0106
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel on 10/01, 10/08 & 10/15, 2021.
NOTICE OF PETITION TO ADMINISTER ESTATE OF: ANASTACIA BARRIOS GONZALES
CASE NO. PROSB2100675
To all heirs, beneficiaries, creditors, contingent creditors, and persons who may otherwise be interested in the will or estate, or both of ANASTACIA BARRIOS GONZALES:
A PETITION FOR PROBATE has been filed by PHILLIP GONZALES in the Superior Court of California, County of SAN BERNARDINO.
THE PETITION FOR PROBATE requests that PHILLIP GONZALES be appointed as personal representatives 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 OCTOBER 26, 2021 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: MICHAEL C. MADDUX, ESQ.
1894 COMMERCENTER WEST, SUITE 108
SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92408
Telephone No: (909) 890-2350
Fax No: (909) 890-0106
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel on 10/01, 10/08 & 10/15, 2021.

NOTICE OF PETITION TO ADMINISTER ESTATE OF: EVAMARIE D. SUMNER
CASE NO. PROSB2100635
To all heirs, beneficiaries, creditors, contingent creditors, and persons who may otherwise be interested in the will or estate, or both of EVAMARIE D. SUMNER:
A PETITION FOR PROBATE has been filed by AUBREY MINA SUMNER in the Superior Court of California, County of SAN BERNARDINO.
THE PETITION FOR PROBATE requests that AUBREY MINA SUMNER be appointed as personal representatives 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 OCTOBER 20, 2021 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: MICHAEL C. MADDUX, ESQ.
1894 COMMERCENTER WEST, SUITE 108
SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92408
Telephone No: (909) 890-2350
Fax No: (909) 890-0106
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel on 10/01, 10/08 & 10/15, 2021.

NOTICE OF PETITION TO ADMINISTER ESTATE OF: MARY LOU BARAJAS
CASE NO. PROSB2100554
To all heirs, beneficiaries, creditors, contingent creditors, and persons who may otherwise be interested in the will or estate, or both of MARY LOU BARAJAS :
A PETITION FOR PROBATE has been filed by LISA MARIE ECTOR in the Superior Court of California, County of SAN BERNARDINO.
THE PETITION FOR PROBATE requests that LISA MARIE ECTOR be appointed as personal representatives 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 1, 2021 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: MICHAEL C. MADDUX, ESQ.
1894 COMMERCENTER WEST, SUITE 108
SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92408
Telephone No: (909) 890-2350
Fax No: (909) 890-0106
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel on 10/01, 10/08 & 10/15, 2021.

NOTICE OF PETITION TO ADMINISTER ESTATE OF: MARY LOU BARAJAS
CASE NO. PROSB2100554
To all heirs, beneficiaries, creditors, contingent creditors, and persons who may otherwise be interested in the will or estate, or both of MARY LOU BARAJAS:
A PETITION FOR PROBATE has been filed by LISA MARIE ECTOR in the Superior Court of California, County of SAN BERNARDINO.
THE PETITION FOR PROBATE requests that LISA MARIE ECTOR be appointed as personal representatives 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 1, 2021 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: MICHAEL C. MADDUX, ESQ.
1894 COMMERCENTER WEST, SUITE 108
SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92408
Telephone No: (909) 890-2350
Fax No: (909) 890-0106
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel on 10/01, 10/08 & 10/15, 2021.

NOTICE OF PETITION TO ADMINISTER ESTATE OF: HEINZ LINSER
CASE NO. PROSB2100676
To all heirs, beneficiaries, creditors, contingent creditors, and persons who may otherwise be interested in the will or estate, or both of HEINZ LINSER:
A PETITION FOR PROBATE has been filed by CARA RENEE MORRIS in the Superior Court of California, County of SAN BERNARDINO.
THE PETITION FOR PROBATE requests that CARA RENEE MORRIS be appointed as personal representatives 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 OCTOBER 26, 2021 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: MICHAEL C. MADDUX, ESQ.
1894 COMMERCENTER WEST, SUITE 108
SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92408
Telephone No: (909) 890-2350
Fax No: (909) 890-0106
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel on 10/01, 10/08 & 10/15, 2021.

FBN 20210009543
The following person is doing business as: MC BODY CONTOURING 141 W FOOTHILL BLVD SUITE C UPLAND, CA 91786 MARMIA ENTERPRISES INC 15407 ROCKWELL AVENUE FONTANA, CA 92336
Mailing Address: 15407 ROCKWELL AVENUE FONTANA, CA 92336
The business is conducted by: A CORPORATION
State of Incorporation: CALIFORNIA C4785478SN
The registrant commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on: 9/03/2021
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/ MARICEL DELA CUESTA CALILAO
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 09/21/2021
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 D5511
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 10/01, 10/08, 10/15 & 10/22, 2021.

FBN 20210009748
The following person is doing business as: CHOSEN COFFEE COMPANY 1173 S CACTUS AVE #37 RIALTO, CA 92376: JULIAN J ESTRADA 1173 S CACTUS AVE #37 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: 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/ JULIAN J ESTRADA
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 09/03/2021
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 I1327
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 10/01, 10/08, 10/15 & 10/22, 2021.

FBN 20210009264
The following person is doing business as: RADICAL 66 8401 COTTONWOOD AVE. APT #209 FONTANA, CA 92335: RADRAGE L.L.C. 8401 COTTONWOOD AVE. APT #209 FONTANA, CA 92335
The business is conducted by: A LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY
Registered with the State of California: 202122910336
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/ RASHAD HERD
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 09/03/2021
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 D5511
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 10/01, 10/08, 10/15 & 10/22, 2021.
FBN 20210009567
The following person is doing business as: COLD STONE VICTORIA GARDENS 12451 NORTH MAINSTREET RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91739: ALL PROFIT ENTERPRISES LLC 12451 NORTH MAINSTREET RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91739
Mailing Address: 2783 ATHENS RIDGE DR HENDERSON, NEVADA 89052
The business is conducted by: A LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY
Registered with the State of California: 201023810103
The registrant commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on: JANUARY 1, 2015
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/ WESLEY KIM
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 09/21/2021
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 D5511
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 10/01, 10/08, 10/15 & 10/22, 2021.
FBN 20210008816
The following person is doing business as: BEE ANGEL CLEANING SERVICE 2516 W 3RD AVE SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92407 ( PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS SAN BERNARDINO); FABIOLA DELGADO 2516 W 3RD AVE SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92407
The business is conducted by: AN INDIVIDUAL
The registrant commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on: AUG 16, 2021
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/ FABIOLA DELGADO, OWNER
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 08/25/2021
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 09/10/2021, 09/17/2021, 09/24/2021, 10/01/2021 CNBB35202101MT

FBN 20210008352
The following person is doing business as: BRYAN’S AUTOMOTIVE REPAIR 481 E LAUREL ST SUITE E COLTON, CA 92324 ( PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS SAN BERNARDINO); BRYAN GRANADOS RAZO 481 E LAUREL ST SUITE E 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/ BRYAN GRANADOS RAZO, OWNER
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 08/12/2021
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 09/10/2021, 09/17/2021, 09/24/2021, 10/01/2021 CNBB35202102MT

FBN 20210008449
The following person is doing business as: MOSHA BEAUTY BAR 8221 ILEX ST.#59 FONTANA, CA 92335 ( PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS SAN BERNARDINO); HEIDY S PONCE-FLORES 8221 ILEX ST.#59 FONTANA, CA 92335
The business is conducted by: AN INDIVIDUAL
The registrant commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on: SEP 01, 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/ HEIDY S. PONCE-FLORES, OWNER
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 08/13/2021
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 09/10/2021, 09/17/2021, 09/24/2021, 10/01/2021 CNBB35202103IR

FBN 20210008446
The following person is doing business as: AMH CONSTRUCTION 8221 ILEX ST. #59 FONTANA, CA 92335 ( PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS SAN BERNARDINO); ALEX MONREAL HOFFMAN 8221 ILEX ST. #59 FONTANA, CA 92335
The business is conducted by: AN INDIVIDUAL
The registrant commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on: JAN 22, 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/ ALEX MONREAL HOFFMAN, OWNER
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 08/13/2021
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 09/10/2021, 09/17/2021, 09/24/2021, 10/01/2021 CNBB35202104IR

