By Mark Gutglueck
The prosecution in the Charles Merritt murder trial this week rested its case, and the defense initiated the presentation of its witnesses and evidence.
On Tuesday, the prosecution, led by Supervising Deputy District Attorney Britt Imes, sought to go out with a bang, bringing in an expert on photometric analysis from outside of the country to salvage what otherwise would have been a gaping hole in its presentation.
That expert, Eugenio Liscio, was called upon by Imes to replace Dr. Leonid I. Rudin, whom the prosecution had thought it could rely upon to make a science-based identification critical to the case.
That identification pertained to the partial images of a vehicle caught on the security video at the home of Jennifer Mitchley, who in 2010 lived one door up and across the street from the McStay family home located at 3473 Avocado Vista Lane in Fallbrook.
Charles “Chase” Merritt is charged with the bludgeoning murders of the entire McStay family, including his business partner Joseph McStay, McStay’s wife Summer, and the couple’s two sons, four-year-old Gianni and three-year-old Joseph, Jr. Those deaths occurred, prosecutors allege, on February 4, 2010.
A key piece of evidence which the prosecution alleges places Merritt at the scene of the murders is Mitchley’s security video, positioned on her front porch, which showed the lower portion of a vehicle leaving the driveway of the McStay family’s home and heading out Avocado Vista Lane. That vehicle, prosecutors want the jury to conclude, was Merritt’s 2000 Chevy 350 truck.
Nine years and a day after the murders, on February 5, 2019 in what was the 15th day of the trial, during an evidentiary hearing that was, fortunately for the prosecution, conducted outside the presence of the jury, Dr. Rudin dashed the expectations of the prosecutors trying the case, consisting of Supervising Deputy District Attorney Britt Imes, Supervising Deputy District Attorney Sean Daugherty and Deputy District Attorney Melissa Rodriguez. The district attorney’s office had been banking on Dr. Rudin, one of the world’s leading photogrammographers, being able to offer testimony that would leave no doubt that Merritt was at the McStay residence that fateful night by testifying that it was definitely his truck caught on the video. Possessing a master of science degree in mathematics and a PhD. in photography, Rudin holds 31 patents relating to scientific data collection and is arguably the world’s leading authority on photographic analysis.
After applying his analysis of the video images and a three dimensional image made by Michael Russ, a San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department’s scientific analysis division technician, using a laser scanner known as a FARO at the direction of San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Sergeant Ryan Smith, Rudin’s determination was inconclusive. During the evidentiary hearing held on February 5 of this year, Imes asked him what his conclusion was.
“The answer was we could not reject it [i.e., the hypothesis that it was Merritt’s truck seen on the video], but there was some guarded error that we derived,” said Dr. Rudin.
With the image of Merritt’s truck caught by the sheriff’s department’s FARO laser scanner at the same angle as the angle of the Mitchley video camera to the subject vehicle serving as the background of an image projected on the courtroom’s video monitor, a transparency of the Mitchley video was projected across the background during the February 5, 2019 hearing. When the moving vehicle’s image moved into position corresponding to the background image, the video was frozen, with that portion of the truck visible on the video superimposed over the three-dimensional model of the truck.
Rudin said, “I could not eliminate the model as corresponding to the vehicle captured on the video but could not make an identification that it was definitely the truck.”
Rudin further indicated that when his software program and equipment were utilized to take readings of the truck’s wheelbase, he received conflicting results, a discrepancy, he said, of “up to six percent in the worst case scenario and roughly 3 percent in the average scenario. No matter how we used that truck, we were getting plus-minus.”
A precise determination of the truck’s dimensions is critical to the case. Two sets of tracks were found at the site of the McStay family graves, one with a width measuring 73 inches, which roughly, according to prosecutors, matches the tire width of Merritt’s truck. The other set of tracks at the gravesite measured 76 inches across.
On February 5, 2019, Judge Michael A. Smith, over the defense’s objection, ruled that Rudin could testify. He was scheduled to do so on February 19, but that date came and went and he never appeared as a witness, quite likely because of concern that the defense would exploit statements he made during the February 5 evidentiary hearing to sow doubts in the minds of jurors that Merritt was at the McStay residence on February 4, 2010 as the prosecution contends. Last week, on Monday March 4, the prosecution instead elected to have Sergeant Ryan Smith testify with regard to his non-scientific observations and the conclusion he had personally reached that the image on the Mitchley video is a match to the Chevrolet work truck Merritt was driving in 2010.
This week, on the day it rested its case, the prosecution sought to bolster Smith’s testimony by having Eugenio Liscio, a leading authority on three-dimensional forensic reconstruction and an instructor at the University of Toronto and the president of the International Association of Forensic and Security Metrology, to replace Rudin.
Under direct examination by Imes, Liscio said that the low lighting conditions and low resolution of Mitchley’s video camera as well as glare from the bright lights of the vehicle limited his ability to make measurements down to a certain range. Nevertheless, Liscio testified, he found numerous similarities between the vehicle seen on the video and Merritt’s truck.
Liscio said “The headlamps are consistent with the 2000 Chevrolet truck” and that the headlight pattern of the 2000 Chevrolet matched up with the headlight pattern of the vehicle in the video.
“The bulk of the glare measurement on the Chevrolet truck in terms of the horizontal distance is like 47 to 68-69 inches, somewhere in that range,” said Liscio. The dimensions of the headlight pattern of the vehicle in the video was, Liscio said, “approximately 40 inches on the inside and then 70 inches on the outside.” Continuing, he said, “Similarly, there’s the height. So the lower and the upper parts of the glare, the headlamps in the vertical direction, they’re about 27.4 to 38.5. So the low end is 27.4 and the high end is 38.5 and then from the video we’re getting about 27 to 40. The range is obviously bigger where it cast a larger pattern, but from looking at it, aside from the numbers, you can see it falls within the range. So, the headlamps, in just looking at this, are consistent with the 2000 Chevrolet truck.”
Furthermore, Liscio said, the glare pattern off the bumper presented an opportunity for quantification. He said he placed lines on the FARO scan of Merritt’s truck and on a still from the video that followed the glare to find out “how high is that glare pattern off the ground, what range does it fall into. On the Chevrolet truck the actual measurement was found to be 26 inches.” He did the same on a frame lifted out of the video. “When we checked the glare in this particular frame, it goes from about 24-and a-half to about 26-and-a-half,” Liscio said. “So it changed and that could be because the vehicle… actually I looked at the vehicle. It doesn’t seem like older trucks to be perfectly straight or the bumper was hit or something. Different things can happen. Plus there’s a range of error here. I can’t get down to precise measurements. We’re down to the inch range, but I think, as you can see, it falls within that range. Once again… in my opinion the measurements show that it is consistent with what we’re seeing with [Merritt’s truck]. The 2000 Chevrolet Truck is consistent with what we see in the video.”
Turning to the back of the vehicle, Liscio said he compared a model of the shadowing or shadow pattern at the back of the vehicle on the ground created by the brake light of Merritt’s truck to the shadow pattern displayed on the ground beneath the vehicle that was present in the 3400 block of Avocado Vista Lane on the night of of February 4, 2010 which was caught by Mitchley’s video camera when the brake lights came on. “You’ll see that I’ve recreated the shadow in that area quite closely, like really, really close,” said Liscio. “Now, it’s not perfect. It’s not 100 percent perfect. There’s some little tiny things that are different, but the overall shape, scale and measurement is consistent with the outline and what is actually documented on the truck.”
Liscio said the tailpipe of Merritt’s truck matched up with the tailpipe of the vehicle seen on the video.
“In the last few frames when the brake lights go on, you can see there is a clear distinction between this bottom part of the vehicle,” Liscio said. “You have a space and then you have another space and then you start getting shadow or brown. And there’s this object that’s sticking out here. As you cycle through [the video frames] here, in this image it’s bent.” He then overlaid the FARO scan image of the back part of Merritt’s truck on the still taken from the video. “Now, when I take the vehicle and I superimpose it back into the position on the street, you’ll see that it lines up with what I call the dark object,” said Liscio. “It appears to be an exhaust pipe. We go back a couple of frames or through all the frames, we get the same thing.”
The exhaust pipe, which was much more clearly depicted in the FARO scan than in the frame from the video, had a slight bend to it. The exhaust pipe on the video, which was somewhat pixelated, roughly corresponded in shape to its counterpart on the laser scan.
“Again, we don’t have great video here,” said Liscio, “but you can still see the size, the position and the geometry is consistent with what we have on this 2000 Chevy truck.”
With regard to the profile of the vehicle, Liscio said, “The outline of the bottom of the vehicle seems to be consistent with the shadows and dark spots in the video.”
The match the prosecution wanted was threatened by what appears to be a light on the passenger side toward the back of the vehicle shown in the video. There is no such corresponding light on Merritt’s truck. As a witness called by the prosecution, Liscio engaged in an analysis that gravitated toward making the match. Ultimately, he found something upon which to explain away the presence of the light. Liscio used stop action on the video to show that as the vehicle moves forward, at one point the light begins to fade and then in a few frames disappeared altogether before gradually reappearing and growing brighter.
“That bright spot happens to coincide with a latch on the side of the vehicle,” Liscio said, referring to the handle/lock for one of the storage compartments mounted on the bed of Merritt’s truck. “The only thing I can say is it’s close to the latch, so it is not inconceivable that the latch could be causing some type of reflection. When the vehicle first comes into view, you can see it is bright. Then it keeps moving, it goes dim, and then it starts getting brighter again. Just before it exits the screen it gets bright again. So what could be happening here – there are other lights on in the street, a streetlight or house lights, things like that. And when it was farther away, there’s something shining on it that illuminates it and when it starts moving it moves out of the way of this light and it starts transitioning to – it gets brighter and brighter and brighter – so there’s another light that is illuminating it. So, it’s quite conceivable that’s what is happening. There are certain lights on the street that could cause that.”
Liscio enumerated some of those possible light sources, including a spotlight in the side yard of the house next to the Mitchley residence, a street light and a light on the Mitchley porch near the location of the security video camera.
“After conducting all of this analysis, what conclusions could you draw from the evidence that you were provided?” Imes asked.
“The first is the position of the headlights,” said Liscio. “The headlights on the 2000 Chevy truck is consistent with the position of the glare that we’re seeing in the video. That is consistent. The glare that we’re seeing off the bumper at the front of the vehicle: I compared the height of where those are located on the vehicle down to the ground, and that is also consistent with range we found on the 2000 Chevy truck. The other thing we found was the shadows at the back of the vehicle and how they make this specific shape, and I did it through a trace. I also did it through simulated lighting. That is still consistent with what we are seeing in the video. I also looked at the outline of the truck at the bottom and you can see that it falls very close to where the dark spot starts. In the portion where the brake lights come on you can see through that area. That also appears consistent. The exhaust pipe – that is consistent and I think I showed you that this illuminated spot appears to be a reflection. At least the spot appears where the latch is. That’s the closest thing it appears to. Based on that, all these features are consistent with the 2000 Chevy truck. Having said that, a truck that is similar to this one, so if it has the same configuration at the back – it has the brake lights at that spot; it has the same kind of bumper; it’s the same model truck – that could be consistent, as well. That’s possible. It would have the same geometry, the same features and everything else. So, I can’t make an identification with the evidence I have. I can’t go in and say, ‘Well, look, I can tell exactly it’s this 2000 Chevy truck. All I can say is this model truck that you have is consistent with all the features I’ve pointed out in the video.”
As Imes’ direct examination of Liscio was drawing to a close, it appeared as if the prosecution had managed to overcome in some measure the setback of not being able to rely upon the testimony of Dr. Rudin.
The momentum in the favor of the prosecution was short-lived, however, as Merritt’s defense co-counsel, James McGee, methodically dismantled Liscio on cross examination. Through a nearly three-hour back and forth, McGee went beyond simply questioning the witness’s conclusions, but discrediting him with regard to the selective nature of his analysis and his avoidance of evidence and data which controverted his findings. In addition to outright controverting two of the bases for Liscio’s matching of the characteristics of the vehicle seen on the video and Merritt’s utility truck, McGee was able to make a visual display for the jury that seemingly demonstrated the vehicle in question could not have been Merritt’s truck.
“Your last conclusion on your report is you can’t exclude my client’s truck?” McGee asked early in his cross examination.
“That is correct,” Liscio said.
“What are the factors or criteria for exclusion in your analysis?” McGee asked.
“The criteria we can see in the video, which was the headlight, the bumper, the exhaust pipe, the outline of the vehicle, the shadows,” Liscio responded.
Liscio’s use of the singular term “video” rather than the plural term “videos” would prove crucial in McGee’s impeachment of Liscio later in his cross examination.
“That’s for inclusion,” said McGee. “I’m talking about exclusion. What would you need to find to say, ‘We have to exclude a vehicle.’ What are the things you would look for, generally?”
“There has to be something grossly in error,” Liscio said, with error being used as a term to describe a discrepancy between the characteristics of the items or objects being compared. An obviously missing part could be grounds for exclusion, Liscio testified, but only upon the assumption that nothing had changed on the vehicle. “A missing part could be removed,” Liscio said. “It doesn’t mean it wasn’t there before.”
Liscio repeated his statement made under direct examination that he was limited in his analysis by the relatively poor quality of the video he had to work with, such that in making his comparisons to the much more precise and crisp images on the FARO scan the consistencies in the images he noted fell “within a reasonable margin of error.”
“What is your reasonable margin of error based upon a percentage of measurement?” McGee asked.
“There’s no answer for that question,” said Liscio. “You can’t just say ‘It’s two inches. If it’s two inches, I’m going to cancel everything out.’ No, because it depends on the quality of the video you have. What if you can only see one foot of resolution on the video? Then obviously my range has to go bigger than that. Your question – it’s too broad. It’s not fine enough. There are too many things. There are too many variables that you have to account for.”
Liscio insisted that all of the measurements he took were objective.
McGee moved through the various elements of Liscio’s testimony on direct examination in what was a first pass through of his conclusions without making any direct challenge of those findings initially, as if taking a survey of Liscio’s methodology and approach.
McGee’s first sustained intensified sally against Liscio’s credibility and the validity of his conclusions centered on his pronouncement that the headlights of the vehicle seen on Mitchley’s security video match the headlights of Merritt’s 2000 Chevrolet truck.
McGee pointed out that on the video “It appears that the headlights are wider than they are tall.”
“You mean the glare?” Liscio responded with a question.
“Yes,” said McGee.
“Yes,” said Liscio.
“And that would be consistent, since the height of the headlight was 7.2 inches and the width was 8.8 [inches], correct?”
“Yes, but it also depends on the shield, the housing, that it’s in, as well,” said Liscio.
“But that makes sense, since it’s a rectangular shape – that’s a horizontal rectangular – that matches the same size or shape of the headlights,” said McGee.
“Okay,” said Liscio.
“I calculated out the ratio,” said McGee. “That would be a four to five ratio, height to width. Would that be fair?”
“Of the actual measurements?” Liscio asked.
“Yes,” said McGee.
“That sounds fair to me,” said Liscio.
“Now the problem with this picture is if you take the headlights and the running lights together, they’re 11.1 inches tall, correct?” McGee asked.
“On the vehicle, yeah,” said Liscio.
“But only 8.8 [inches] wide,” said McGee. “That’s a five-to-four ratio in height, not width.”
“Um-humm,” Liscio acknowledged.
“Is that a yes?” McGee asked.
“The actual measurements on the vehicle, yes,” said Liscio. “Pertaining to the actual measurements, yes.”
When McGee pointed out that in Liscio’s circumscription of the headlights in his report, “You’re ignoring the running lights, correct?”
“Objection, argumentative,” Supervising Deputy District Attorney Britt Imes interjected.
“Overruled,” said Judge Michael Smith. “He can answer.”
“So, I’m not ignoring anything,” said Liscio. “All I’m doing is saying is these ellipses are what the light appears to be. You draw a circle around the glare, and then what I’m doing here is just looking at the vehicle and seeing how they compare from a different angle. I’m comparing the outline of the glare in the video to, and how they overlay, to the front geometry of the vehicle.”
McGee then displayed a frame taken from a video made by the sheriff’s department of Merritt’s truck that was made at night with the lights on in which the headlights were clearly distinguishable from the running lights, also referred to as parking lights, beneath them.
Liscio said the photo was taken from a point closer to the vehicle than the Mitchley security video camera was from the vehicle on Avocado Vista Lane the night of February 4, 2010, and that the equipment used in photographing Merritt’s truck was of a higher quality.
“If the resolution of the camera is much higher, then I’m going to get a lot more detail,” said Liscio. “If I have a [camera] that is 3,000 by 2,000 pixels, then I have tens of thousands more pixels to look at. If I take a security camera that’s 704 by 480 pixels, I have a lot less. So, you can see the effect here of how the glare is already blending in together. You don’t see a separation between the headlight and parking light. They start to blend together. So now we move back 40-50 feet and take a low resolution camera, and now take also into consideration that the combination of the sensor that’s on the mobile camera is probably a lot better than a cheap security camera, so the ability to detect the differences in lighting, the dynamic range of the sensor in a security camera is probably really poor, and this is much better. So, for all intents and purposes, this is a completely unfair comparison.”
“Did you include in your report how you are excluding the use of this video?” McGee asked, referring to the sheriff’s department high resolution video.
“I didn’t say anything about this video in the report,” Liscio acknowledged.
McGee then displayed on the courtroom’s overhead monitors for Liscio, the jury and courtroom observers a FARO scan image of the front of Merritt’s truck in which the wide and relatively short rectangular parking/running lights which extend further toward the outside edge of the front of the truck than the headlights were clearly distinguishable and visible as separated from the tall rectangular and less wide headlights above them.
“Is it clear from this image that the parking light on the passenger side wraps around the side a little bit?” McGee asked.
“On the passenger side at this distance in this photograph you can see it does extend further,” said Liscio. “On the other side, if you look at the driver’s side, it doesn’t appear to do so as much.”
McGee then displayed on the courtroom’s monitors a still frame taken from the Sheriff’s Department FARO scan of Merritt’s truck above a still from the Mitchley surveillance video in which the headlights were shown to taper slightly at their respective bottoms.
“Let’s start with the driver’s side,” said McGee. “On the driver’s side, on the bottom it [the headlight] rounds in, correct?”
“Yes,” said Liscio. “It does.”
“And it goes down to a shorter distance on the bottom than it does in the middle and on the top,” said McGee.
“Sir, I have to say this,” Liscio began. “You are comparing two images that are completely different, so I’ll answer your questions, but just understand that this is not a fair comparison. You’re comparing apples to oranges here.”
“Your Honor, I would object as non-responsive and move to strike,” said McGee.
“Overruled,” said Judge Smith. “He can explain his answers.”
“My question was simple,” said McGee, “In the bottom picture of the headlight on the driver’s side, does it become more narrow than it is in the middle and the top?” McGee’s question focused on the still frame taken from the Mitchley video.
“Yes,” said Liscio.
“Now, the picture on the top, you can see the headlight start to bend in like it is more narrow, but then there is a parking light that bumps back out, correct?” McGee asked, his question referencing the FARO scan image of Merritt’s truck.
“Yes, and if you’re trying to compare the two images, it’s an unfair comparison,” said Liscio.
“Let’s go to the passenger side,” said McGee. “Again the bottom rounds in, correct?” McGee queried.
“Yes,” said Liscio.
“And the bottom left part of that is further in than the side of the light,” said McGee.
“Objection, that calls for speculation, is not relevant, given the previous answers of the witness about the comparison,” Imes said.
“Overruled,” said Judge Smith. “He can answer.”
“In this frame, yes,” answered Liscio.
“But on that picture above, with that parking light wrapping around, it sticks out significantly, it would be fair to say, yes?” McGee prompted the witness.
“I don’t know what you mean by significant, but again, you are comparing two images,” Liscio said. “I agree with you. It’s sticking out in a completely different image.”
“I agree,” said McGee. “We’re comparing two separate vehicles. I get that.”
“No, you’re comparing images of two separate scenarios,” said Liscio. “Again, you have a different camera. You have a different position close to the vehicle. Those all change what you are seeing and the clarity in which you can see it.”
“You’re saying there’s no way that parking light would ever show up on that security video?” McGee asked.
“Objection, argumentative,” Imes protested.
“Overruled,” said Judge Smith.
“It may or it may not,” said Liscio. “What I am saying is what you are showing me right here doesn’t. And the way to do that would be to do a test. Drive the vehicle by, and I don’t know if the same camera’s still in existence, but drive the vehicle by at night and see what you get. That would be a very fair test.”
“So, when you saw this video and said ‘That’s not a fair comparison because it’s not the same camera,’ did you say, ‘Sheriff’s Department, DA: Do a proper comparison. Go down and drive that truck at night in front of that camera’?” McGee asked.
“Objection!” Imes thundered. “Argumentative.”
“Sustained,” said Judge Smith.
“Did you ask for a fair comparison?” McGee persisted. “You say this is not representative.”
“Objection,” Imes said. “Assumes facts not in evidence.”
Sustained,” said Judge Smith.
“Did you ask for this truck to be driven in front of the camera at night?” McGee tried once more.
“Objection,” Imes said, unwilling to relent. “Assumes facts not in evidence, that the camera exists or can be recorded in the same fashion.”
“Overruled,” said Judge Smith. “He can answer if he made such a request.”
“I did not ask them to go drive the truck, no,” said Liscio.
“You’re not willing to say the running lights are missing on the security camera video” McGee said.
“What I’m saying is it’s quite likely that it’s not detectible,” said Liscio. “It may be on and we can’t see it or it may be off and that’s why we don’t see it or it could be a different vehicle. So there’s different scenarios there.”
“There was testimony from Sergeant Ryan Smith that said, ‘The running lights cannot be turned off…’” McGee began, but was interrupted by Imes’ objection.
“Objection, argumentative,” Imes interrupted.
McGee’s reference was to Sergeant Smith’s testimony that when the headlights in Merritt’s truck were turned on, the parking/running lights automatically turned on as well, such that the headlights could not be illuminated without the running/parking lights being actuated.
Judge Smith overruled Imes’ objection and McGee attempted to continue with his question.
“So, it’s either A, not detectible, or B, not the same vehicle…” McGee started.
“Objection,” Imes broke in. “That assumes facts not in evidence, such as a bulb being burned out.”
“Overruled,” said Judge Smith.
Liscio, unfamiliar with Sergeant Smith’s testimony, was thus trapped by McGee into a tacit acknowledgment that the tall rectangular headlights which narrowed toward the bottom on the video either did not match the wide rectangular headlights on Merritt’s truck or that the video was of such a decidedly poor quality that any conclusions based upon it were unreliable.
McGee took up the issue of the light visible on the passenger side toward the back of the vehicle seen on the Mitchley video.
Referencing Liscio’s report, McGee said, “You said, ‘There’s a small reflection or illuminated spot which appears on the side body of the vehicle in the video. It is difficult to say where the source of the illumination originated from but this spot lines up most closely to one of the handles on the rearmost passenger side compartment.’ Correct?”
“Yes,” said Liscio.
“And you’re saying ‘It’s not a light.’ Right? It’s a reflection?” McGee asked.
“I’m calling it an illuminated spot,” said Liscio. “It doesn’t appear as a constant light.”
“You’re not saying it’s a light but a reflection illumination,” said McGee.
“That’s what I’m saying because there doesn’t appear to be any lights on the end of the vehicle in that position,” Liscio said.
“And you’re aware that the latch is made out of non-reflective metal,” McGee said.
“That assumes facts not in evidence that it is, in fact, non-reflective metal,” Imes said.
“Overruled,” said Judge Smith.
“I don’t understand what you mean by non-reflective metal,” said. Liscio. “What does that mean?”
“It’s not chrome or anything that’s going to shine brightly,” said McGee.
“Let’s just be clear here,” said Liscio. “If it’s metal, if it’s painted or not painted, it will reflect light.”
“So if the light is reflected, then the light has a source,” said McGee.
“Yes,” said Liscio.
“If you know the shape of the object reflecting it, you should be able to trace it to the source, right?” McGee asked.
“One would think so,” said Liscio. “If you had an accurate account of the geometry of the object, it might be possible.”
While the court went into a 15-minute recess, Liscio undertook to use the software on his laptop computer to recreate what the light source was. Upon the jury’s return, Liscio said the sole determination about the source of the light he was able to draw was that it was on the same side of the street as the Mitchley video camera.
Using a still from the FARO scan that was displayed on the courtroom’s overhead monitors, McGee pointed out and had Liscio confirm that there was another latch identical to the one Liscio theorized was the reflective surface on the side of the vehicle further toward the middle of the vehicle on the same side. The second latch was for the forward storage compartment on Merritt’s utility truck and it was positioned roughly five feet in front of and at the exact same height as the rearward latch Liscio theorized might be the source of the reflection seen on the video.
“So,” McGee asked, “if the two latches are in the same direction, same height, same closed position, should they not both show an illumination from that light source?”
“Not necessarily,” Liscio said. “I don’t know, because I don’t know what the light source is.”
McGee then played the Mitchley security video, which showed the vehicle progress from left to right across the visual field of the street in front of the Mitchley residence. McGee, for a period, put the video on loop mode, allowing the jury and court observers to see the video snippet over and over again. He stopped the video at certain points to display the illuminated spot, driving home the point that at no time did a spot forward of where Liscio theorized the back compartment latch to be located – one corresponding to the latch on the storage compartment in front of the rear storage compartment – ever illuminate. This cast a pallor of doubt over Liscio’s stated theory that the illuminated spot on the vehicle was not a light but rather a reflective surface. No such light is present on Merritt’s truck.
McGee then moved on to a demonstration that effectively discredited the entirety of Liscio’s assertion that Merritt’s truck could not be excluded as a match to the vehicle captured in the February 4, 2010 drive-by on the Mitchley video.
Previously during his cross examination of Liscio, McGee was able to get the witness to identify the height of the top of the taillights of Merritt’s truck as being 60.1 inches from the ground and the bottom of the taillights being 54.6 inches from the ground. Liscio, in response to McGee’s questions, stated that on the opposite side of the vehicle the top of the headlights were 38.5 inches above the ground. McGee had Liscio acknowledge that the vertical difference between the height of the top of the headlights and the height of the bottom of the taillights was 16.1 inches.
Also earlier in his cross examination of Liscio, McGee had zeroed in on a GoogleEarth shot of the 3400 block of Avocado Vista Lane in Fallbrook where the McStay family and Michley had lived in February 2010. That GoogleEarth depiction, which Liscio had included as part of his report, offered a bird’s-eye view of the McStay and Mitchley residences, on opposite sides of the street and roughly a door to a door-and-a-half up or down from each other.
“On that GoogleEarth, one thing you found important to mark was the front porch camera and where it’s located and where its pointed, correct?” McGee had asked at that point.
“Yes,” said Liscio.
“Why didn’t you list the side camera on the side of the house?” McGee asked.
“It wasn’t important for my analysis,” Liscio said.
“So you ignored it,” McGee said.
“Well, there was nothing for me to look at,” said Liscio.
“We’ll come back to that,” McGee promised.
Indeed, after McGee had punctured Liscio’s credibility with regard to the Canadian scientist’s assertion that what appeared to be a light on the side of the vehicle seen in the video was not a light but a reflection, he returned to the Mitchley side yard video camera and what images it had captured.
McGee played on the courtroom’s monitors the brief passage of video footage recorded not by the video camera on Mitchley’s porch but by the video camera on the side yard of the Mitchley residence, which was closer to the McStay’s residence than the porch video. Shot from a higher position than the porch video and at a slightly more downward angle, the side yard camera’s visual field caught even less of the street than its porch-based counterpart, so that even less of the top portion of the vehicle is captured on that video than the one Liscio chose to concentrate on. Nevertheless, because the side yard camera was laterally angled slightly rightward with regard to its orientation toward the street while the porch camera was laterally angled slightly leftward with regard to its orientation in relation to the street, the side yard camera offered a fuller perspective on the back of the vehicle as it drove past the Mitchley residence, traveling left to right from the cameras’ perspectives.
“Can you start to see the beginning of the vehicle pulling out of the driveway from that angle?” McGee asked.
“I can see some lights moving in the front there, so now I can see it turning,” Liscio said. “It’s a vehicle, um-hmm.”
What appeared to be taillights on the vehicle were visible at a height roughly equivalent to the headlights.
Liscio had already testified that the FARO scan of Merritt’s truck documented that the bottom of its taillights were at a height of 54.6 inches from the ground, 16.1 inches above the level of the top of the headlights, at 38.5 inches above the ground. It was thus apparent from the side yard video that the vehicle passing in front of the Mitchley house, with its taillights at an approximate height of 33 to 39 inches above the ground, did not match Merritt’s truck.
After running the side yard video once, McGee said, “Watch it again,” and he played it once more.
“That’s the headlights, right?” he said as the car could be seen coming away from the McStay family’s driveway and then straightening itself into alignment to head down the street.
“Um-hmm,” said Liscio.
“Is that a yes?” McGee asked.
“Yes,” said Liscio. “That’s the headlights, yeah.”
“And then,” said McGee, “a taillight, right? Nice and bright.”
A look of abject terror momentarily registered on Liscio’s face, but he quickly recovered his outward composure as he labored to maintain his equanimity. “Why is it a taillight,” he asked, nonchalantly.
“It’s nice and bright,” said McGee. “That’s what you said you wanted to see. Bright and constant from the side, correct?”
Liscio sat silent on the witness stand, struggling for a response.
McGee played the video once more.
“Is that not the bright and constant that you said you wanted to see to determine that’s a taillight?” McGee asked after a 20 second pause between his last having asked the question.
At last, Liscio said, “I don’t think you can say that’s a taillight from what you’re pointing out to me in this video.”
“No?” said McGee, with incredulous affect.
“No,” said Liscio.
McGee asked if Liscio was not evincing confirmation bias, which is defined as the tendency to interpret evidence as a confirmation of one’s existing beliefs or a priori conclusions.
“No,” Liscio responded. “Actually, what you’re saying is it is a taillight, and I’m saying that you can’t tell from the video whether it is or it isn’t.”
“So, you’re just going to find whatever evidence that matches the theory that you want to reach, and you’re going to say that’s a latch, it’s not a light, right? McGee began
“Objection, argumentative,” Imes said.
“Objection sustained as argumentative, and it assumes facts not in evidence,” ruled Judge Smith.
With the video on loop mode and playing over and over again on the courtroom’s monitors, McGee asked “Why won’t you say this is a taillight?”