FBN 20210008444
The following person is doing business as: RANCHO VERDE MARKET 2018 N. RIVERSIDE AVE. RIALTO, CA 92377 ( PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS SAN BERNARDINO);[ MAILING ADDRESS 3796 WATKINS DR. RIVERSIDE, CA 92507]; DEEB MANSOUR MARKET INC 18957 VAN BUREN BLVD STE C RIVERSIDE, CA 92508
The business is conducted by: A CORPORATION
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/ GHASSAN MANSOUR, CFO
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 08/13/2021
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 09/10/2021, 09/17/2021, 09/24/2021, 10/01/2021 CNBB35202105IR

FBN 20210008454
The following person is doing business as: NICK’S SMOG CHECK 291 E. HIGHLAND AVE. SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92404 ( PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS SAN BERNARDINO); JOSE O ESCUTIA GOMEZ 291 E. HIGHLAND AVE. SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92404
The business is conducted by: AN INDIVIDUAL
The registrant commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on: JUN 01, 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/ JOSE O. ESCUTIA GOMEZ, OWNER
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 08/13/2021
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 09/10/2021, 09/17/2021, 09/24/2021, 10/01/2021 CNBB35202106IR

FBN 20210008979
The following person is doing business as: JMG VOCATIONAL SERVICES 1020 EAST SAINT ANDREWS STREET ONTARIO, CA 91761 ( PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS SAN BERNARDINO); YORKAVITE, INC 1020 EAST SAINT ANDREWS STREET ONTARIO, CA 91761
The business is conducted by: A CORPORATION
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/ JESSE MICHAEL GARIBAY, PRESIDENT
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 08/30/2021
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 09/10/2021, 09/17/2021, 09/24/2021, 10/01/20211 CNBB35202107MC

FBN 20210008354
The following person is doing business as: TAZ.GURU 2315 STATE LN BIG BEAR CITY, CA 92314 ( PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS SAN BERNARDINO);[ MAILING ADDRESS P.O BOX 416 BIG BEAR CITY, CA 92314]; TAYLA A SHEPARD 2315 STATE LN BIG BEAR CITY, CA 92314; KYLER J BULLOCK 2315 STATE LN BIG BEAR CITY, CA 92314
The business is conducted by: A GENERAL PARTNERSHIP
The registrant commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on: JUN 11, 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/ TAYLA A. SHEPARD, GENERAL PARTNER
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 08/12/2021
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 09/10/2021, 09/17/2021, 09/24/2021, 10/01/2021 CNBB35202108IR

FBN 20210008343
The following person is doing business as: JONATHAN & ANA AND ASSOC 10681 E FOOTHLL BLVD #140 RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91730 (PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS SAN BERNARDINO); J & A HOLDINGS CO. 2175 FOOTHILL BLVD STE B LA VERNE, CA 91750
The business is conducted by: A CORPORATION
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/ BRYAN J. BECERRA-ALBUREZ, PRESIDENT
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 08/12/2021
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 09/10/2021, 09/17/2021, 09/24/2021, 10/01/2021 CNBB35202109MT

FBN 20210008681
The following person is doing business as: MALDONADO MAINTENANCE 805 E WILLOW ST ONTARIO, CA 91764 ( PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS SAN BERNARDINO); JOSE S MALDONADO RODRIGUEZ 805 E WILLOW ST ONTARIO, CA 91764
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/ JOSE S. MALDONADO RDRIGUEZ, OWNER
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 08/20/2021
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 09/10/2021, 09/17/2021, 09/24/2021, 10/01/2021 CNBB35202110MT

FBN 20210008694
The following person is doing business as: PEAK ENTERPRISES E.V. 673 COOLEY DR SUITE #110 COLTON, CA 92324 ( PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS SAN BERNARDINO); KURT R LANTZ 673 COOLEY DR SUITE #110 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/ KURT R. LANTZ, OWNER
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 08/20/2021
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 09/10/2021, 09/17/2021, 09/24/2021, 10/01/2021 CNBB35202111MT

FBN 20210008851
The following person is doing business as: HIGH DESSERT WOOD WORKS 1146 E. CONGRESS ST. SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92408 ( PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS SAN BERNARDINO); BELEN NAVARRO 1146 E. CONGRESS ST. SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92408
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/ BELEN NAVARRO, OWNER
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 08/25/2021
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 09/10/2021, 09/17/2021, 09/24/2021, 10/01/2021 CNBB35202101IR

FBN 20210009101
The following person is doing business as: MARISCOS LUMBRE 10269 STAFFORD ST RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91701 ( PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS SAN BERNARDINO);[ MAILING ADDRESS 311 W CIVIC CENTER DR STE B SANTA ANA, CA 92701]; CHRISTIAN A MARQUEZ 10269 STAFFORD ST RANCHO CUCAMONNGA, CA 91701; SRTURO JR O MARQUEZ 10269 STAFFORD ST RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91701; REBECCA MARQUEZ 10269 STAFFORD ST RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91701
The business is conducted by: A GENERAL PARTNERSHIP
The registrant commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on: AUG 25, 2021
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/ CHRISTIAN A MARQUEZ, PARTNER
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 09/02/2021
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 09/10/2021, 09/17/2021, 09/24/2021, 10/01/2021 CNBB35202102IR

FBN 20210009073
The following person is doing business as: HANDMADE PAPER ART 10155 CLOVERDR OAK HILLS, CALIF 92344 ( PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS SAN BERNARDINO);[ MAILING ADDRESS 311 W CIVIC CENTER DR STE B SANTA ANA, CALIF 92701]; ERNESTO AVINA 10155 CLOVER DR OAK HILLS, CA 92344
The business is conducted by: AN INDIVIDUAL
The registrant commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on: AUG 25, 2021
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/ ERNESTO AVINA, OWNER
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 09/01/2021
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 09/10/2021, 09/17/2021, 09/24/2021, 10/01/2021 CNBB35202103CV
FBN 20210008851
The following person is doing business as: HIGH DESERT WOOD WORKS 1146 E. CONGRESS ST. SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92408 ( PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS SAN BERNARDINO); BELEN NAVARRO 1146 E. CONGRESS ST. SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92408
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/ BELEN NAVARRO, OWNER
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 08/25/2021
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 09/17/2021, 09/24/2021, 10/01/2021, 10/08/2021 CNBB36202101IR

FBN 20210008667
The following person is doing business as: YUNNI CLEANING SERVICES 494 S. MACY ST. SPC 51 SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92410 ( PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS SAN BERNARDINO); EUNICE FLORES 494 S. MACY ST. SPC 51 SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92410
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/ EUNICE FLORES, OWNER
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 08/19/2021
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 09/17/2021, 09/24/2021, 10/01/2021, 10/08/2021 CNBB36202102IR

FBN 20210009025
The following person is doing business as: VALLEY WHOLESALE 17921 VALLEY BLVD. STE D BLOOMINGTON, CA 92316 ( PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS SAN BERNARDINO); SAMUEL CAVE 17921 VALLEY BLVD. STE D BLOOMINGTON, CA 92316
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/ SAMUEL CAVE, OWNER
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 08/31/2021
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 09/17/2021, 09/24/2021, 10/01/2021, 10/08/2021 CNBB36202103IR

FBN 20210009024
The following person is doing business as: QIC REG 17921 VALLEY BLVD. STE D BLOOMINGTO, CA 92316 ( PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS SAN BERNARDINO); SAMUEL CAVE 17921 VALLEY BLVD. STE D BLOOMINGTON, CA 92316
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/ SAMUEL CAVE, OWNER
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 08/31/2021
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 09/17/2021, 09/24/2021, 10/01/2021, 10/08/2021 CNBB36202104IR

FBN 20210009022
The following person is doing business as: ISLAS PROCESSING AND ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 8200 HAVEN AVE SUITE 210B RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91730 ( PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS SAN BERNARDINO); DULCE K DELGADO 8200 HAVEN AVE SUITE 210B RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91730
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/ BDULCE K DELGADO, OWNER
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 08/31/2021
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 09/17/2021, 09/24/2021, 10/01/2021, 10/08/2021 CNBB36202105MT

FBN 20210008914
The following person is doing business as: MK APPLIANCES 117 E. RIALTO AVE RIALTO, CA 92376 ( PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS SAN BERNARDINO); MARIO MARQUEZ VALDEZ 117 E RIALTO AVE 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: 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/ MARIO MARQUEZ VALDEZ, OWNER
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 08/26/2021
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 09/17/2021, 09/24/2021, 10/01/2021, 10/08/2021 CNBB36202106MT

FBN 20210008854
The following person is doing business as: INLAND CASH INVESTORS 1551 E MARSHALL BLVD UNIT B SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92404 ( PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS SAN BERNARDINO); PHILLIP R HERNANDEZ JR. 1551 E MARSHALL BLVD UNIT B SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92404; JOSEPH A HERNANDEZ 1551 E MARSHALL BVD UNIT B SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92404
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/ PHILLIP R. HERNANDEZ JR., GENERAL PARTNER
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 08/25/2021
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 09/17/2021, 09/24/2021, 10/01/2021, 10/08/2021 CNBB36202107MT

FBN 20210008696
The following person is doing business as: L & M TRUCKING 6111 N GEREMANDER AVE RIALTO, CA 92377 ( PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS SAN BERNARDINO); LEONCIO G MONDRAGON 6111 N GEREMANDER AVE RIALTO, CA 92377
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/ LEONCIO G. MONDRAGON, OWNER
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 08/20/2021
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 09/17/2021, 09/24/2021, 10/01/2021, 10/08/2021 CNBB36202108MT

FBN 20210008788
The following person is doing business as: AMERICAN VETERAN HOUSIN, INC 7696 ALTA VISTA HIGHLAND, CA 92346 ( PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS SAN BERNARDINO); AMERICAN VETERAN HOUSING INC. 7696 ALTA VISTA HIGHLAND, CA 92346
The business is conducted by: A CORPORATION
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/ ERIC WOOLRIDGE, PRESIDENT
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 08/24/2021
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 09/17/2021, 09/24/2021, 10/01/2021, 10/08/2021 CNBB36202109MT

FBN 20210008882
The following person is doing business as: SIERRA LAKE CLEANERS 16953 SIERRA LAKE KWY #109 FONTANA, CA 92336 ( PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS SAN BERNARDINO); THE TRABUCO, INC 15 HIDDEN CREEK LN LAGUNA HILLS, CA 92653
The business is conducted by: A CORPORATION
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/ JEAN H. CHNG, PRESIDENT
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 08/26/2021
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 09/17/2021, 09/24/2021, 10/01/2021, 10/08/2021 CNBB36202110MT

FBN 20210008998
The following person is doing business as: ASAP QUALITY COMMERCIAL CLEANING SERVICES 52808 LITTLE MOUNTAIN DRIVE SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92407( PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS SAN BERNARDINO); ANTONIO GREENWOOD 52808 LITTLE MOUNTAIN DRIVE SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92407
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/ ANTONIO GREENWOOD, OWNER
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 08/30/2021
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 09/17/2021, 09/24/2021, 10/01/2021, 10/08/2021 CNBB36202111MT

FBN 20210008588
The following person is doing business as: SUPREME LIGHTNING 1615 W HOLLY STREET RIALTO, CA 92376 ( PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS SAN BERNARDINO); RUBEN A VILLANUEVA 1615 W HOLLY STREET 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: 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/ RUBEN A. VILLANUEVA, OWNER
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 08/25/2021
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 09/17/2021, 09/24/2021, 10/01/2021, 10/08/2021 CNBB36202113MT

FBN 20210009029
The following person is doing business as: BETANCO CONSTRUCTION & REMODELING 9750 TULLOCK CT BLOOMINGTON, CA 92316( PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS SAN BERNARDINO); MARVIN C BETANCO PEREZ 9750 TULLOCK CT BLOOMINGTON, CA 92316; NANCY F GARCIA SOTO 9750 TULLOCK CT BLOOMINGTON, CA 92316
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/ MARVIN C. BETANCO PEREZ, HUSBAND
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 08/31/2021
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 09/17/2021, 09/24/2021, 10/01/2021, 10/08/2021 CNBB36202112MT

FBN 20210009292
The following person is doing business as: GRUPO PANTERA AUTO INSURANCE & SERVICES 2816 W. RIALTO AVE RIALTO, CA 92376( PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS SAN BERNARDINO); PANAMERICA INCOME TAX AND INSURANCE SERVICES II 1175 N UNRUH AVE LA PUENTE, CA 91744
The business is conducted by: A CORPORATION
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/ JORGE ANTONIO CAMPOS, CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 09/10/2021
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 09/17/2021, 09/24/2021, 10/01/2021, 10/08/2021 CNBB36202113EM
FBN 20210008137
The following person is doing business as: MORA’S DEALS ON WHEELS 17921 VALLEY BLVD. SUITE C BLOOMINGTON, CA 92316 ( PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS SAN BERNARDINO); XOCHITL J MORA 17921 VALLEY BLVD. SUITE C BLOOMINGTON, CA 92316
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/ XOCHITL MORA, OWNER
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 08/06/2021
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 08/20/2021, 08/27/2021, 09/03/2021, 09/10/2021 CNBB30202101IR

FBN 20210008129
The following person is doing business as: MELCHOR’S GARAGE DOORS 325 E. 3RD ST. RIALTO, CA 92376 ( PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS SAN BERNARDINO); CHRISTIAN J MELCHOR 325 E. 3RD ST. 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: 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/ CHRISTIAN J. MELCHOR, OWNER
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 08/06/2021
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 08/20/2021, 08/27/2021, 09/03/2021, 09/10/2021 CNBB30202102IR

FBN 20210008122
The following person is doing business as: AVILEZ AUTO BODY 10078 CLAREMONT AVE. BLOOMINGTON, CA 92316 ( PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS SAN BERNARDINO);[ MAILING ADDRESS 10701 CEDAR AVE SP 206 BLOOMINGTON, CA 92316]; JEREMY W FIGLEY 10078 CLAREMONT AVE BLOOMINGTON, CA 92316
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/ JEREMY W. FIGLEY, OWNER
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 08/06/2021
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 08/20/2021, 08/27/2021, 09/03/2021, 09/10/2021 CNBB30202103IR

FBN 20210008139
The following person is doing business as: AGUILAR’S TRUCKING 16170 OWNE ST FONTANA, CA 92335 ( PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS SAN BERNARDINO); CESAR I AGUILAR 16170 OWNE ST FONTANA, CA 92335
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/ CESAR I AGUILAR, OWNER
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 08/06/2021
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 08/20/2021, 08/27/2021, 09/03/2021, 09/10/2021 CNBB30202104IR

FBN 20210008213
The following person is doing business as: RAMO’S TIRE SERVICES 1486 W. 11TH ST. #4 POMONA, CA 91766 ( PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS SAN BERNARDINO); JESUS R GAXIOLA 1486 W. 11TH ST. #4 POMONA, CA 91766
The business is conducted by: AN INDIVIDUAL
The registrant commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on: JUL 01, 2021
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/ JESUS R. GAXIOLA, OWNER
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 08/09/2021
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 08/20/2021, 08/27/2021, 09/03/2021, 09/10/2021 CNBB30202105IR

FBN 20210008189
The following person is doing business as: HERITAGE CUSTOM POOLS & DESIGN 8780 19TH ST. #278 ALTA LOMA, CA 91701 ( PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS SAN BERNARDINO); DREAMSCAPES ENTERPRIZES, INC. 8780 19TH ST. #278 ALTA LOMA, CA 91701
The business is conducted by: A CORPORATION
The registrant commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on: MAR 27, 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/ SAMUEL MILNE, CEO
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 08/09/2021
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 08/20/2021, 08/27/2021, 09/03/2021, 09/10/2021 CNBB30202106IR