“It’s not what I can or can’t say,” Liscio said. “It’s what the evidence can show. And sometimes the evidence can only take you to a certain point. And right now the evidence can only take me to a point where I can say it’s an illuminated area. It behaves differently in the other video. You have one angle here where you’re not capturing many frames and, again, looking at it from the other angle, it behaves differently.”
Liscio, keying off of McGee’s reference to the latch, blurred the distinction between the taillight and the side panel light. “So, all I can say is it’s illuminated, it lines up with the latch, I don’t know what it is other than that is the closest we can get,” he said.
With the side yard video loop yet playing, McGee asked, “Now looking at this video, seeing it drive by, do you still stand behind your statement earlier that you made on cross [examination] that there was nothing important in this video for your analysis?”
“So, if you were to hand me this video and I had absolutely no context, so you say ‘There’s a light here,’ whatever, I would tell you the same thing I’m telling you now. I don’t know,” Liscio insisted.
“Yeah but so, you have context,” said McGee. “You have a video angle. You have lighting circumstances. You could have joined these two cameras together, right, and show where all this lights up where the vehicle is and show how these two interlace with one another and say, ‘Hey, look, here’s how they kind of match up.’ Right?”
“So, the reason I didn’t use this video is I don’t have anything to do any measurement or alignment from,” Liscio said. “There’s such little to work with here. And so, I just want to say again I don’t know.”
At that point, Liscio unraveled further, retreating once more toward merging the taillight with the illumination on the side panel. “Again, I just want to say that I don’t know. I know you want me to say it’s one or the other. I’m being honest. I don’t know what it is, other than that it is an illuminated spot [that] aligns with the latch when I did the reconstruction.”
“Let’s be clear,” said McGee. “If that’s an actual taillight, that’s not my client’s vehicle, right?” McGee asked.
“Objection,” said Imes. “That calls for speculation.”
“Sustained,” said Judge Smith.
“If that is a taillight,” said McGee, “that does not match the characteristics of the 200[0] Chevy 350 that you analyzed,” said McGee.
“Objection,” Imes said. “That assumes a lot of facts not in evidence and misstates his testimony.
“Overruled,” said Judge Smith.
“Again, what you’re saying is if that’s a different vehicle then it’s not the same vehicle,” Liscio said circuitously. “I think I said that there are other vehicles that could be or fall into this category, so vehicles of a similar nature, same form, geometry, same box at the back. If there is one that had exhaust pipe and brake lights and headlights and bumper, and somebody put a side light on there, that is possible. And it’s possible it’s another vehicle. So, I’m not saying that this is your client’s vehicle. All I’m saying is that the vehicle in question is consistent with my report and that if there’s another vehicle that looks similar, that is possible. I can’t make an identification and say it is.”
During his testimony, Liscio provided a statement, extrapolated from his report, that is likely to prove problematic for the prosecution on another score, one unrelated to the Mitchley video.
According to the prosecution, after murdering the McStay family using a three-pound miniature sledgehammer on February 4, 2010, Merritt transported the corpses up into the desert north of Victorville and southeast of Oro Grande and crudely interred them along with the sledgehammer in two shallow graves in the area accessed by a dirt road off of the I-15 Freeway and Stoddard Wells Road on February 6, 2010. On February 6, 2010, 1.1 inches of rain fell in the area around Victorville, and two sets of vehicle tracks, each leading to the side of the two six-foot-long, two-foot-wide and 18-inch-deep graves were yet grooved into the desert floor when the bodies were discovered in 2013. Investigators took measurements of those tire grooves at the time. The width of one of those sets of tracks, from the outside edge to the outside edge of the tire indentations was 73 inches. The other tire track width was 76 inches. It is the contention of the prosecution that that the 73-inch set of tracks is another indication that Merritt is the murderer. The prosecution maintains the width spanning the outside edge to the outside edge of the tires on Merritt’s truck is 73 inches.
McGee asked Liscio, “You also measured the outside wheel width from one edge of the tire to the other edge of the tire, correct?” McGee asked.
“Yes,” said Liscio.
“And what was the distance there?” McGee asked.
“The outer was 71-and-a-half,” said Liscio.
“Not 73,” said McGee.
“Depending on where you take it, again, this is just a rough measurement,” said Liscio. “So, if the tire, you know, if somebody took it from the edge of the tire, it was flatter or less air, it could expand another inch or whatever at the sides. We roughly got 71-and-a-half, so that’s what I have.”
After Liscio concluded his testimony, for which he was provided $4,000 to cover his time on the witness stand in addition to the $10,000 he was paid for his report, he was dismissed without being subject to recall, and was free to make his way back to Toronto.
At that point, subject to the entering of further prosecution exhibits that have not yet been filed with the court, the prosecution rested.
The defense began putting on its case the following day. It began on Wednesday morning with Merritt’s 24-year-old daughter, Sara Taylor Jarvis, followed by her mother and Merritt’s common law wife, Catherine Jarvis, who has lived separately from Merritt since 2011.
Sara Jarvis’s value to the defense in large measure consisted of her having been in a position, when she was 15 years old, to have witnessed a quarrel between her mother and father over Merritt having failed to answer a phone call from Joseph McStay on the evening of February 4, 2010. That call, placed at 8:28 p.m. was the last call ever made from Joseph McStay’s cell phone. That phone call took on significance in the light of subsequent events and has been a recurring topic and issue during the trial.
Sara Jarvis’s testimony supports the version of events offered by her mother, to the effect that Merritt was at or around their Rancho Cucamonga residence at the Homecoming apartment complex on Church Street the evening of February 4, 2010.
Earlier that afternoon, Merritt had met with Joseph McStay at a Chick-fil-A fast food restaurant in Rancho Cucamonga. The prosecution alleges that McStay had confronted Merritt at that meeting about Merritt having fraudulently accessed McStay’s business account and embezzling $4,995 by writing fraudulent checks to himself from it. Later that afternoon and into the evening, according to the prosecution, Merritt shut off his cell phone so his movements could not be tracked and he drove down to the McStay family residence where he killed his business associate and his family.
On the witness stand, Sara Jarvis testified that she recalled her father and McStay partnering when she was 11 or 12 years old to construct large-size custom water features, including fountains and artificial waterfalls. Her father designed and built the metal, glass and rock structures based upon specifications provided by McStay in accordance with the orders for the product from customers. She said that shortly after her father made McStay’s acquaintance McStay had become “my dad’s business partner and his best friend.”
Under direct questioning by Merritt’s co-counsel, Rajan Maline, Taylor Jarvis recalled her parents getting into a spat the night of February 4, 2010 over her father not answering an incoming call from McStay. She told Maline the call came while the family was at the Rancho Cucamonga apartment complex where they lived at the time.
Her father’s failure to answer the call became a larger issue shortly thereafter when her father was unable to contact McStay, she said. The minor disagreement the night of February 4 “turned into less of an argument and more of” consternation on her mother’s part when, she said, “the next day my dad couldn’t get a hold of Joseph. In the subsequent days the conversation turned more to my mom saying, ‘Now you can’t get a hold of Joseph.’ As time went on, it became, ‘What if that was an emergency call or a call for help?’”
The prosecution in its cross examination of Sara Jarvis, carried out by Deputy District Attorney Melissa Rodriguez, sought to portray the witness as someone whose affection and loyalty to her father compromised the truth and accuracy of her testimony.
When Sara Taylor was pressed about the February 4, 2010 phone call, she acknowledged that she had not herself seen the call when it came in, but that it lodged in her memory because of the argument it provoked and the aftermath, which involved her father trying to call McStay later, to no avail.
Rodriguez also sought to elicit from Merritt’s daughter an admission that her father, from his jail cell during the latter stages of his more than four years of incarceration and particularly since his trial has begun, attempted to influence her testimony.
“You had several conversations with your dad after trial started, right?” asked Rodriguez.
“Correct,” said Sara Jarvis.
“And he talked about evidence that was presented during trial, right?” Rodriguez continued.
“Um-humm,” said Taylor Jarvis.
“And he talked to you about phone towers, right?” Rodriguez said.
“Yes,” said Jarvis.
“He specifically told you about the need to be at home on the night of the fourth [February 4, 2010] because his phone was pinging off a tower in the Riverside area,” said Rodriguez. “Do you recall that part of the conversation?”
“I don’t know he said he needed to be home, but I remember talking in general about the phone towers,” said Sara Jarvis.
“And your dad talked to you about the financial aspect of the case as well, right?” asked Rodriguez.
“Sure,” Jarvis responded.
“And he talked about whether you were going to be called as a witness to testify, right?” the deputy prosecutor asked.
“Yes,” said Taylor Jarvis. “I didn’t know if I was.”
“And your dad talked to you about what he wanted you to testify to, right?” Rodriguez probed.
“No, not that I recall,” Sara Taylor Jarvis said.
“You went to visit your dad, right?” Deputy District Attorney Rodriguez asked
“Yes,” said Jarvis.
“And at some point when you talked, you talked through the glass,” said the deputy prosecutor, referring to the plexiglass partitions in the visiting booths at the West Valley Detention Center.
“Yes,” said Sara Taylor.
“And you were made aware at some point your dad’s visits through the glass were being recorded, right?” Rodriguez asked.
“Yes,” said Taylor Jarvis.
“And that was after you had gone to visit your dad and in those visits you talked about the case through the glass, right?” the deputy prosecutor asked.
“Yes,” said Jarvis.
“After you found out they were being recorded, you stopped talking about the trial, basically, through the glass, right?” Rodriguez asked.
“I’d say that’s accurate,” said Sara Jarvis.
“So you talked about what you were going to have to testify about, right?” Rodriguez asked.
“Yes,” said Sara Taylor.
“So, you talked to your dad about different things you might be asked about, right?” asked Rodriguez.
“Well, just it was…” Taylor Jarvis began.
“Just a yes or no question,” Rodriguez barked. “Did you talk to your dad about things you were going to testify about?”
“I only saw one thing you showed me,” said Jarvis, referencing a transcript of a recording of her jailhouse exchange with her father she had been provided with by Rodriguez.
“And your dad talked to you, in addition, about the pseudonym that you heard about, right?” Rodriguez asked. “Him searching for a pseudonym?”
“Yes,” said Taylor. “I think so.”
“So, even if you weren’t here in court, you’ve been privy to everything that’s gone on during trial, right?” the deputy prosecutor asked.
“I would hope so,” said Sara Jarvis. “I mean, it’s my family that’s going through this.”
“But you knew that you could potentially be called as a witness in this case, right?” Deputy District Attorney Rodriguez asked.
“Yes,” said Sara.
“And so you were still talking to your dad about different testimony that had occurred in court, right?” Rodriguez asked.
“Yes,” said Jarvis.
“And in fact you testified about events that occurred when you were approximately eleven to twelve years old until the time you were fifteen, back when the defendant worked for Joseph McStay, right? Rodriguez asked.
“Correct,” said Sara Jarvis.
“And would it be fair to say an eleven-year-old isn’t super-involved in the business aspect of things?” Rodriguez asked.
“Yes. That’s fair,” responded Sara Taylor.
“And so you have some pretty detailed information about that now, though, right?” the deputy prosecutor asked.
“More detailed than I had, but I still don’t know too much,” Taylor Jarvis responded.
While questioning Sara Jarvis, Rodriguez brought up the subject of her father’s work with Keene Engineering, with whom he was employed in the years after the McStay family’s disappearance. Rodriguez took the opportunity to display for her, the jury and courtroom observers photos of her father in what appeared to be a desert setting as he was involved in excavating earth.
Rodriguez asked Sara Jarvis about her father’s work with Keene Engineering, prompting a response that she was not too familiar with what he was doing at that time because she had already moved out of her parent’s house and that she had only seen drawings of what her dad was working on.
“You were aware though that he was involved with making machines that would be able to mine for gold, right?” Rodriguez asked.
“Yes,” said Sara Jarvis.
Two of the photos pointedly showed Merritt, clad in a T-shirt emblazoned with the Keene Engineering Logo across the back, in a hollow that was dredged out from the desert floor. For at least some courtroom observers, and very possibly for some members of the jury, those photos conjured the conception of the fashion in which the McStay family had been buried in the area north of Victorville and southeast of Oro Grande. One of the photos showed Merritt looking up toward the camera as he was standing in what appeared to be a trench at least one-and-a-half times as deep as the relatively shallow 18-inch deep graves the McStay family was buried in.
Sara Taylor evinced a steely resolve in the face of Rodriguez’s questioning, maintaining her equanimity and not allowing herself to be provoked by the deputy prosecutor’s harsh characterizations and insinuating suggestions, and at no point responded in kind.
It was only during Maline’s more gentle questioning on redirect examination that Taylor Jarvis made a showing of emotion. When Maline asked her why her family had discussed the case in jail meetings, Jarvis uttered “Our whole family is part of this,” and at that point grew lachrymose. After she recovered, Maline asked her, “In the entire four-and-a-half-year period that you have been visiting your dad, has he ever once told you to lie for him?” Maline asked.
“No.” Jarvis said, indicating the facts being what they are, no misrepresentations were necessary.
“I don’t have any reason to lie for him,” she said.
Following her daughter to the witness stand was Catherine Jarvis.
Merritt’s common law wife and the mother of his three children, Catherine Jarvis was listed as a prosecution witness, but was never called during the case Imes, Rodriguez and their colleague, Supervising deputy District Attorney Sean Daugherty put on during the accusatory phase of the trial that began with opening statements on January 7, consisting of 28 days in trial, 27 of which were before the eight-woman/four man jury and their six alternates, with one entire day outside the jury’s presence for an evidentiary hearing. Anticipating that the defense would call her as a witness, the prosecutors made a decision to use the opportunity that would provide them to wring from her under cross examination everything that would have otherwise been achieved by questioning her during direct examination, while at the same time deriving the extra benefit of being able to untrack the defense and interrupt its intended focus and progression by redirecting the jury’s attention to the gravamen of the prosecution’s contentions.
Thus, Rodriguez was in essence lying in wait for Jarvis. Before the deputy prosecutor could effectuate that ambush, however, she had to abide while Maline carried out his direct examination of the witness.
In testimony that echoed that of her daughter’s, Catherine Jarvis testified that Merritt, whom she characterized as “very creative,” had progressed to manufacturing water features after fabricating “metal art” and terracotta pots. She said she had assisted him when he started manufacturing artificial waterfalls, which were built in an enclosed porch area next to the driveway of the house in San Dimas where they then lived. She said that Merritt had started modestly, specializing in a relatively uncommon if not unique type of hanging waterfall that found a small niche and was marginally successful, selling the product at home and garden shows. He eventually expanded from a home-based business to one which operated out of a small shop in San Dimas, she said, and moved to a larger shop in Pomona. She said it was at that time that her husband made the acquaintance of Joseph McStay, who was then selling prefabricated waterfalls on his website. Shortly thereafter, she indicated, her common law husband and McStay “were doing business together.” Joseph’s operation thereupon progressed from the simple plastic, metal and glass waterfalls he was marketing before he met Merritt to ones built to order and specification by Merritt, Catherine Jarvis testified. “The custom orders started taking up more of Joseph’s business,” she said. By 2007 and 2008, she said, their shared enterprise was expanding. “It was steadily moving up,” she said. “They were starting to do a lot more volume, or not just volume, but more expensive waterfalls.”
“And they became very close,” said Maline. “Is that right?”
“Yes,” said Jarvis.
“You say they became friends?” Maline asked.
“Yes,” said Jarvis.
By that time, Jarvis said, she was no longer involved in the water feature operation.
“We kept butting heads about how best to take care of customers and get orders out,” she said. “I thought I was right and he thought he was right. It was causing too much friction.”
“Did you guys have disagreements upon how the business should be run?” Maline asked.
“Yes,” said Catherine Jarvis. “Definitely.”
“Who was the more fiscally responsible person?” Maline asked.
“Me,” said Catherine Jarvis.
“So, his skill did not lie with the management of money, I take it,” said Maline.
“His focus was on the waterfalls,” said Catherine Jarvis.
“He was very artistic,” said Jarvis. “He was very creative. He could build anything. He was a hard worker and that’s what he spent most of his time doing.”
Subsequently, Jarvis said, Merritt moved his fabrication operation from Pomona to Claremont. In the same timeframe, Jarvis said, she, Merritt and their family moved to Rancho Cucamonga into a home on Filkins Avenue, which they were renting to buy. When that fell through, she said, they moved into the Homecoming apartment complex in Rancho Cucamonga in 2009. While they were living at the Homecoming apartments, they did not have television and internet service, Catherine Jarvis testified, and so the family often made use of the complex’s clubhouse which had a business center with computers, printers, and fax machines, in addition to recreational amenities including pool tables, a movie theater and a gym, as well as a pool and barbecues nearby. She said that Merritt made use of the business center frequently and the children were often in the clubhouse as well.
“He did go there to make copies and use the fax machine and computers a lot,” she said.
The computer in the clubhouse was on a “hard wire” system, she said, so access to the internet was reliable there. But cell phone reception there was another matter, she said.
“If you had to drag your kids out of there or get Chase’s attention if he was there to get him home, how would you communicate?” Maline asked her. “Would you walk over to the clubhouse or would you call?”
“Most oftentimes it would be easier just to call if I could,” she said. “A lot of times I couldn’t get a hold of them that way, so I would end up walking over there, and seeing what they were doing or when they were coming home.”
“And why was it difficult to sometimes call?” Maline asked.
“I don’t know,” Catherine Jarvis answered. “It just was bad reception.”
She testified that after the family’s move to Rancho Cucamonga and out of the San Dimas operation, she and the rest of the family saw less of Joseph McStay, but that she, Merritt and the children still had occasional contact with McStay, mostly by going out to dinner with him.
“Do you recall at some point Joseph and his family went missing?” Maline asked.
“Yes,” Catherine Jarvis said.
“Do you recall approximately when that was?” Maline asked.
“February of 2010,” she responded.
“Just prior to that, in January, the end of January, did you have an occasion to have one of these dinners with Joseph?” Maline asked.
“Yeah, I believe so,” Catherine Jarvis responded. “They were talking about some new projects that were coming up, and they were some big projects. So, Joseph was really excited about them, and he was almost giddy. He was talking about the Saudi Arabia project.”
The Saudi Arabia project, which at other times was referred to as the “Dubai project,” was the largest and most lucrative undertaking yet for McStay’s company, known as Earth Inspired Products.
“Do you recall the last day that Joseph had contact with Chase?” Maline asked.
“Yes,” said Catherine Jarvis.
“When was that?” asked Maline.
“The Fourth of February [2010],” Catherine Jarvis said.
“And on the Fourth of February, do you recall, did Chase go to work that day?” Maline asked.
“Yes,” said Jarvis.
“Do you know what Joseph did that day or whether he saw Joseph that day?” Maline asked.
“He went to work in the morning and he said he was on his way to meet Joseph for lunch and pick up checks,” Catherine Jarvis said.
Jarvis said he returned home with checks later that day. Jarvis testified that McStay occasionally gave Merritt blank checks so he could pay for materials and vendors relating to the water feature construction business. Jarvis said Merritt also used cash in paying for materials and services relating to those manufacturing efforts. Jarvis said that because of a bankruptcy, she and Merritt often dealt in cash.
Jarvis said that Merritt was gone from their residence during the daytime on February 4, 2010, but that he returned while it was yet daylight. To Maline’s question, she said Merritt was home “in the evening. I think he was home that day earlier than usual, maybe 5 [o’clock]. It was still light outside.”
Maline asked if Merritt was in the clubhouse that day. “Specifically, I don’t remember for sure if he went to the clubhouse, but he was home in the area that day,” she said.
“Was there a phone call that Chase received in the evening hours?” Maline asked.
“Yes,” Catherine Jarvis said.”
“Do you recall when that was?” Maline asked.
“It was after dark,” Jarvis responded. “Around 8 o’clock.”
“And do you know who the call was from?” Maline asked.
“Yes,” said Jarvis.
“Who?” asked Maline.
“Joseph,” Catherine Jarvis said.
“And how do you know?” Maline asked.
“It said on Chase’s display who the call was from,” she said.
“Now, did you see that?” Maline asked.
“Yes, I did,” Catherine Jarvis said.
“Did Chase answer the phone?” Maline asked.
“No, he did not,” Jarvis said.
“Did you respond in any way after you saw Joesph’s name pop up and you see Joseph not answer it?” Maline asked. “Did you say or do anything?”
“Yes, we proceeded to get into a little bit of an argument about him not answering his phone,” she said.
She said, “I told him it was Joseph calling.” She said Merritt told her “’I already saw him and I’ll call him tomorrow.’ And then I was like, ‘Well, he’s calling, and it’s evening. Shouldn’t you answer the phone? He probably called for a reason.’ And he just didn’t answer.”
She said Merritt never heard from Joseph after that.
Jarvis recollected that two detectives from the San Diego Sheriff’s Department came to their home to speak with Merritt about the McStay family’s disappearance. She remembered that as happening “three or four weeks” after Joseph went missing, though previous testimony in the trial indicated it occurred on February 17, 2010.
Catherine Jarvis said Merritt’s failure to take Joseph’s call came to be an item of discussion and bone of contention between them in the days and weeks that followed. After Merritt was not able to reach McStay, she said, “He said he was going to drive down to Joseph’s house and check on him.” After Merritt did so, she said, “Eventually he got a hold of the family and he told me he was going down there and he was going to meet his brother there and they were going to try to get in the house to see if there was any evidence of them being gone somewhere and having taken a vacation somewhere without telling anyone.”
Jarvis said that Merritt and McStay, prior to the disappearance, “talked everyday, ten, fifteen times a day, constantly.”
“Do you know if Chase notified the police?” Maline asked.
“He did not,” Jarvis said.
“Did you talk about that with Chase?” Maline asked.
“Yes,” Catherine Jarvis answered.
“And when did you have that discussion with Chase?” Maline said.
“It was in the days he couldn’t get a hold of him,” she indicated. “I said, ‘Why don’t you contact the police?’ and he was like, ‘Let’s wait until after the weekend’ and ‘Maybe they just went on vacation and didn’t tell anyone. They just took off someplace’ and ‘I’ll see if I can get a hold of the family and see if they know where he is’ and, you know, ‘Let’s not just jump the gun.’”
Jarvis said that by June 2011 she and Merritt were no longer living together.
In 2013 she said she was still in contact with Merritt though not living with him when the remains of the McStay family were found. She said that she was twice interviewed by detectives with the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department.
She told the detectives about the unanswered phone call from McStay that was placed to her husband the night of February 4, 2010, she said.
Maline asked her about an interview she had with San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department investigators on October 10, 2014. “How was that experience?” Maline asked. “Were they questioning you about whether he really received that phone call or not?”
An objection was made to the question and sustained. Maline had Jarvis confirm that she had stood by her statement that Merritt had gotten but did not answer a call from Joseph McStay on the evening of February 4, 2010.
Catherine Jarvis testified that after Joseph McStay’s disappearance, an effort involving Merritt and McStay’s brother and mother was made to keep Earth Inspired Products up and running. She said that she also understood that effort might have included Dan Kavanaugh, who was involved in the sale of the water features via the internet. Merritt had completed the Saudi Arabia waterfall project, she testified, and he traveled to Saudi Arabia to install it.
In the summer of 2014, homicide detectives with the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department had obtained warrants to place taps on Merritt’s and Jarvis’s phones. In an effort to induce one or both of them into making an incriminating statement or incriminating statements, the detectives interrogated Catherine Jarvis on October 10, 2014. The following day, October 11, 2014, there was phone contact between Merritt and Jarvis. The recording of that conversation was played in court on Thursday morning while Jarvis was on the witness stand.
On the audio of the call, Jarvis can be heard telling Merritt that she had been subjected to an interrogation by the detectives “for hours” in which they were trying to convince her that she had things “wrong. Pretty much telling me that you did the murders and that I, you know, helped you in some way, shape or form.”
She said the detectives were showing her “evidence and things, pictures…”
“Such as?” Merritt asks.
“Pictures of your utility truck and pictures of the family, pictures of us, pictures of our kids,” she says.
“What’s that got to do with anything?” Merritt says.
“They’re trying to intimidate,” she says. “They say, ‘If you go to jail, what’s going to happen to your kids?’ Stuff like that. They show me a picture of my kids. ‘Do you want them to be without a mother?’”
“Those fuckers,” Merritt responds. “What kind of questions were they asking?”
“Like, ‘What happened the night before Joseph disappeared?’ and then they brought out phone records and said, “Well, that’s not what happened. Chase wasn’t home.’ And I go, ‘What? That’s not possible. That’s not what I remember.’ And, so like ‘Well, here’s the phone records’ and ‘You were trying to get a hold of him at the time you saw the phone ringing.’”
“I was trying to get a hold of him?” Merritt says.
“No, I was trying to get a hold of you,” Jarvis says.
“They were showing me the phone records from that night,” she said. “’Look, there’s call after call after call, and he’s not answering.’ I go, ‘That can’t be. That can’t be, because you were home. I remember!’ It was crazy.”
A bit further on in the phone call, Jarvis is heard saying the investigators were telling her “You [i.e., Merritt] had something to do with it. Now you’re going to be accused of the murders. I was like, ‘This is not possible. Not possible. I know Chase. It’s not possible.’ You’ve got no reason to do this.”
Jarvis told Merritt she told the detectives, “’One day somebody is going to come and probably shoot Chase, kill him, but for him to do this to somebody else, just doesn’t make sense.’ I told them there’s no way you could have done it and they said that there was, and your car, your truck was seen at Joseph’s house the night he disappeared. We’re going back and forth and I was just like ‘Am I going crazy? Am I remembering things wrong? What the hell is happening?’ They were trying to convince me or get me to say it didn’t happen the way I said. I know. I know it happened. And I said, ‘Maybe it happened on another day, but I could have sworn it was on a Friday. I could have sworn this is what happened.’”
Jarvis said, “I don’t know if they’re just trying to find evidence to pin this on you. I don’t know if they’re telling me a made-up story for my benefit.”
Merritt said, “They’re spending an awful lot of energy on me.”
“Well, they’re just trying to find out who did it,” Jarvis responded. “I think they want to cover a lot of bases and you don’t know if they’re spending an awful lot of energy on you. It’s just that you’ve made a lot of people angry at you. That’s part of the problem. If somebody’s going to point a finger, they’ll point at you because you’ve pissed everybody off.”
“Where do you get I’ve pissed everybody off?” Merritt retorted.
“Who haven’t you pissed off?” Jarvis came back.
“I haven’t pissed everybody off,” Merritt is heard saying.
“Think about it,” Catherine Jarvis said.
“Like who?” Merritt asked.
“Chase, like everybody,” she said. “Everybody that I can think you come into contact with. The customers. Business associates. You piss everybody off. Because you end up walking away. You don’t follow thorough. You don’t finish. You piss a lot of people off. That’s what I told the detective. I said, ”That’s what I’m saying.’ I couldn’t take that chance with my family because you’re too reckless. You don’t think about the consequences of things. I thought you were going to piss off the wrong person and they were going to come after you and/or us. I said, ‘If anything, it will be Chase who will end up dead. He’s going to piss off the wrong person one day and he’s going to end up dead. But for him to take somebody else out, that just don’t make sense. He just doesn’t care much about anything or anyone.’”
“Well, thanks,” said Merritt..
“Well, it’s friggin’ the truth,” Jarvis said.
“No, it’s not,” Merritt responded.
“You didn’t care enough to keep your family together,” Jarvis remonstrated. “You don’t stop doing the bad things you do. You don’t think about the repercussions. You don’t listen to people when they’re trying to tell you that you’re not doing the right thing.”
Nevertheless, after that diatribe, Catherine is heard saying, “I still believe in you. I still care about you. You drove me crazy.”
When the prosecution was still putting its case on and was yet contemplating calling Catherine Jarvis as a prosecution witness, the defense team made a motion to prevent the introduction of evidence consisting of monitored conversations between Merritt and both Catherine Jarvis and Sara Jarvis. In an effort to circumvent the recording of conversations over the intercom phones on either side of the visiting booths at West Valley Detention Center, Merritt had taken to shouting loudly though the plexiglass partition. Sergeant Ryan Smith placed a digital recording device in the booth that captured those exchanges. Judge Michael Smith ruled that the prosecution could use those recordings and present them to the jury.
Thus, with Catherine Jarvis on the stand, Rodriguez had one of those recorded exchanges played for the jury.
In it, Merritt can be heard telling Jarvis that she is likely to be called upon to testify about the February 4, 2010 phone call from Joseph McStay that went unanswered. He also discusses with her the circumstance relating to a waterfall he and McStay had built for Provecho, a restaurant in Los Angeles. Provecho had stiffed McStay for the $38,000 cost of that impressive water feature, and McStay was on the verge of suing the restaurant to recoup the money. In the meantime, both McStay and Merritt had agreed to split the loss – $19,000 each – on the project.
The prosecution was hoping that the jury might construe Merritt’s statements to Catherine Jarvis with regard to her upcoming testimony as an effort to influence that testimony, and an indication of his guilt. Among courtroom observers, that evidence left varying impressions. Indeed, among those courtroom regulars who are favorably disposed to the prosecution and who have reached the conclusion that Merritt is guilty, Merritt’s recorded shouts through the glass were uniformly interpreted as further confirmation of his culpability in the brutal murders and as an effort to fabricate evidence and tamper with a witness. Among others, however, his efforts to bypass the jailhouse’s eavesdropping system after being cooped up for more than four years was seen in a far less sinister light. Of import here, it was noted, the statements he made with regard to the Provecho matter were absolutely true and can be documented by communications between McStay and others. Moreover, law enforcement officials for more than four years have made a concerted effort to change Catherin Jarvis’s statements with regard to the unanswered February 4, 2010 phone call from McStay to Merritt, going so far as to threaten her with arrest and to charge her as an accomplice in the murders if she did not do so. In this way, Merritt’s efforts to keep her on track without alerting the authorities lends itself to an entirely different construction, coming across to some as a logical and defensible effort to prevent himself from being railroaded.
In cross examining Jarvis, Rodriguez obtained an acknowledgment from the witness that Merritt had taken an almost obsessive interest in gambling in the 2007-2008 timeframe, and had begun completing at poker tournaments. When Jarvis indicated that Merritt’s fascination with gambling had lasted “a couple of years,” Rodriguez introduced evidence that had been presented through other witnesses earlier in the trail to show that Merritt’s overindulgence in gaming had persisted for far longer and at an intensity greater than Jarvis had represented, in that he had frequented the Pechanga, Commerce and San Manuel casinos on at least 73 occasions between February 2009 and February 2010. An element of the prosecution’s case is that Merritt’s gambling addiction had contributed to the financial desperation that led to the McStay family murders.
In an effort to imply to the jury that Catherine Jarvis was shading the truth in her testimony, Rodriguez asked her about her current relationship with Merritt and her feelings toward him. She acknowledged she still loved him.
Rodriguez dwelt at length with both the mother and daughter with regard to their contact with Merritt’s defense team. Both acknowledged having reviewed with Merritt’s lawyers transcripts, videos or audio recordings of their questioning by investigators.