FBN 20210007997
The following person is doing business as: ONE WAY CONSULTANTS 1014 N WATERMAN AVE UNIT D SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92410 ( PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS SAN BERNARDINO);[ MAILING ADDRESS 1883 W ROYAL HUNTE DR. SUITE 200A CEDAR CITY, CA 84720]; NEW CREATION, LLC 1883 W ROYAL HUNTE DR. SUITE 200A CEDAR CITY, CA 84720
The business is conducted by: A LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY
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/ ANTHONY MARTINEZ, MANAGING MEMBER
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 08/04/2021
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 08/20/2021, 08/27/2021, 09/03/2021, 09/10/2021 CNBB30202107MT

FBN 20210007643
The following person is doing business as: PARAMOUNT WINDOWS & DOORS 723 W MILL STREET SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92410 ( PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS SAN BERNARDINO); AKAL SAHI INC 1817 THOMAS CT MODESTO, CA 95355
The business is conducted by: A CORPORATION
The registrant commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on: JUL 15, 2021
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/ HARSIMRANJIT BOHGUNH, SECRETARY
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 07/27/2021
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 08/20/2021, 08/27/2021, 09/03/2021, 09/10/2021 CNBB30202108MT

FBN 20210007942
The following person is doing business as: GOLDEN AMERICA INVESTMENT CO 2287 LERONA AVE ROWLAND HEIGHTS, CA 91748 ( PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS SAN BERNARDINO); ESTEFANI C LIAOU 2287 LERONA AVE ROWLAND HEIGHTS, CA 91748
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/ ESTEFANI C. LIAOU, OWNER
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 08/03/2021
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 08/20/2021, 08/27/2021, 09/03/2021, 09/10/2021 CNBB30202109MT

FBN 20210008464
The following person is doing business as: GAREY TEST ONLY 2580 N GAREY AVE B POMONA, CA 91767 ( PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS SAN BERNARDINO); JUAN RAMON MARTINEZ 11448 BASYE ST EL MONTE, CA 91732
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/ JUAN RAMON MARTINEZ, OWNER
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 08/16/2021
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 08/20/2021, 08/27/2021, 09/03/2021, 09/10/2021 CNBB30202110CH
FBN 20210009434
The following person is doing business as: GERMAN’S AUTO REPAIR 544 W. 1ST ST. RIALTO, CA 92376;( PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS SAN BERNARDINO);[ MAILING ADDRESS 2075 W. RIALTO AVE. SPC 7 SAN BEERNARDINO, CA 92376]; SARA T RAMIREZ 2075 W. RIALTO AVE. SPC 7 SAN BERNARDINO, 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: 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/ SARA T. RAMIREZ, OWNER
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 09/16/2021
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 09/24/2021, 10/01/2021, 10/08/2021, 10/15/2021 CNBB37202112IR

FBN 20210008915
The following person is doing business as: A OMEGA BRAND 16331 CONSTUCTION CIRLE IRVINE, CA 92606;( PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS SAN BERNARDINO); A OMEGA TERMITE & CONSTRUCTION CORP. 8502 EAST CHAPMAN AVE SUITE 203 ORANGE, CA 92869
The business is conducted by: A CORPORATION
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/ VICTOR HERRERA, SECRETARY
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 08/26/2021
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 09/24/2021, 10/01/2021, 10/08/2021, 10/15/2021 CNBB37202111IR

FBN 20210009242
The following person is doing business as: CHINO CONCRETE PUMPING 14414 FROSTBURG AVE CHINO, CA 91710;( PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS SAN BERNARDINO);[ MAILING ADDRESS 1301 S. GIBBS ST. POMONA, CA 91766]; MIGUEL A RODRIGUEZ-IBANEZ 1301 S. GIBBS ST. POMONA, CA 91766
The business is conducted by: AN INDIVIDUAL.
The registrant commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on: JAN 26, 2021
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/ MIGUEL A. RODRIGUEZ-IBANEZ, OWNER
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 09/09/2021
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 09/24/2021, 10/01/2021, 10/08/2021, 10/15/2021 CNBB37202110IR

FBN 20210009358
The following person is doing business as: MAG INVESTMENTS SOLUTIONS 6713 HOMAN ST CHINO, CA 91710;( PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS SAN BERNARDINO);JAIME E MILLAN DEL SALTO 6713 HOMAN ST CHINO, CA 91710
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/ JAIME E. MILLAN SALTO, OWNER
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 09/14/2021
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 09/24/2021, 10/01/2021, 10/08/2021, 10/15/2021 CNBB37202109MT

FBN 20210009448
The following person is doing business as: SUNRISE PLUMBING 300 W OLIVE ST SUITE B COLTON, CA 92324;( PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS SAN BERNARDINO);ANDREW J BORCSA 300 W OLIVE ST SUITE B 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/ ANDREW J. BORCSA, OWNER
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 09/16/2021
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 09/24/2021, 10/01/2021, 10/08/2021, 10/15/2021 CNBB37202108MT

FBN 20210009185
The following person is doing business as: TIP TOP TREE CARE 11217 MARYVNE ST EL MONTE, CA 91733;( PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS SAN BERNARDINO);PEDRO SANDOVAL JR. 11217 MARYVINE ST EL MONTE, CA 91733
The business is conducted by: AN INDIVIDUAL.
The registrant commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on: JUN 04, 2021
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/ PEDRO SANDOVAL JR., OWNER
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 09/08/2021
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 09/24/2021, 10/01/2021, 10/08/2021, 10/15/2021 CNBB37202107IR

FBN 20210009494
The following person is doing business as: AA & A KINGS 1027 E. ACACIA STREET ONTARIO, CA 91761;( PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS SAN BERNARDINO)[ MAILING ADDRESS 1038 ALLEN AVE, APT. 3 GLENDALE, CA 91201];ALBERT VARDUMYAN 1027 E ACACIA ST ONTARIO, CA 91761
The business is conducted by: AN INDIVIDUAL.
The registrant commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on: JUL 29, 2021
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/ ALBERT VARDUMYAN., OWNER
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 09/17/2021
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 09/24/2021, 10/01/2021, 10/08/2021, 10/15/2021 CNBB37202106AC

FBN 20210009129
The following person is doing business as: GGG & SOA TRANSPORT. 925 S RIVERSIDE AVE APT. #5 RIALTO, CA 92376;( PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS SAN BERNARDINO);GERARDO G JR GALVEZ 925 S RIVERSIDE AVE APT #5 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: 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/ GERARDO G JR GALVEZ, OWNER
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 09/03/2021
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 09/24/2021, 10/01/2021, 10/08/2021, 10/15/2021 CNBB37202105IR

FBN 20210009329
The following person is doing business as: ALPHA RUNNERZ TRANSPORT. 1769 N VISTA AVE RIALTO, CA 92376;( PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS SAN BERNARDINO); EDWARD VALENZUELA 1769 N VISTA AVE 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: 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/ EDWARD VALENZUELA, OWNER
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 09/13/2021
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 09/24/2021, 10/01/2021, 10/08/2021, 10/15/2021 CNBB37202104IR

FBN 20210009343
The following person is doing business as: J & J FASHION. 516 W FLORA ST SANTA ANA, CA 91762;[ MAILING ADDRESS 311 W CIVIC CENTER DR STE B SANTA ANA, CA 92701];( PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS SAN BERNARDINO); CRISTAL LOPEZ 516 FLORA ST ONTARIO, CA 91762.
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/ CRISTAL LOPEZ, OWNER
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 09/13/2021
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 09/24/2021, 10/01/2021, 10/08/2021, 10/15/2021 CNBB37202103CV

FBN 20210009073
The following person is doing business as: HANDMADE PAPER ART. 10155 CLOVER DR OAK HILLS, CA 92344; [ MAILING ADDRESS 311 W CIVIC CENTER DR STE B SANTA ANA, CA 92701]; ( PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS SAN BERNARDINO); ERNESTO AVIÑA 10155 CLOVER DR OAK HILLS CALIFO, 92344.
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/ ERNESTO AVIÑA, OWNER
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 09/01/2021
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 09/24/2021, 10/01/2021, 10/08/2021, 10/15/2021 CNBB37202102CV

FBN 20210009101
The following person is doing business as: MARISCOS LUMBRE. 10269 STAFFORD ST RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91701;( PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS SAN BERNARDINO); CHRISTIAN A MARQUEZ 10269 STAFFORD ST RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91701; ARTURO JR O MARQUEZ 10269 STAFFORD ST RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91701; REBECCA MARQUEZ 10269 STAFFORD ST RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91701
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/ CHRISTIAN A MARQUEZ, PARTNER
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: SEPTEMBER 02, 2021
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 09/24/2021, 10/01/2021, 10/08/2021, 10/15/2021 CNBB37202101CV

By clicking on the blue portal below, you can download a PDF of the September 24 edition of the San Bernardino County Sentinel.

Sentinel 09-24-21

By Mark Gutglueck
The effort by Upland municipal officials to covertly issue $121 million in bonds and impose thereafter what would ultimately become a $3,560.56 tax on every man, woman and child in Upland to cover the cost of pensions for municipal employees was thwarted this week by the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association.
On July 21, the City of Upland quietly sued its 77,754 residents by means of what is in legal parlance referred to as a validation complaint, challenging them to come forward within 30 days of being served with notice of the lawsuit with reasons why the city should not issue $121 million in pension obligation bonds. On September 9, the city served that summons on its residents by means of a legal notice published in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin. Publication was repeated on September 16, again in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin and once more yesterday, September 23, also in a legal notice in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin. Those three appearances of the notice in three consecutive weeks met the specification in California law and under the order of the court, specifically that of Superior Court Judge Lynn Poncin, for Upland’s residents and all others with standing to be given adequate warning of the potential entry of a default judgment in the city’s favor by the court if no response was made. If it turned out that by 4 p.m. on October 9 no answer to the validation complaint was lodged with the court, the city in that event would then be at liberty to proceed with the issuance of the pension obligation bonds.
Other than the notices published in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin, the City of Upland and its officials, led by acting City Manager Steven Parker and advised by City Attorney Steve Deitsch and its bond issuance consultant Julio Morales, gave Upland residents no heads up with regard to the lawsuit. In all of its actions relating to the contemplated bond issuance, which included the hiring, on April 28 of this year, of Morales and the firm he works for, Urban Futures, as the city’s bond issuance consultant; the retaining, on May 10 of this year, of Deitsch’s law firm, Best Best & Krieger, to serve as the validation counsel and bond counsel; the retaining, on May 10 of this year, of the law firm of Straddling Yocca, Carson & Rauth to serve as the disclosure counsel for the bond issuance; and the hiring, on August 9 of this year, of J.P. Morgan Securities LLC as the managing underwriter and Stifel, Nicolaus & Company, Incorporated as the co-managing underwriter for the proposed pension obligation bond issuance, the city council acted stealthily. Rather than listing those hirings in the open as separate action items on the April 28, May 10 and August 9 city council agendas, they were presented on the consent calendars for each of those meetings.
Normally, in Upland and all cities elsewhere, the consent calendar is reserved for routine and noncontroversial actions that merit no discussion. The practice in Upland as it is in other cities is to not consider any of the items that are placed on the consent calendar individually but to vote on them collectively. In this way, it is very easy for the pubic to take no note of the items on the consent calendar. Accordingly, the public is very likely to miss the significance of any items that appear on the consent calendar and to have no understanding whatsoever or awareness of the substance of consent calendar items.
In this way, city officials minimized the degree to which Upland’s residents’ attention could be drawn to the pending bond issuance. When the city filed the validation complaint on July 21, it did so without any fanfare. Once the filing was made, city officials made a concerted effort to lull Upland’s citizenry into a state of complacency so that no answer to the validation action would be made.
Earlier in the year, there had been a discussion of the seriousness of the pension funding dilemma the city faces. That discussion included reference to the generous commitments made by past city councils going back more than three decades, such that at present the City of Upland has an accrued pension debt that is close to three times its annual budget.
The current outstanding debt the City of Upland has to the California Public Employees Retirement System to cover the cost of the pensions being paid to already retired former Upland City employees and the anticipated cost of paying present employees their pensions in the future is referred to, in municipal parlance, as Upland’s unfunded pension liability.
More than nine years ago, as of June 30, 2012, Upland’s unfunded pension liability had reached $88,994,066. It rose modestly but steadily for the seven years thereafter, jumping almost $11 million, reaching $99,976,917 as of June 30, 2019. Over the last two years, Upland’s pension debt escalation has been historically steep. During the six months after June 30, 2019 alone, the pension debt grew by more than it had in the previous seven years, hitting $112,039,675 by the midway point of fiscal year 2019-20 on December 31, 2019. As of June 30, 2020, it stood at $120,920,721. A document issued by the city in March 2021 indicated the city’s unfunded pension liability as of that month had reached $130,186,277.
As early as August of 2020, when the city council did not include two of its current members – First District Councilwoman Shannan Maust and Third District Councilman Carlos Garcia, both of whom were elected in November 2020 – and now-Mayor Bill Velto was a councilman running, successfully it would turn out, against former Mayor Debby Stone, the city had looked at issuing pension obligation bonds as a means of meeting the financial challenge the pension debt represents to the city and its taxpayers.
Advocates of issuing pension obligation bonds argued that by doing so – essentially borrowing money from bond buyers at a lower interest rate than the anticipated 7 percent yield the California Public Employees Retirement System expects from its investments – the city could reduce significantly the cost of servicing its pension debt. Others offered counterarguments against issuing the bonds, maintaining borrowing money to pay down already existing debt is a risky proposition. They argued that before the city engages in any such strategies to lower its pension debt through refinancing, it should first reform its pension system by reducing the level of benefits being provided to the city’s future retirees and/or shifting the responsibility of paying for the retirement program from the city’s taxpayers to the employees. It was further suggested that simultaneous with any refinancing of the pension debt through the issuance of pension obligation bonds, the city should exit from the California Public Employees Retirement System going forward, and institute in its stead a municipal employee 403 (B) retirement program for those city workers which they pay for themselves, perhaps with some modest city contribution, similar to 401 (K) programs available in the private sector.
Earlier this year, some members of the public expressed concern that city employees, in particular those at the management echelon at City Hall who are on a trajectory that will qualify them for extremely lucrative pensions, in some cases in excess of $200,000 per year, were dragging their feet with regard to having the city engage in actual pension reform because doing so was not in their personal interest. Those residents observed that the city’s top administrators were seeking to stampede the city into the issuance of the pension obligation bonds because doing so would end the impetus for pension reform. Councilman Carlos Garcia offered an assurance that the city was not pre-committed to the issuance of the pension obligation bonds, and that the city would approach any such issuance if it were to occur methodically and with complete transparency, keeping the public apprised at every juncture of the action to be taken, and allowing the public to weigh in on the matter and be heard by the council before it took any such action.