In the face of overwhelming resident opposition, the Fontana City Council on Tuesday March 12 approved a massive warehousing and industrial business park project at the southeastern corner of the city.
The West Valley Logistics Center is to entail seven high cube warehouses for a total space of 3.4 million square feet, to be built within the West Valley Logistics Center Specific Plan Project Area, bounded on the north by a Southern California Edison (SCE) Utility Corridor, on the west by the Jurupa Hills, on the south by residential properties within the City of Jurupa Valley, and on the east by residential uses within Bloomington.
The project applicant, Red Rock Development, obtained a recommendation on the project from the planning commission on January 15 by a vote of 4-to-1, with Commissioner Laura Vasquez dissenting. The commission majority ran counter to planning staff’s call for the project to be rejected.
This Tuesday, Michael Morris, speaking on behalf of Red Rock, sought to stir up excitement for the project. “This project,” Morris said, “when approved and the first building permit is issued will start a series of payments to the City of Fontana that will total to $19 million to the city’s general fund for off-site parking improvements and other municipal needs. Development impact fees paid at the permit stage will be in excess of 14 million [dollars] paid to the city of Fontana, school fees in excess of 2 million [dollars] will be paid to the Colton Unified School District, even though the project will not directly generate students that will impact the school district. The property tax assessment at complete build-out will be in excess of $475 million, and based on the city’s 21.7 percent to the city the fire district and parks will total more than one million [dollars] annually. The permanent jobs created will be in excess of 2,000, another 4,000 jobs related to construction and another 2,000 related to infrastructure construction. The permanent jobs will be listed in the logistics trade and logistics supply chains.”
Morris continued, “The economic output impact both direct and indirect and induced will be more than 740 million [dollars] generated through construction, building construction and operation to Fontana, San Bernardino County and the regional economy.”
The vast majority of the public weighing in with regard to the project at the hearing were far less enthusiastic, with only a few members of local construction unions offering any encouragement to the council to approve the project.
Tomasa Manlove said, “I do not want a warehouse in our Beautiful Bloomington Hills. We already have enough warehouses that have recently been put on Cedar Avenue, about three of them. We don’t need another one, especially in those hills. It will decrease the value of our houses, of our property.”
Shiraz Tangri, an attorney with the law firm of Meyers Nave representing the County of San Bernardino, said, “We ask the city to deny the project at this point in time. The county has expressed its concerns about environmental impacts on multiple occasions over the past five years. We appreciate the city’s efforts to try to meet with the county to discuss these issues, but at this time the final environmental impact report for the project does not address the county’s fundamental concerns about this new industrial facility. The county’s primary concern is that the project’s traffic, air quality, noise and drainage impacts will unduly burden county facilities. The project’s extensive truck traffic will adversely impact county residents, including those in the Bloomington community. Beyond that, the final environmental impact report does not comply with the California Environmental Quality Act’s fundamental requirements to disclose, analyze and mitigate the many impacts this massive logistics facility will create on the environment. The project description is vague and inconsistent. It’s unclear exactly what specific uses will be developed or who the users will be, what hours the center will operate, how the construction will be phased, whether hazardous materials will be transported and used on the site, and what off-site improvements should ultimately be required for the project. The environmental impact report underestimates the truck traffic generation.”
Gary Grossich, a Colton planning commissioner and the chair of the Bloomington Municipal Advisory Council, said, “This project proposes to run 100 percent of its traffic through Bloomington. I spoke with your staff and was told there are currently 60,000 trips a day over the large already-improved Sierra interchange. The 2019 estimate for the Cedar Interchange with this project is almost 65,000 trips on an interchange designed for 41,000 daily trips. The 65,000 trips do not include this proposed project and may not even include the 2.2 million square feet of warehouses Rialto is building on our border at the old El Riveno Country Club. I would point out that almost 75 Bloomington residentially-zoned properties along Locust would need to be purchased by the developers who have no eminent domain rights. Moreover, purchase of these properties to allow 2,000 diesel trucks to travel up and down Locust would cause an impact to the residential neighborhoods that cannot be mitigated. Along with that, the county would end up being responsible for the cost of continuing future maintenance to wear and tear from all the trucking. Locust is currently a lightly-traveled street. Even with the proposed mitigation, the existing conditions will not improve. They will worsen. Mitigation measures are used to alleviate impacts, not to be used as a justification to cause other negative impacts that cannot be mitigated. Approving this project would most likely result in the entire Locust corridor being forced to be rezoned to industrial instead of its current residential zoning. Bottom line, the residents of Bloomington have the sole right to make decisions regarding the future of Bloomington. Bloomington continues to suffer negative traffic impacts from industrial projects located on our borders from both Rialto and Fontana, along with massive amounts of illegal trucking operations, many of which are directly related to our neighboring cities’ projects. These illegal trucking operations are operating next to our schools and in the middle of our residential neighborhoods. Bloomington cannot continue to carry the traffic burden of neighboring cities’ projects while our community suffers from the negative impacts.”
Residents of the area told the council that one of the oldest trees on record, one that outlived the Ice Age, is located in the Jurupa Hills. Its existence is threatened by the project, they said.
Bloomington and Jurupa Hills residents said that the project would have minimal impact on Fontana, and that all of impact would be imposed on neighboring community.
Thomas Rocha of Bloomington said, “This project would not only eliminate our horse trails and our foothills, but it would destroy my community of Bloomington. Personally, like hundreds of others, I am tired of this game that you and the county keep playing on our lives. You send out notices, you ask for our opinions on certain projects, you go to numerous hearings, developers with their fancy suits show up and tell you how good this project is for our community, using fabricated numbers all based on speculation. They bring in union workers here to fill the seats and tell us how much they need these jobs close to their house. Believe me, I’m all for unions – I’ve been a union member for 40 years. As a shop steward we build up communities, we don’t tear them down. One thing we taught, being a shop steward, is union rights and human rights go hand-in-hand. The basic human right that every man woman and child has is to work, play and raise their children in a clean and toxic-free environment. The environmental groups are here with hard, proven facts. They tell you how harmful these projects are and all the negative impacts they are going to have on our lives, to our communities. They [the city council and county supervisors] give the community members five minutes to speak. They come up there and spill their heart out to you guys. You act like you’re listening. You look at them. You act concerned. But you don’t really care. You’re not even paying attention right now. When does this stop? We have enough vacant warehouses in the Inland Empire. When is enough enough? Put our union bothers and sisters to work. Let them build houses. We need houses. We have a housing shortage. The developers and you guys always talk about income. But one thing you never talk about is the outcome. The income you guys bring [from building warehouses] isn’t enough to get you out of your mother’s house, to pay utilities and to pay rent. Let’s talk about the outcome. The end results, the way this all turns out, are the consequences we face for your irresponsible land use decisions that you continue to make. None of you on this board or the planning commission or the developers will have to face or raise your children in this outcome. Our children will suffer being overburdened with particulate matter, getting asthma and stunting their lung growth. Our elderly, like me, will suffer with chronic ill health. It will shorten our life span. Our roads, our quality of life, and our air quality will be forever changed.”
Jim Hosmanek said, “With the added trucks we’re going to have more congestion. We’ll bring in some businesses that will probably be automated. You’re losing jobs there. I’m old. I wanna get out of here and move to Arizona because California’s expensive and I can’t afford it. My military benefits don’t pay that much. I’m older and I really don’t like kids, they irritate me, because I’m old. They’re the greatest thing in the world, but they just get on my nerves. I’m glad my kids have grown up. They’ve gone to school, they’re educated, but they’re gone. I don’t have grandkids. The traffic is gonna increase. As I’ve gotten older, I don’t have the road rage. I wave to people when I piss them off because I’m the old guy driving down the road and I drive real slow and I don’t really care because I really don’t have any place to be. My biggest deal is driving past the schools. How many schools do we have in that general area? They have a lot of schools in that area and these kids walk right in the middle of the street. One of these days – mark my words – one of these days… one of these days some kid is going to get killed. One kid is one kid too many to get killed when a big-ass truck for some stupid ass like me, speeding by because I can’t get somewhere and I kill a kid, a trucker kills a kid, somebody kills somebody. Mark my words.”
Members of San Bernardino-based Hod Carriers and Laborers Local 783 supported the project, saying it would provide jobs that are proximate to where they live.
Ericka Flores, with the Center for Community Action and Environmental Justice, said the zoning change being granted for the project will precipitated future health risk escalations for nearby residents.
Andrea Vidaurre, a policy analyst at Center for Community Action and Environmental Justice, characterized the project as irrational.
“The West Valley Logistics Center will bring more than 6,000 vehicle trips, 2,000 of which will be diesel trucks,” said Vidaure. Heavy duty vehicles emit up to five times the amount of carbon monoxide per mile versus a light-duty vehicle. The project will certainly help to worsen the pre-existing pollution in the bordering communities of Bloomington, Fontana, and Jurupa Valley.”
The West Valley Logistics Center, to be built on a site originally planned for a 1,154-home residential project an elementary school and private and joint-use recreational facilities, required a zone change for approval.
Assemblymembers Eloise Gomez Reyes and Freddie Rodriguez and State Senator Connie Leyva signed a letter of opposition which asserted the project’s vicinity to sensitive communities will trash the quality of life of residents throughout the region through increased air pollution, noise and traffic congestion.
“The Fontana Planning Commission staff recommended denying the West Valley Logistics Center as the environmental analysis shows that it have significant and unavoidable impacts on traffic and air quality. Given the environmental injustices faced by this community, we request that the City of Fontana reconsider this project,” according to the letter.
Project applicants said the site will create about 4,000 construction jobs during an 18- to 24-month period, and an additional 2,000 jobs once the warehouses are running.
Councilmember Jesse Sandoval, before casting the lone no vote against the project, said the call of union members for the project to be approved did not move him because the decent paying work to be generated consisted of temporary jobs, and most of the warehouse jobs were poor paying positions provided through staffing agencies.
Sandoval said nearby homes and schools would be impacted by noise, traffic and pollution created by the warehouses.
Mayor Acquanetta Warren, who has earned the sobriquet “Warehouse Warren” because of her practice of accepting massive scale political donations from warehouse developers and supporting their projects, said the concerns voiced by those in opposition to the project could be overlooked because the the project is good for Fontana and will result in the addition of thousands of local jobs.
In response to suggestions that the eventual tenants at the project site were unknown, she asked Morris if those who would occupy the buildings had been determined. Morris told her that what he is engaged in is “called speculative building because the tenant is not yet known.” That did not dim Warren’s enthusiasm for the project. She pressed him for an indication that the buildings would not be used simply as warehouses but rather for manufacturing operations. Morris was not able to make that commitment, but indicated that some manufacturers might take up operation there. “W certainly hope so.”
Warren was not able to count on her longstanding council ally, John Roberts to back her in supporting the project because he owns property in the area and did not vote because of a potential conflict of interest.
Councilmembers Jesse Armendarez and Phillip Cothran, who are members of her political machine, came through for her.
They declared that a so-called decision of “overriding consideration” offset any downside of the project relating to incompatible land use in that the potential for job creation was too valuable to pass up.
Armendarez, perhaps self-conscious about what Rocha had said about feigning interest in the sentiment of the public and then voting in an opposite direction, said: “We do listen to you. You may not like my decision, but we do listen.”
Cothran, in a statement that was scripted for him by Warren and her advisors, said he supports bringing jobs to Fontana through more warehousing. He said manufacturing jobs will benefit the entire community.
The project was approved by a 3-to-1 margin.
-Mark Gutglueck