That they were being sued by their city went unremarked by virtually all of Upland’s residents for nearly two weeks after the city made its unheralded filing of the validation action in San Bernardino County Superior Court on July 21.  In early August, a handful of Upland residents learned of the City of Upland’s effort to issue the bonds and the launching of its validation lawsuit against them and their fellow residents. Inquiries were made at City Hall and of the city council. Upland Acting City Manager Steven Parker, Upland Councilwoman Shannan Maust and Upland Councilwoman Janice Elliot responded to those inquiries, insisting that the city was not suing its residents. That quieted the residents temporarily, but six days after all of Upland’s residents were served with notice of Upland’s validation notice, via the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin, a smattering of residents spotted the summons, which began with the language, “Notice! You have been sued.”
Instantaneously, the credibility of Parker, Garcia, Maust and Elliott came in for a shellacking, as did the believability of the mayor, city council and City Hall in general. Thereafter, residents, through the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, filed an answer to the validation complaint in protest of the proposed Upland bond issuance.
In that answer, filed on Tuesday, September 21, 2021, the Howard Jarvis Taxpayer Association, which has members who reside in Upland and therefore have standing in the matter, framed its response with regard to the 34 paragraphs in the city’s validation complaint pertaining to its rationale for making the issuance. The answer admits, or acknowledges the accuracy of nine of the validation complaint’s relevant paragraphs, those being paragraphs 2, 3, 4, 5, 13, 19, 20, 21 and 22. The answer takes issue with 12 other paragraphs in the validation complaint – paragraphs 1, 6, 9, 10, 11, 12, 18, 24, 25, 27, 28 and 29 – on various grounds, denying them in part, admitting them in part or finding them to be non-applicable to the meat of the complaint.
The complaint denies in whole the assertions contained in 13 of the validation complaint’s paragraphs, those being paragraphs 7, 8, 14, 15, 16, 17, 23, 26, 30, 31, 32, 33 and 34.
Specifically in its answer, the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association Taxpayers denies that the “city’s contract with the California Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) is a bond that can be ‘refunded.’ Taxpayers therefore deny that city has authority under Government Code section 53589.5 to issue ‘refunding bonds.’”
The answer denies that retirement law obligates the city to make annual contributions to the system to fund pension and other retirement benefits for its members and their beneficiaries and amortize the unfunded accrued actuarial liability of the city and denies that the city is absolutely obligated to satisfy its pension debt “from any money available in any fund in the city’s treasury.”
The answer denies that the city has established or “evidenced” its obligations to the state retirement system as a consequence of its past adherence to a contract it has with PERS dated August 7, 1944.
The answer denies that California Government Code sections 53570 and 53584 authorize the city to issue pension obligation bonds to refund any pension debt it has.
The answer contests the proposed commitment that the city issue and sell the pension obligation bonds for the purpose of refunding and applying the proceeds of the bonds to refund the city’s pension debt.
The answer contests the proposed commitment that the city issue and sell $121,060,000 in pension obligation bonds to refund all or a portion of its current unfunded obligation and any future unfunded obligation.
City officials have not explained why they intend to limit the issuance to $121.06 million, even thought the unfunded pension liability the city has accrued had reached $130,186,277 as of March of this year.
The answer denies that the bond issuance the city proposes is in conformity with the applicable provisions of all laws and enactments at any time in force or controlling upon such proceedings and denies it is or will be fully in conformity with all applicable requirements of all regulatory bodies, agencies or officials if the bonds are issued.
The answer denies the validation action is properly brought under Government Code section 53511 and California’s validation statute such that the agreements envisioned in the bond issuance contemplated by the city are valid and legal, and in conformity with the applicable provisions of Article XVI, Section 18 of the California Constitution.
The answer denies retirement law imposes a statutory duty upon the city to provide funding for retirement benefits for city employees and former employees and it denies that the city has demonstrated or “evidenced” this obligation in the PERS contract and that the the PERS contract is a legal and enforceable obligation of the city. The answer denies that the pension obligation bonds constitute fulfillment of the city’s legally imposed obligation to fund the retirement benefits for city employees and former employees.
The answer denies that the proceedings related to the issuance of pension obligation bonds are are exempt from and not subject to the debt limitation set forth in Article XVI, Section 18 of the California Constitution.
The answer denies that the city can use the validation process to obtain a judicial determination establishing that the pension obligation bonds can be issued in lieu of the requirements of Article XVI, Section 18 of the California Constitution.
Article XVI, Section 18 of the California Constitution states that “No county, city, town, township, board of education, or school district, shall incur any indebtedness or liability in any manner or for any purpose exceeding in any year the income and revenue provided for such year, without the assent of two-thirds of the voters of the public entity voting at an election to be held for that purpose.”
City officials were in a rush to establish the city’s eligibility to issue the bonds because, those officials say, interest rates are at historic lows, in the range of 2.6 percent. According to acting City Manager Parker and City Treasurer Greg Bradley, if the city continues on the current trajectory of using the repayment schedule the California Public Employees’ Retirement System has set for paying down the $121 million in unfunded pension liability the city is targeting in its pension obligation bonds refinancing effort, the debt service and principal payments on that $121 million will come to $225 million. By issuing the pension obligation bonds, they maintain, the city can reduce that $225 million to $165 million. For that reason, the city had set a goal of making that bond issuance by November, before interest rates rise.
It now appears impossible for the city to meet that goal, as the court is faced with considering the answer the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association has lodged, which asks that Judge Poncin declare the proposed issuance and sale of bonds without voter approval invalid. Judge Poncin has set February 14, 2022 as the date for a trial setting conference in the matter, meaning that even if the city prevails in convincing Judge Poncin that the bonds can be issued, that is unlikely to take place any time prior to the arrival of spring.