Action by the Victorville City Council last week has renewed longstanding criticism and suspicion with regard to the cooperative and overlapping application of the separate governmental authorities exercised by the County of San Bernardino and its 24 cities. In particular, municipal and county officials find themselves under the uncomfortable focus that has again arisen as a result of certain improprieties weaved into the fraternization amongst them at what has come to be a traditional conference that takes place in Lake Arrowhead on an annual basis.
A recurrent criticism of government is that the rights of citizens have been consistently eroded by means of what has come to be known as “agency-to-agency privilege.” While much of the information the government gathers is considered to be public, governmental officials often restrict its availability to anyone outside that governmental entity, i.e., citizens who are not employed by that particular branch or level of the government. That restriction is routinely lifted, however, if the entity making a request for the data is an employee or official with another governmental entity. This sharing of information is an example of agency-to-agency privilege. Other examples of the exercise of agency-to-agency privilege typically consist of the cooperation between governmental entities, including the sharing or lending of resources, facilities, equipment and manpower.
San Bernardino County’s annual County-City Conference, usually held at the Lake Arrowhead Resort, a luxury hotel on the shore of Lake Arrowhead considered one of the county’s premier getaway venues, involves seminars and presentations relating to governance and specific issues of note with regard to finance, infrastructure and shared interests between the county and some of the cities. The conference also typically involves a venue for social interaction between government officials in a variety of settings, including ones on a scale from the relatively formal to the progressively more and more intimate. Alcohol is commonly used as an emollient. In a good number of cases over the years, that intimacy has progressed to an ultimate conclusion, as when one year the sheriff of the county spent the night in the room of a councilwoman from Grand Terrace.
Perhaps the most famous, or perhaps infamous, of these episodes of intimacy among attendees of the County-City Conference occurred at the one held on March 23 and 24, 2006.
Mike Ramos was then the district attorney, having first been elected to that office in 2002. Two weeks prior to the conference, he had learned that no opponent had registered by the deadline to run against him in that year’s election, an indication, essentially, that he would remain as district attorney at least until 2011, as the next election for district attorney in San Bernardino County thereafter would not come until 2010. Confident in the knowledge that his action would not be used against him politically and aware as well that his position and authority as the county’s top prosecutor provided him with an even further layer of insulation, Ramos fully immersed himself in the general licentiousness the soiree entailed, drinking himself to a point of inebriation. Before doing so, however, the-then 49-year-old district attorney set his sights on the then-38-year-old Doreen Boxer, who just two months previously had been hired as San Bernardino County’s public defender. Ramos approached Boxer, who was seated on an oversized chair in hotel’s lobby near the entranceway to the hotel’s restaurant. A few minutes later, they were spotted inside the restaurant, seated closely together in a booth. Later that evening, Ramos and Boxer were seen together in an elevator. Numerous witness at the conference, including Supervisor Josie Gonzales and then-supervisors Dennis Hansberger and Bill Postmus, as well as a reporter for the Los Angeles Times, saw Ramos and Boxer exiting the elevator in a state of partial undress.
The public defender’s office provides criminal defenses to county residents charged with crimes who are indigent or otherwise incapable of making financial arrangements to obtain legal representation. In this way, the district attorney’s office often squares off against the public defender’s office. The public defender almost exclusively goes to court against the district attorney’s office. For that reason, at least some of Ramos’s employees were aghast to learn that their boss had initiated some level of a romantic physical relationship with Boxer.
County officials were not particularly bothered by what had occurred, and Boxer was permitted to remain as public defender, though she was reportedly queried about her relationship with Ramos by members of the board of supervisors sometime after the conference. More than three years later, Ramos’s penchant for womanizing blew up into a full-blown scandal, including revelations of his affairs with three of the deputy prosecutors in his office, a one-time deputy prosecutor who was promoted to the specially-created position of assistant to the district attorney, an office management consultant to the district attorney’s office, a member of the training staff with the California District Attorney’s Office staff in Sacramento, two investigative technicians in the district attorney’s office and one of its paralegals. Thereafter, one of those, then-District Attorney’s Office Evidence Technician Cheryl Ristow, sued Ramos and the county, claiming she had initiated a consensual off-and-on relationship with Ramos in September 2003 that lasted three-and-a-half years. After she sought to terminate the relationship, she maintained, he continued to pursue and harass her, and she alleged she faced a hostile work environment and retaliation thereafter. When Ramos labeled her claim “false and politically motivated,” the county authorized the hiring of the law firm of Curiale Hirschfield & Kraemer, under a $75,000 contract, in an effort to absolve Ramos and the county of any wrongdoing. Attorneys acting in the role of investigators with Curiale Hirschfield & Kraemer, however, in short order confirmed that Ramos had sexual relations with at least four of his employees along with the incidental fact that the County-City Conference was, in the words of one attendee “a huge fuckfest.” By arranging to have the investigation carried out not by licensed investigators but rather by attorneys, together with the application of a $65,000 uprating of the Curiale Hischfield & Kraemer contract to a total of $140,000 for the work on the Ramos womanizing matter, the firm delivered a sanitized version of its findings for public consumption which found there was no retaliation aimed at Ristow, and that any disciplinary action leveled at her while she was yet employed with the district attorney’s office was not retaliation as she characterized it, but rather corrective action related to her job performance “based on objective, verifiable and current concerns. Whether Ramos did or did not have welcome – or unwelcome – sexual relationships” with other employees or others with whom such interaction would have been inappropriate such as Boxer or the training staff member with the California District Attorney’s Office “is irrelevant to whether or not he, or individuals at his request or suggestion, retaliated against Ristow,” the report delivered by Curiale Hischfield & Kraemer to the county stated. “Thus, while encouraged by many to delve into the muck or rumor and scandal, that was neither our charge nor an obligation necessitated by the issue presented.” As the matter had in its entirety been handled by lawyers, the investigation fell within the rubric of attorney- client privilege, eliminating any chance that the embarrassing and damning information the investigation had unearthed or had simply come across would ever be revealed.
Having dodged that bullet, county and city officials have continued with the annual City-County Conference in the years since. Unsurprisingly, the conference has evolved into a closed one, at which members of the public are unwelcome and where press participation is virtually non-existent.
For years, county and city officials have conveyed and frolicked about in Lake Arrowhead well outside the scrutiny of the public. On March 5, however, Victorville Mayor Gloria Garcia, in conjunction with council members Jim Cox and Debra Jones and City Attorney Andre de Bortnowski took action which has redirected attention to the revelry near the mountaintop. Ironically, it appears that action was intended to keep one of the better-kept secrets of the privilege of governance under wraps.
All mayors and council members in the county’s 24 cities are extended an invitation to the conference. As a matter of course all of the Victorville City Council was invited to attend. In response, city staff at Victorville City Hall prepared an action item for the March 5 council meeting calling for an appropriation of $1,959.65 to cover the tab of all five council members’ official business travel to the 2019 city-county conference, including the cost of registration at the conference, hotel accommodations and parking.
When the council took up the item, Mayor Gloria Garcia made a motion to exclude Councilwoman Blanca Gomez from the business travel expenditure authorization.
“I move to authorize council to attend the conference with the exception of Councilmember Gomez due to her continued disregard of council policy and procedures,” Mayor Garcia said.
Councilwoman Debra Jones seconded the motion but before the council could vote on it, Gomez interjected, “I create a substitute motion to include all council members. Gomez said she was doing so “because what you would be doing is you will be bringing discrimination against the city and this is not fair for a taxpayer. You can’t just arbitrarily do stuff like that. You are setting a precedence and I know that the city attorney has been following it greatly. So I would like for you to comment as well.”
“I don’t see any indication of discrimination with respect to the current motion on the table,” said City Attorney Andre DeBortnowski.
“So, then what you’re saying is it’s okay for the council members – four of them – to exclude me because they feel they have the power to exclude me, Mr. Attorney?” Gomez countered.
“I haven’t seen any vote on the discussion yet,” said de Bortnowski in sidestepping the question. “That’s premature.”
“You haven’t seen it yet?” Gomez pressed.
“There hasn’t been any action,” responded de Bortnowski.
“Well, when it takes action, I would like your legal opinion to be imported,” said Gomez.
Councilwoman Rita Ramirez-Dean seconded Gomez’s motion that all five of the city’s council members attend.
Before that vote took place, Councilman James Cox made the point that he had recently attended a League of California Cities conference on his own dime, notwithstanding the consideration that the city was on the verge of paying the registration costs and incidental costs of a room and meals at the Arrowhead Resort for the members of the council to attend the City-County Conference. “In this motion here, for Lake Arrowhead, this is a City-County Conference. It’s different from the League of California Cities. Certainly the mayor and mayor pro tem need to attend those. I think our new council needs to attend. I’ll make it easy. I don’t need to attend. If I do, I’ll pay my own way, as I usually do. We don’t point that out a lot, but this is an important meeting for those three members of the council.”
Speaking directly to Gomez, Cox, apparently acceding to a distinction that Gomez had made between “the city,” meaning the officials and employees who populate City Hall as opposed to the residents of the city, accused Gomez of being disloyal to her elected colleagues and the city’s employees. “It’s difficult, but in the council meeting you said you would never represent the city,” said Cox. “Those are your words. You will not represent the city. You represent the voters. You will not represent the city. Why would you go to a meeting if you refuse to represent the city? I can’t support you to go to a meeting and represent some other point of view. And we have a policy that says the position of the city is the mayor and the council or the whole council. If you agree to do that, I think you should go to the meeting, but as long as your position is that you will not represent the city, I don’t think that you should be there. I think you just shouldn’t.”
Cox is a creature of government, particularly in Victorville. He began as a mid-level staffer with the city in November of 1967 and was elevated to the city manager post in December 1969. He led the city for thirty years, retiring in December 1999. Cox subsequently served as Apple Valley town manager in an extended interim capacity, when he was lured out of retirement in 2008. He subsequently came back as Victorville city manager in 2009, remaining in that position for more than two years.
The item on the agenda consisted of a staff recommendation that “that the city council authorize official business travel to the 2019 city-county conference for all council members in the total amount of $1,959.65 for registration, hotel and parking.”
Gomez said she thought that altering the recommendation to exclude her was tantamount to a violation of the Ralph M. Brown Act, California’s open public meeting law which requires that issues to be voted on must be advertised on the agenda 72 hours ahead of the vote. The council’s impromptu alteration of the item changed what was being voted upon, she asserted. “If we want to add to the agenda, and not pass this one, that is what we should do,” she said.
Bortnowski said, “Ms. Gomez, I respectfully disagree with you. Right now, the recommendation before the council is to consider whether or not to fund all members going. Any council member can make a modification of that and submit a motion that differs from that. It’s related to the exact same subject matter. Totally appropriate.”
City Manager Keith Metzler said, “I’ve attended this event a couple of times representing the city and it’s an opportunity certainly for not only Victorville representatives to go but also be among the other representatives within the county. So, you’ll get an opportunity to, of course, network and work with your peers in other communities. But they also have an agenda that is largely educational as to things going on in the county, issues of particular interest to the county, and it also allows you to in some cases see best practices from some of your peers as to how they’re tackling or handling issues in their community.”
The vote was taken and Gomez’s substitute motion failed 2-3, with Garcia, Cox and Councilwoman Debra Jones voting against it.
The council then took up Mayor Garcia’s initial motion to have the four members of the city council excluding Gomez attend the conference and adjust the funding accordingly. “I’m happy to second it,” said Jones.
Recognizing the vote was not going to go her way, Gomez said before the vote was taken, “So, for the public that’s watching: They say they have the power to oust one because I don’t represent the people in terms of the city. Who is the city? You or us five? Who do we represent? Do I represent the people outside these four walls or do I represent four other council members’ ideologies?”
The council then voted 3-to-1 with Gomez in opposition and Ramirez-Dean abstaining in support of Garcia’s motion.
Since being elected to the Victorville City Council in 2016, Gomez has attracted controversy. She has crossed swords with virtually everyone on the council, current and former, with the exception of Ramirez-Dean. She has, on occasion, expressed reservations about action the council has taken in both public sessions and in closed executive sessions outside the scrutiny of the public. This has led to charges that Gomez has violated confidences and confidentiality. While much or most of what a governmental decision-making body such as a city council does is considered to be public action, cities are permitted to hold closed sessions to discuss items relating to real estate sales or purchases; the hiring disciplining or firing of city personnel; employee contract negotiations; and pending or ongoing litigation.
There was concern expressed that Gomez lacks the necessary discretion to avoid embarrassing the city, which in the context of preventing her attendance at the City-County Conference has been interpreted as worry that she would not keep her mouth shut about the orgiastic ongoings in Lake Arrowhead, thus ruining the good time that would be shared in not only by the solons from Victorville but the county’s 23 other municipalities and county officials as well.
de Bortnowski’s interpretation notwithstanding, there is some question as to whether the city council has the authority to disinvite Gomez from the conference.
According to David Wert, San Bernardino County’s official spokesman, “The county handles the invitations and reservations, and we email an invitation to each mayor and city/town council member individually, and a reservation including payment has to be submitted by or for each mayor and council member.”
Wert said, “The county does not concern itself with whether a mayor or council member’s reservation is made and/or paid for by the individual mayor or council member or their city/town on their behalf. There is no process by which a city/town must endorse or pay for a mayor or council member’s participation.”
It would thus seem that the county’s invitation to Gomez yet stands, whether or not the City of Victorville will pay for her registration and attendance, and she is free to register on her own. This leaves open the possibility that some person or entity interested in having Gomez’s eyes and ears present at the conference may sponsor her attendance.
With regard to the unrestrained and libidinous carousing that hase been a feature of the conference, Wert said, “I’ve attended all but maybe a couple City-County Conferences during the past 30 years and have never witnessed or even heard of anything that could be described as ‘unbridled licentiousness.’ Definitions of the ‘wild side’ may vary, but nothing more ‘wild’ than a few people relaxing at the hotel bar after the day’s events have concluded currently takes place at these conferences.”

With virtually no fanfare, Fourth District Supervisor Curt Hagman late last year removed Alan Wapner as his policy advisor.
Wapner’s departure came more than three years after Hagman moved the longtime Ontario city councilman into the post. Filling the position is Jeff Sorenson, who was previously serving as a member of Hagman’s staff in a capacity that entailed policy formulation.
When Wapner acceded to the advisor position in September 2015, it was viewed with surprise and skepticism in many quarters. Both Hagman and Wapner are classic alpha males who have functioned in the San Bernardino County political arena for a sustained period of time. They offer a study in contrasts and similarities that made their ability to coexist as functioning team members difficult given their penchant for dominating the fora in which they operate. Known in most quarters for their aggressive assertiveness, it seemed doubtful they could sustain a working relationship in the advent of any issues in which they held a political interest
Both are Republicans who have used slightly different formulas to obtain and stay in power. Hagman, a bail bondsman who scratched his way to the top of the Chino Hill political scene by running for city council and acceding to mayor before running successfully for the California Assembly, used his Republican Party affiliation as a stepping stone to office in the GOP-leaning expanse in San Bernardino County’s extreme southwest corner and the swath of eastern Orange County and southwest Los Angeles County in which his former 55th Assembly District was located. As his ticket in Sacramento was about to
expire in 2014 as a result of term limits, he ousted and then replaced Robert Rego as the chairman of the San Bernardino County Republican Central Committee and from that position of strength utilized the fundraising capability open to him to defeat former Democratic Congresswoman Gloria Negrete-McLeod in the race for supervisor, despite her name recognition, power of incumbency as a congresswoman that offset his as an assemblyman, and the voter registration advantage Democrats held over Republicans in the Fourth District. In 2018, he again beat Negrete-McLeod, despite what had become by then a lopsided Democratic Party advantage in the Fourth District in terms of voter registration.
Wapner, a former police detective with the Ontario Police Department who retired on a service disability, bootstrapped his way into a position on the city council two-and-a-half decades ago. Despite efforts to move into higher political office, he has not been able to transform his success in Ontario to victory at the polls when he has vied for the California Assembly. With regard to several issues he has been a lightning rod for controversy, and has had a sometimes rocky relationship with his colleagues and other authority figures relating to issues of primacy and policy. Despite his GOP affiliation, he has had far less success in getting the local Party of Lincoln to assist him in his electioneering than has Hagman.
Wapner’s A-personality traits came to the fore eight years ago when he induced his colleagues on the Ontario City Council to wage near-war on the City of Los Angeles to break the larger metropolis’s ownership and management hold over Ontario Airport that resulted from a 1967 joint operating agreement between the two cities and Los Angeles’s fulfillment of performance milestones in that agreement that resulted in Ontario deeding the airport to Los Angeles in 1985. Pursuing an aggressive game plan that included litigation, Ontario convince Los Angeles to agree to the return of the airport to local control three years ago. Prior to that, Ontario had created the Ontario International Airport Authority, to which Wapner was appointed as its chairman. He has been the only chairman in that body’s history and upon Hagman’s election to the board of supervisors, Wapner agreed to move Hagman into a position on the Ontario International Airport Authority Board, replacing Hagman’s predecessor as Fourth County Supervisor, Gary Ovitt, a former Ontario mayor, on that panel. It was subsequent to that when Hagman took Wapner on as his policy advisor.
There was concern on multiple levels at that time about Wapner’s hiring. First, it had the appearance of Wapner being rewarded by Hagman for Hagman’s appointment to the airport authority board. Second, it created a situation in which Wapner, who in his capacity as authority chairman served in a fashion as Hagman’s boss, was now working for Hagman, such that each of them were now their boss’s boss. Third, it intensified the degree to which Hagman’s staff members were increasingly creatures of government. Wapner as a policeman and councilman was rooted in the government. Hagman’s then chief of staff, Mike Spence, was a longtime government employee and mayor and council member in West Covina. Ed Graham, a Chino Hills councilman and teacher by profession, was another of Hagman’s staff members. He would be replaced by Chino Hills Councilman Peter Rogers. Sorenson was formerly employed as an investigative technician with a county prosecutor’s office among other government posts.
At the time Hagman hired Wapner, Hagman acknowledged Wapner as a fellow alpha male and that their mutual need to dominate the situations in which they involve themselves could be a recipe for a clash. “We’ll play it out and give it a shot and see what happens,” Hagman said. “I have other alpha males and other elected officials on my staff. They all present the advantage of knowing the issues in this district and area and what they entail.”
What was at the root of Wapner’s departure is unclear. Hagman’s chief of staff, Katherine Kolcheva, did not expound on the reason for his leaving or Sorenson’s promotion. The only issue relating to the matter she weighed in on was the suggestion that Wapner’s hiring in 2015 had been a quid pro quo or political sop provided as a reward for Hagman’s appointment to the Ontario International Airport Authority Board.
“The agreement to appoint a representative of the county on the Ontario International Airport Authority Board, specifically whoever served as the Fourth District supervisor, was reached between the county and the City of Ontario when they entered into the joint powers authority agreement to bring back Ontario Airport,” Kolcheva said. “The formation of the joint powers authority happened during Supervisor Gary Ovitt’s service on the board of supervisors.”
Sorenson has a bachelor of arts degree in political science from UCLA and a juris doctor degree from the La Verne School of Law. The website for the Fourth District states, “Jeff looks forward to using his strong sense of mission accomplishment and his appreciation of hard work to provide valuable insight and information to the supervisor. With these traits and his legal background, Jeff looks forward to serving the residents of the Fourth District.”
-Mark Gutglueck