Dashing the hopes of the development industry and movers and shakers in the private sector, the Acquanetta Warren-led Fontana City Council this week forsook what many had hoped would prove to be the ascendancy of Phil Burum into a key public sector administrative role in San Bernardino County’s second largest city.
On Tuesday, September 21, city officials closed a deal with Shannon Yauchzee, the longtime public works director of West Covina who more recently completed a nearly seven-year assignment as the city manager in Baldwin Park to serve in the capacity of interim city manager.
Yauchzee displaces Burum, who for two weeks has piloted the 217,237-population city in the aftermath of Mark Denny’s abrupt departure as city manager. Burum made a dynamic debut in the public sector in February, zooming to near the top of the management echelon in Fontana with his hiring as deputy city manager after spending the entirety of his professional life in the private sector. He is a highly thought-of talent, an unabashedly pro-development force in a decidedly pro-development jurisdiction. Many were disheartened that the reduction in Warren’s political reach and grasp prevented her from installing him into the city management position in Fontana on a permanent basis.
In 1997, Fontana was a wide-open city of more than 40 square miles, with a population of some 137,000. That year, Ken Hunt was promoted to the position of acting city manager, and two years later the qualifier “acting” or “interim” was dropped from his title, at which time he was given a contract to serve as the city’s full-fledged city manager. He remained in that position two decades. In the 22 years Hunt managed the city, Fontana experienced explosive development as one the fastest growing cities in not only California but the United States. In 2019, the city’s population eclipsed 210,000 at which point it had long before moved from being the fourth-largest to the second-largest city in San Bernardino County population-wise, having accelerated past both Rancho Cucamonga and Ontario nearly a decade previously.
During his tenure as city manager, Ken Hunt had been identified as associated with the mayoralties of Dave Eshleman, Mark Nuami, Frank Scialdone and then Acquanetta Warren, who had been on the council since 2002 and acceded to the mayor’s post with the 2010 election. Warren was passionately pro-development in her orientation as she embraced a strategy of intensive expansion aimed at bringing to the city’s newly built residential districts and neighborhoods young and upwardly mobile members of the middle class who were attracted to lower-priced housing than is available closer to Los Angeles. This filled the city with a good number of commuters generally employed elsewhere, such as in Los Angeles and Orange counties, a fair number of which were educated and skilled workers. One of Fontana’s yet unaddressed social issues was the future of a significant segment of Fontana’s homegrown population, those who had not moved into the city after reaching the age of majority, but rather the products of the Fontana Unified School District, where since the 1990s, upwards of 35 percent of the student population were first generation Americans, the children of immigrants. Many of those students’ parents were undocumented or illegal aliens, with poor English skills. The children of those immigrants often struggled in school, a byproduct of their parents’ lack of English-reading ability, lack of sophistication and shallow immersion in American culture, and those students often reached adulthood without having achieved highly academically or mastering the skills demanded in the modern workplace.
Fontana is located at the confluences of the Interstate 15 and Interstate 10 and the California 210 freeways, 68 miles from the Port of Los Angeles accessible by means of the 405, 605 and 10 freeways. Ontario International Airport is 11 miles distant from downtown Fontana via any of four major east-west arterials – Slover Avenue, Santa Ana Avenue, Jurupa Avenue and Valley Boulevard – and Fontana’s main north-south drag, Sierra Avenue. The Burlington Northern-Santa Fe Railroad line runs through Fontana.
All this made Fontana attractive to the logistics industry, which Warren as mayor and Hunt as city manager accommodated. After the first spate of warehouse construction under the Warren regime, some began to second guess the wisdom of allotting so much property, which could be used for other purposes, for the building of warehouses. Local residents and futurists, not to mention some local officials who lacked the political muscle to stop Warren, questioned whether warehouses constitute the highest and best use of the property available for development in the region. They pointed to the consideration that upon their being completed, many warehouses stood empty. Warren’s detractors cited the relatively poor pay and benefits provided to those who work in distribution facilities, the large diesel-powered semi-trucks that are part of those operations with their unhealthy exhaust emissions, together with the bane of traffic gridlock they created. Nevertheless, Warren, who has continuously ruled Fontana with an iron fist based upon her alliances with the council members who have served with her over the years including John Roberts, Jesse Armendarez, Phil Cothran, Jr. and Peter Garcia, has been consistently able to get warehouse projects approved, to the point that she has become known, both derisively by her political opponents and admiringly by her supporters, as “Warehouse Warren.”
Hunt and Warren rode the crest of the development frenzy in Fontana to ever greater heights. In 2011, after Warren had settled in as Fontana mayor, a salary and benefit package was conferred upon Hunt, consisting of $264,596.80 in salary, $58,909.52 in other perks and pay and $36,184.72 in benefits for a total annual compensation of $359,691.04, making him the highest paid city manager in San Bernardino County. In 2018, when his salary escalated to $327,136.35, his other pay reached $25,000, his benefits equaled 59,057.88 and taxpayers contributed another $34,458.79 for a total annual compensation of $445,653.02, Hunt was the second highest paid city manager in the State of California.
Warren had so pleased the development industry by her successful efforts in arranging to have virtually any development proposal on property within Fontana City Limits approved that builder upon builder, contractor upon contractor, investor upon investor, developer upon developer, landowner upon landowner had endowed her political war chest with over $350,000 by last year, making it virtually impossible for anyone to challenge her for reelection.
Hunt’s contract was set to expire in 2021, but as early as 2018 just after he had signed his most recent contract, Warren and her three allies on the council were publicly discussing extending Hunt’s contract three years beyond 2021 to 2024 or perhaps even four years to 2025. Abruptly in 2019, however, Hunt left Fontana with just under two years left on his contract. Warren remained tight-lipped about the reason for his departure. When pressed about why the city manager about whom she had been so laudatory for so long had departed, Warren dissembled, implying he had left of his own volition. Hunt, however, did not immediately move into another position. It appeared that he had been fired. Moreover, the claim that Hunt had voluntarily moved on did not jibe with the disclosure made at that time that Hunt was being kept on the city’s payroll until the end of January 2020 and was collecting a severance on top of that, as Hunt’s contract did not provide for any continuation of pay or a severance if he chose to leave the city of his own accord. Warren continued to stonewall when asked again and again what had really occurred.
Earlier this year it was disclosed that Hunt had not only been kept on the payroll until January 2020 after his July 2019 departure, for which he was paid $153,558.25 in salary over those six months plus benefits of $31,104.23, but that he had been kept on the payroll until January 2021, such that he was provided another $307,116.51 plus benefits of $62,208.46 for those 12 months of not working. On top of that, Hunt was provide with “settlement pay” and a “leave payoff” that together came to $511,182.54.
In this way, Hunt was provided with $1,127,378.45 after he left in July 2019, none of which he was due if he had in fact quit. Tacitly acknowledged was that Hunt had been asked to leave, by Warren no less, and that the $1,127,378.45 was intended to buy his silence over what had precipitated his leaving.
In compliance with the confidentiality clause put into the separation agreement with the city he agreed to and signed in July 2019, Hunt has publicly refused to say why he left. Sources close to him have told the Sentinel that Hunt’s departure was necessitated by a series of events that began in May 2019 when Hunt conveyed to Warren that he had come to recognize that she was on the take, having accepted bribes from developers as well as Alliance Building Solutions, which was given, at Warren’s insistence, a no-bid contract to render several Fontana municipal buildings more energy efficient. Hunt gave Warren an ultimatum, telling her she would need to cease and desist in her corrupt ways. Warren, however, was able to bring her political might to bear, and used her position to arrange an exit for Hunt that bought his silence.
Upon Hunt’s departure, the city arranged with G. Michael Milhiser, who had previously worked as city manager in Montclair, Ontario, Upland and Adelanto, to serve as interim city manager in Fontana, overseeing its roughly 1,200 municipal employees.
In April 2020, the city council, led by Warren, settled upon Mark Denny to serve as city manager. Denny was a one-time aide to California Assembly Speaker Curt Pringle, the director of marketing and strategic planning for Allergan, Inc., the chief of staff for Orange County Supervisor William J. Campbell and the city manager of Dana Point. Warren was acutely aware that Denny was pro-development in his orientation and not terribly fastidious about adhering to ethical or legal constraints.
In 1996, when he was 27, Denny was working for Pringle and had been charged by the Orange County District Attorney and subsequently convicted of engaging in political skullduggery along with five of Pringle’s other political associates. Denny’s convictions on campaign documentation falsification charges before Judge Marjorie Laird Carter came at around the same time that the other five involved in the scheme to prevent Pringle from losing his tenuous hold on the leadership of California’s lower legislative house were also convicted. In accepting guilt, Denny resisted efforts by the prosecution to have him implicate Pringle and two other officeholders who were Pringle’s allies, Assemblyman Scott Baugh and Congressman Dana Rohrbacher. Denny remained a good soldier, fell on his sword and did not turn state’s evidence on the elected officeholders further up the political chain. Impressed by Denny’s demonstrated loyalty to his boss, Warren chose Denny as her man to run things at Fontana City Hall, and used the three votes on the city council she controlled at that time – those of Councilmen John Roberts, Phil Cothran, Jr. and Jesse Armendarez – to bring Denny into the Fontana fold.
Denny initially seemed to mesh well with Warren. He was willing to not only allow aggressive development to take place hand-in-hand with speculative investment, but had no qualms about augmenting projects with taxpayer-assisted subsidizations that defray the cost of infrastructure to jumpstart the development process and increase investor and developer profit. Up close, however, Denny saw that Warren’s attitude toward land speculators and project proponents had crossed the line from accommodation into outright affiliation, ones in which her own interest had become indistinguishable from the undertakings of those applying with the city for permits and project approval. The baldly pay-to-play ethos was most strikingly apparent in the accelerated pace of warehouse development Warren was pursuing.