The City of Chino Hills has elected to promote from within to replace outgoing City Manager Konradt Bartlam by elevating Assistant City Manager Ben Montgomery to the city’s top administrative post, effective April 1.
Montgomery has made a steady climb over the last 13 years, after beginning in Chino Hills in 2006 as the neighborhood services manager. He was most recently previously promoted to the position of assistant city manager in 2007 from the post of interim finance manager. Prior to that he was the deputy city manager.
In his capacity as assistant city manager, Montgomery oversees information technology, community relations, emergency preparedness, human resources and labor relations, risk management, occupational safety and code enforcement, duties he also carried out as deputy city manager.
He served a three month stint as acting finance director in 2017. He held the deputy city manager post for slightly less than two years after working as assistant to the city manager in 2014 and 2015.
Previously he was employed as a management analyst with the City of Brea from 2000 to 2006. He was a management analyst and library assistant with the City of Whittier for nine years in the 1990s.
Montgomery holds a masters degree in business administration from the University of La Verne, a master of public administration degree from Cal State Long Beach; and two bachelors of arts degrees in economics and psychology from Cal State Dominguez Hills.
The city council acceded to Bartlam’s recommendation in conferring the position on Montgomery.
He has been hired into the post under a three-year contract
at an annual salary of $223,000, with benefits that include $1,538 a month in medical coverage and an $800 car allowance. Under the terms of his contract, he is to be provided a 3 percent salary increase in September 2019 and a 2 percent increase in September 2020.
-Mark Gutglueck