On April 20, 2021 the Fontana Planning Commission approved Duke Realty’s proposal to build a 205,949-square foot warehouse on an 8.61-acre seven-parcel piece of ground at the southwest corner of Slover Avenue and Oleander Avenue. The project, which was designed to feature 22 truck docks, 40 truck parking spaces, and 95 standard parking spaces, was slated for a site immediately adjacent to Jurupa Hills High School.
Elizabeth Sena, a Fontana resident, appealed that project approval to the Fontana City Council.
On June 22, 2021, the Fontana City Council denied Sena’s appeal and upheld the planning commission on its decision to allow the warehouse to be built.
In July of this year, California Attorney General Rob Bonta sued the City of Fontana over the approval of the Slover and Oleander warehouse project. Bonta took issue with the lax environmental safeguards the city adhered to in giving Duke Realty go-ahead. The city allowed the planning commission to utilize one of the least exacting forms of environmental certification for the project, a mitigated negative declaration. In the lawsuit, Bonta argued that the city’s limited environmental review of the project and its failure to appropriately analyze, disclose, and mitigate the project’s environmental impacts violates the California Environmental Quality Act.
“Under the California Environmental Quality Act, the City of Fontana is required to implement all feasible mitigation measures to reduce harmful air pollution and other significant environmental impacts of the Slover and Oleander Warehouse project,” Bonta said.
The civil action by the California Attorney General’s Office initially stood as a procedural challenge to the project’s approval. The city and its attorney, Ruben Duran, were thrown for a loop by Bonta’s action. Duran was previously the city attorney in Adelanto from July 2017 to August of 2018, during which time he found himself in the position of providing legal cover for then-Adelanto City Councilman Jermaine Wright and then-Adelanto Mayor Richard Kerr. Wright was arrested by the FBI and charged by the U.S. Attorney’s Office with bribetaking in November 2017, and was removed from the city council in January 2018, after consistently missing all of the council’s regularly-scheduled meetings for two months because he was in federal custody. Kerr, who was voted out of office in November 2018, three months after Duran’s departure from Adelanto, was indicted by a federal grand jury last month over bribery charges stemming from the time he was in office in Adelanto.
Duran’s experience in Adelanto, where he was acting as the consigliere to dual political bosses who were profiting off official actions they were taking in allowing development, in that case pertaining to marijuana and cannabis-related businesses, and what subsequently befell those he was advising instilled in him a degree of caution vis-à-vis the current situation in Fontana, where the California Attorney General’s Office and its investigators have taken an interest in the action of Warren and her three political team members – Peter Garcia, John Roberts and Phil Cothran, Jr. – in allowing what some perceive as ill-considered development, in this case pertaining to warehouse proliferation. Of note is that Garcia is the Southern California regional executive manager for the California Department of Toxic Substances Control’s site mitigation program. Garcia’s professional capacity would have made him intimately familiar with the environmental issues that were glossed over by first the planning commission and then the city council in approving the Slover and Oleander warehouse project.
As the California Attorney General’s Office was taking a deeper dive into the situation in Fontana, the members of the city council had expected Duran to go to the mat to protect them just as he had three and four years ago in Adelanto in attempting to shield Kerr and Wright from the long arm of the federal law. An older and wiser Duran, however, proved far less aggressive in the face of the California Attorney General’s Office’s inquiry in Fontana than he had been when he was city attorney in Adelanto.
Denny likewise saw what was occurring, and he had also had 19 months to watch Warren in action, and see first-hand the favoritism that has been shown to developers, particularly ones willing to be generous toward Warren. Indeed, Bonta’s lawsuit threw what had occurred with regard to the Slover and Oleander Warehouse project into stark relief, offering a glimpse of highly questionable land use decision-making that was virtually indistinguishable, to those in the know, from what was occurring elsewhere in the city involving other warehouse projects. Already convicted once for having gone along with the criminal activity of a political personage above him in the governmental chain of command, Denny was less than confident that Bonta would keep the efforts he was taking with regard to the Slover and Oleander warehouse project restricted to civil action. Indeed, Denny was concerned that If the state’s top prosecutor assigned investigators who routinely ferret out evidence relating to criminal activity to look much more closely at the corners he and the city cut to assist Warren in accomplishing a highly questionable favor for one of her campaign donors, things might not go well for him. At the very least, Denny knew, he would be called upon to answer some very uncomfortable questions about what he knew of monetary inducements provided to Warren in the form of political contributions and through other means, and how explicit the mayor and her donors were in arranging what might be demonstrated to a jury as quid pro quos.
The reason the city gave for Denny’s exit did not differ much from the initial false narrative put out with regard to Hunt’s departure.
Warren claimed that just like Hunt, Denny wanted to leave. The city has refused to say whether a severance package is being conferred on Denny, and if so, what it consists of.
In an effort to sidestep the intense scrutiny and criticism vectored the city’s way because of the lenient environmental standards its officials had applied in approving the plethora of warehouses now sprouting up all over the city and for the shortcuts responsible officials had engaged in when approving the Slover and Oleander warehouse project, Denny hired the Denmark-based international consulting firm Ramboll, which has its American headquarters in Arlington, Virginia, to see if it could come in and do some damage control.
A spokeswoman for Morten Peick, Ramboll’s senior group director for communication and marketing, indicated the company was going to remain clear of any questions relating to how graft and payoffs to Fontana city officials might have contributed to the city’s ongoing issues with regard to overaggressive warehouse development.
According to the company, Fontana can give itself a clean bill of air quality health, since ozone and nitrogen dioxide concentrations and the presence of particulate matter in the city do not exceed federal standards, and the risk of contamination-induced cancer has diminished by 76 percent from 1998 to 2018 and is expected to decrease by an additional 20 percent by 2023.
Furthermore, the city can breathe a sigh of relief since the California Air Resources Board’s standards put into place in 2005 under which the city has performed so poorly is now considered to be an obsolescent air pollution yardstick.
Some of those hearing that, however, believed Ramboll and the city were engaging in semantical sleight-of-hand, since the poor air quality marks Fontana has been given in the past grow out of the California Air Resources Board’s 2005 standards. In actuality, the statistics for the 2005 standards were based upon a survey of air quality from 1995 through 2005, when air quality was poorer than in more recent years. That Fontana fared poorly against the 2005 standard actually means, critics said, that the city would be rated even worse against more up-to-date metrics.
Ramboll suggested during a September 14 presentation that the city could engage in a bit of window-dressing to assuage those who take a dim view of its unbridled approval of warehousing within its confines. One of those ploys would be to adhere to the California Air Resources Board’s recommendation that diesel-powered semi-trucks reduce their idling time from five to three minutes. The city could also make some inroads against air pollution by becoming more electric-vehicle friendly, by, for example, encouraging the proliferation of electric-powered vehicle charging stations, Ramboll maintained. It was also suggested that the city should encourage rooftop solar panels on all buildings of over 400,000 square feet.
The city should consider mandating improvements to future warehouses though an ordinance targeting warehouses specifically, according to Ramboll.
“One of the city council’s most important goals is to preserve the local environment for generations to come,” Mayor Warren said. The city had given itself credibility by seeking, Warren noted, “to not only preserve, but strengthen the local environment. Staff brought in a world-renowned consultancy to assess our air. The study shows that air quality in the last 20 years has improved drastically.”
For nearly two weeks after Denny’s September 8 announcement that he will be taking advantage of an opportunity to move into a position in the private sector closer to his home in San Clemente, many saw a golden opportunity for Phil Burum, who was given the temporary assignment of interim city manager, to remain in that position, perhaps for as long as two years, as was the case with Hunt between 1997 and 1999. Among many in the business community, Burum was seen as the perfect answer to Fontana’s dilemma. A member of the Baldy View Chapter of the Building Industry Association board beginning in 2013 who subsequently served as the president of that board from 2017 to 2019, Burum is perceived to be ideally suited to lead Fontana, which has been mandated by the California Department of Housing and Community Development to construct 22,101 dwelling units over the next eight years to meet what has been adjudged by the Southern California Association of Governments to be its share of  regional housing needs. Burum’s know-how as a builder and his can-do attitude is considered to be conducive to Fontana maintaining its progress toward the future.
With the California Attorney General’s Office breathing down her neck, however, Warren was forced to abandon the plan to allow Burum to accumulate enough experience in the role of acting/interim city manager to justify moving him into the actual city manager role, perhaps as early as mid-2022.
Lots of people were disappointed that a man as talented as Burum, who in the view of many is not hampered by being an institutional government employee but rather represents the best the private sector has to offer, is being stepped over.
Running Fontana for the next several months will be Shannon Yauchzee.
Yauchzee “is dedicated to providing excellent customer service, streamlining the development processes, and making local agencies more efficient and fiscally responsible,” according to a news release put out by Mayor Warren.
Of note is that Yauchzee, who had resided in San Dimas for thirty years from the time he began work with Willdan Engineering out of its City of Industry office in 1989, while he was the director of public works with the City of West Covina from 1996 to 2014 and all but the last two years he was city manager in Baldwin Park from 2014 until May of this year, moved to Fontana in 2019.
“As a Fontana resident I look forward to working alongside council and staff as we enhance the quality of life here in Fontana,” Yauchzee said in the release put out by Warren.
Yauchzee was born in Whittier and worked in various aspects of the construction industry in a business owned by his father while he attended Cal Poly University in Pomona, where he obtained his bachelor of science degree in civil engineering and subsequently obtained his state registration as a California professional engineer. With his wife Lisa, he has two daughters, Emily and Sarah.
Yauchzee has no intention of remaining with the City of Fontana as interim city manager for more than a year. The city is actively at present conducting a recruitment for city manager candidates.
–Mark Gutglueck