Lately I have been obsessed with the teen look for boys. They really are fashionably handsome lately. Fashion I believe is for everyone and this includes teenagers who are striving to be up on the fashion buzz. Boys can have very unique ideas from the type of soap they use down to the shoe gear they. And fashion trends are important if you’re going to be a stylish boy.  Some boys are confident and can make good choices with regard to their wardrobe and maintain their individuality.  I’ve seen them in elongated coats and light colored shirts which is a very stylish combo. Fashionable belts seem to be a hit of the moment with boys. If they’re wearing slacks or denim there’s something about the designer belts.  There’s something cute about an elongated sweaters boys love them. The bottom line is male wear has been dominating lately and young boys are starting to catch on. Just like the fanny pack boys are now Turing to a new idea of turning the bag into a necklace. What next? Short shorts I believe. It should be a scene this spring with a breath new and fresh looks coming down the streets. Can’t wait!

“Remind yourself. Nobody built like you, you design yourself.” – Jay Z

FBN 20190001267
The following persons are doing business as: JUNK-LYFT 122 W. VIRGINIA ST. #B RIALTO, CA 92376 Mailing Address: P.O. BOX 1965 RIALTO, CA 92377 ABEL G GOTTI 122 W. VIRGINIA ST. # B RIALTO, CA 92376
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/Abel G. Gotti
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 1/30/2019
I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office.
Began Transacting Business: N/A
County Clerk, Deputy
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 2/22, 3/01, 3/08 & 3/15, 2019.

FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME
STATEMENT FILE NO-20190002131
The following person(s) is(are) doing business as: Riviere De Charlene, 105 E Rosewood Court, Ontario, CA 91764
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 100, Ontario, CA 91762-8100
Charlene O Nolan, 105 E Rosewood Court, Ontario, CA 91764-2746
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/Charlene Nolan
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 2/20/2019
I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office.
Began Transacting Business: 8/4/2017
County Clerk, s/SH
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).
2/22/2019, 3/1/2019, 3/8/2019, 3/15/2019

FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME
STATEMENT FILE NO-20190001071
The following person(s) is(are) doing business as: Five Star Process Serving, 229 N. Riverside Avenue, Rialto, CA 92376, Catalina M Szetela, 4915 Agate Street, Riverside, CA 92509
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/Catalina Szetela
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 1/25/2019
I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office.
Began Transacting Business: 1/22/2019
County Clerk, s/EF
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).
2/22/2019, 3/1/2019, 3/8/2019, 3/15/2019

FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME
STATEMENT FILE NO-20190001880
The following person(s) is(are) doing business as: OMAS Production, 3420 E Fourth Street Unit 2032, Ontario, CA 91764, Chioma Ebinum, 3420 E Fourth Street Unit 2032, 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/Chioma Ebinum
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 12/12/2019
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/EF
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).
2/22/2019, 3/1/2019, 3/8/2019, 3/15/2019

FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME
STATEMENT FILE NO-20190002122
The following person(s) is(are) doing business as: CJ Consulting, 5066 S. Kensington Ave., Ontario, CA 91762, Camille Johnson, 5066 S. Kensington Ave., Ontario, CA 91762
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/Camille Johnson
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 2/19/2019
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/DYM
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).
2/22/2019, 3/1/2019, 3/8/2019, 3/15/2019

FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME
STATEMENT FILE NO-20180013914
The following person(s) is(are) doing business as: Wisdom Tree Counseling, 10601 Civic Center Dr #100-L, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730-3878, Mailing address: P.O. Box 4571, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730-4571
Jeraleen M Peterson, 4228 N 3rd Avenue, San Bernardino, CA 92407
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/Jeraleen M Peterson
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 12/7/2018
I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office.
Began Transacting Business: 3/13/2013
County Clerk, s/DOM
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).
2/22/2019, 3/1/2019, 3/8/2019, 3/15/2019

FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME
STATEMENT FILE NO-20180013823
The following person(s) is(are) doing business as: We Care Pharmacy, 590 N Sierra Way, San Bernardino, CA 92410,Mailing address: 14819 Meadows Way, Eastvale, CA 92880
OM Pharmacy Services Inc, 14819 Meadows Way, Eastvale, CA 92880
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/Vatsal Prabodh Kothari
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 12/6/2018
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/SH
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).
2/22/2019, 3/1/2019, 3/8/2019, 3/15/2019

FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME
STATEMENT FILE NO-20180014574
The following person(s) is(are) doing business as: Elohay Enterprises, 6452 Caledon Pl, Alta Loma, CA 91737, Mailing Address:  P.O. Box 9650 Alta Loma, CA 91701
Xciomara V Williams, 6452 Caledon Pl, Alta Loma, CA 91701
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/Xciomara V. Williams
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 12/27/2018
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/TM
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).
2/22/2019, 3/1/2019, 3/8/2019, 3/15/2019

SUMMONS Citación Judicial
Notice To Defendant (Aviso Al Demandante):
Jesus Maria Santiago, an individual; Does 1 to 25, inclusive
You are being sued by plaintiff: (Lo esta demandando el demandante): > Hong Hoang, and individual; Julia Trinh, an individual; Richard Trinh, an individual ,
Notice! You have been sued. Read the information below. Lo han > demandado. Lea la información a continuación
Short Name of Case: Hoang, et al vs. Santiago
Case number: 30-2017-00964151-CL-PA-CJC
Filed Superior Court of California County of Orange
Clerk of the Superior Court (Secretario)
by Candice Nguyen, Deputy (Adjunto)
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 and legal papers are served on you to file a written response at this court and have a copy served on the cross-complainant. 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 días, la corte puede decidir en su contra sin escuchar su versión. Lea la información a continuación.
Tiene 30 DÍAS DE CALENDARIO después de que le entreguen esta citación y papeles legales para presentar una respuesta por escrito en esta corte y hacer que se entregue una copia al contrademandante. Una carta o una llamada telefónica no lo protegen. Su respuesta por escrito tiene que estar en formato legal correcto si desea que procesen su caso en la corte. Es posible que haya un formulario que usted pueda usar para su respuesta.
Puede encontrar estos formularios de la corte y más 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 más cerca. Si no puede pagar la cuota de presentación, pida al secretario de la corte que le dé un formulario de exención de pago de cuotas. Si no presenta su respuesta a tiempo, puede perder el caso por incumplimiento y la corte le podrá quitar su sueldo, dinero y bienes sin más advertencia.
Hay otros requisitos legales . Es recomendable que llame a un abogado inmediatamente. Si no conoce a un abogado, puede llamar a un servicio de remisión a abogados. Si no puede pagar a un abogado, es posible que cumpla con los requisitos para obtener servicios legales gratuitos 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 poniéndose 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 por imponer un gravamen sobre cualquier recuperación de $10,000 ó más de valor recibida mediante un acuerdo o una concesión de arbitraje en un caso de derecho civil. Tiene que pagar el gravamen de la corte antes de que la corte pueda desechar el caso.
The name and address of the court is Central Justice Center 700 West Civic Center Drive Santa Ana, California 92701
The name, address, and telephone number of the plaintiff’s attorney, or plaintiff without an attorney, are: (El nombre, la dirección y el número de teléfono del abogado del demandante, o del demandante que no tiene abogado, es): The Tu Firm, APLC; 16185 Brookhurst Street, Fountain Valley, CA 92708 Telephone: (714) 636-6030
Date (Fecha): 12/28/2017
DAVID H. YAMASAKI, Clerk of the Court Clerk, by (Secretario,) Candice
Nguyen, Deputy (Adjunto)
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel March 1, 8, 15 & 22, 2019.

ATTORNEY OR PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY (Name, State Bar Number, and Address):
THE TU FIRM, APLC
Hoang Huy Tu, Esq., SBN 200842
Walter Emil Teague III, Esq., SBN 68548
16185 Brookhurst Street, Fountain Valley, CA 92708
TELEPHONE NO.: (714) 636-6030
FAX NO. (714) 636-6048
E-MAIL ADDRESS: walterteague@thetufnm.com
ATTORNEY FOR: Hong Hoang, Julia Trinh, and Richard Trinh

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF ORANGE
STREET ADDRESS: 700 West Civic Center Drive
CITY AND ZIP CODE: Santa Ana 92701
BRANCH NAME: Central Justice Center

PLAINTIFF: HONG HOANG, JULIA TRINH, and RICHARD TRINH
DEFENDANT: JESUS MARIA SANTIAGO, and DOES 1 to 25

CASE NUMBER: 30-2017-00964151-CL-PA-CJC

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT—Personal Injury, Property Damage, Wrongful Death

Type: MOTOR VEHICLE, PROPERTY DAMAGE, PERSONAL INJURY
Jurisdiction: ACTION IS A LIMITED CIVIL CASE
Amount demanded exceeds $10,000, but does not exceed $25,000

1. Plaintiff: HONG HOANG, JULIE TRINH, and RICHARD TRINH alleges causes of action against defendant: JESUS MARIA SANTIAGO
2. This pleading, including attachments and exhibits, consists of the following number of pages: 5
3. Each plaintiff named above is a competent adult
a. except plaintiff: JULIA TRINH, a minor, for whom a guardian or conservator of the estate or a guardian ad litem has been appointed
b. except plaintiff: RICHARD TRINH, a minor, for whom a guardian or conservator of the estate or a guardian ad litem has been appointed
ATTORNEY OR PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY (Name, State Bar Number, and Address):
THE TU FIRM, APLC
Hoang Huy Tu, Esq., SBN 200842
Walter Emil Teague III, Esq., SBN 68548
16185 Brookhurst Street, Fountain Valley, CA 92708
TELEPHONE NO.: (714) 636-6030
FAX NO. (714) 636-6048
E-MAIL ADDRESS: walterteague@thetufnm.com
ATTORNEY FOR: Hong Hoang, Julia Trinh, and Richard Trinh

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF ORANGE
STREET ADDRESS: 700 West Civic Center Drive
CITY AND ZIP CODE: Santa Ana 92701
BRANCH NAME: Central Justice Center
PLAINTIFF: HONG HOANG, JULIA TRINH, and RICHARD TRINH
DEFENDANT: JESUS MARIA SANTIAGO, and DOES 1 to 25
CASE NUMBER: 30-2017-00964151-CL-PA-CJC
STATEMENT OF DAMAGES (Personal Injury or Wrongful Death)
To: JESUS MARIA SANTIAGO
Plaintiff: HONG HOANG, JULIA TRINH, and RICHARD TRINH
Seeks damages in the above-entitled action, as follows:
1. General damages
a. [x] Pain, suffering, and inconvenience: $5,000.00
2. Special damages
a. [x] Medical expenses (to date): $5,625.00
b. [x] Future medical expenses (present value): $5,000.00
e. [x] Property damage: $4,447.27
Date: October 23, 2018
Attorney: Hoang Huy Tu, Esq.
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel March 1, 8, 15 & 22, 2019.
FBN 20190001392
The following person is doing business as: EVOLVE MENOPAUSE HEALTH COACHING 1152 N ROSALIND AVENUE RIALTO, CA 92376 YVETTE U GODFREY-BROWN 1152 N ROSALIND AVENUE RIALTO, CA 92376
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/Yvette U. Godfrey-Brown
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 2/01/2019
I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office.
Began Transacting Business: N/A
County Clerk, Deputy
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 3/01, 3/08, 3/15 & 3/22, 2019.
FBN 20190002480
The following person is doing business as: JAV GENERAL CONSTRUCTION 1662 CONEJO DR SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92404 JOSE A AVILA 1662 CONEJO DR SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92404
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/JOSE A. AVILA
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 2/27/2019
I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office.
Began Transacting Business: N/A
County Clerk, Deputy
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 3/01, 3/08, 3/15 & 3/22, 2019.

FBN 20190002475
The following persons are doing business as: LOTUS VILLA & MEMORY CARE 9448 CITRUS AVE FONTANA, CA 92335 KP HEALTH CARE GROUP 9448 CITRUS AVE FONTANA, CA 92335
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/ GORDHAN PATEL
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 2/27/2019
I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office.
Began Transacting Business: N/A
County Clerk, Deputy
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 3/01, 3/08, 3/15 & 3/22, 2019.

FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME
STATEMENT FILE NO-20190002319
The following person(s) is(are) doing business as: Thomas and Associates, 7391 Plumaria Drive, Fontana, CA 92336-1677
Clarence D Thomas, 7391 Plumaria Drive, Fontana, CA 92336-1677
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/Clarence D. Thomas
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 2/25/2019
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/SH
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).
3/1/2019, 3/8/2019, 3/15/2019, 3/22/19

FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME
STATEMENT FILE NO-20190001353
The following person(s) is(are) doing business as: Arrowhead Roofing, 871 Balsam Ln, Twin Peaks, CA 92391-0209
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 209, Twin Peaks, CA 92391-0209
Roberto Perez Moreno, 871 Balsam Ln, Twin Peaks, CA 92391-0209
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/Roberto Perez Moreno
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 1/31/2019
I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office.
Began Transacting Business: 3/08/2004
County Clerk, s/GAM
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).
3/1/2019, 3/8/2019, 3/15/2019, 3/22/19

FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME
STATEMENT FILE NO-20190000634
The following person(s) is(are) doing business as: Enchanted Creek Ranch, 43623 Stone Creek Rd, Temecula, CA 92590
Mailing Address: 6018 N. Reno Ave, Temple City, CA 91780
Ruben Plascencia, 10401 E Riverside Dr, Ontario, CA 91761, Dilia Mercado, 6018 N Reno Av, Temple City, CA 91780
Business is Conducted By: A General Partnership
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/Ruben Plascencia
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 1/15/2019
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/SOM
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).
1/18/2019, 1/25/2019, 2/1/2019, 2/8/2019

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE FOR CHANGE OF NAME CASE NUMBER  CIVDS1905715
TO  ALL INTERESTED PERSONS: Petitioner: Jermaine Michael O’Neal filed with this court for a decree changing names  as follows:
Jermaine Michael O’Neal to: James Michael O’Neal III
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: 04/08/2019
Time: 8:30 a.m.
Department: S17
The address of the court is Superior Court of California, County of San Bernardino, San Bernardino District – Civil Division, 247 W Third Street, Same as above, San Bernardino, CA 92415-0210, San Bernardino
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this order be published in the SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL in San Bernardino County California, once a week for four successive weeks prior to the date set for hearing of the petition.
Dated: Feb 22, 2019
Michael A. Sachs
Judge of the Superior Court.
Published in SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL on 03/01/19, 03/08/19, 03/15/19, 03/22/19

NOTICE OF PETITION TO ADMINISTER ESTATE OF:
Henry Cooper
NO. PROPS1900034
To all heirs, beneficiaries, creditors, contingent creditors, and persons who may otherwise be interested in the will or estate, or both of Henry Cooper
A PETITION FOR PROBATE has been filed by Derrek L. Cooper, in the Superior Court of California, County of SAN BERNARDINO.
THE PETITION FOR PROBATE requests that Derrek L. Cooper 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. S36 at 8:30 a.m. on May 14, 2019 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 Petitioner:
Audre Delahoussaye-Quantrell
13101 Washington Boulevard, Suite 235
Los Angeles, CA 90066
Telephone No: 310-446-5434
San Bernardino County Sentinel
3/1/19, 3/8/19, 3/15/19

SUMMONS – (FAMILY LAW)
NOTICE TO RESPONDENT: Kamlehbhai P. Patel
(AVISO AL DEMANDADO):
YOU ARE BEING SUED BY PLANTIFF: Karla Y. Lopez
CASE NUMBER FAMSS 1807556
You have 30 CALENDAR DAYS after this Summons and Petition are served on you to file a Response (Form FL-120) at the court and have a copy served on the petitioner. A letter or phone call will not protect you. If you do not file your Response on time, the court may make orders affecting your marriage or domestic partnership, your property, and custody of your children. You may be ordered to pay support and attorney fees and costs. For legal advice, contact a lawyer immediately. Get help finding a lawyer at the California Courts Online Self-Help Center (www.courtinfo.cagov/selfhelp), at the California Legal Services Website (www.lawhelpcalifornia.org), or by contacting your local county bar association.
Tiene 30 DIAS DE CALENDARIO después de haber recibido la entrega legal de esta Citacion y Peticion para presentar una Respuesta (formulario FL-120) ante la corte y efectuar la entrega legal de una copia al demandante. Una carta o liamada telefonica o una audiencia de la corte no basta para protegerio. Si no presenta su Respuesta a tiemp, la corte puede dar ordenes que afecten su matrimonio o pareja de heco, sus bienes y la custodia de sus hijos. La corte tambien le puede ordenar que pague manutencion, y honorarios y costos legales. Para asesoramiento legal, pongase en contacto de inmediato con un abogado. Puede obtener informacion para encontrar un abogado en el Contro de Ayuda de las Cortes de California (www.sucorte.ca.gov), en el sitio web de los Servicios Legales de California (www.lahelpca.org) o poniendose en contacto con el colegio de abodgados de su condado.
NOTICE – Restraining orders on page 2: These restraining orders are effective against both spouses or domestic partners until the petition is dismissed, a judgement is entered, or the court makes further orders. They are enforceable anywhere in California by any law enforcement office who has received or seen a copy of them.
AVISO – Las ordenes de restriction se encuentran en la pagina 2 : Las ordenes de restriccion estan en vigencia en cuanto a ambos conyuges o miembros de la pareja de hecho hasta que se despida la peticion, se emita un fallo o la corte de otras ordenes. Cualquier agencia del orden publico que haya rocibido o visto una copia de estas ordenes puede hacerlas acatar en cualquier lugar de California.
FEE WAIVER : If you cannot pay the filing fee, ask the clerk for a fee waiver form. The court may order you to pay back all or part of the fees and costs that the court waived for you or the other party.
Exencion de cuotas : Si no puede pagar la cuota de presentacion, pida al secretario un formulario de execion de cuotas. La corte puede ordenar que ested pague, ya sea en parte o por completo, las cuotas y costos de la corte previamente exentos a peticion de usted o de la otra parte.
The name and address of the court is: (El nombre y dirrecion de la corte son):
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO
351 North Arrowhead Ave.
San Bernardino, CA 92415
Central District
The name, address and telephone number of petitioner’s attorney, or petitioner without an attorney, are: (El nombre, direccion y numero de telefono del abogado del demandante, o del demendante si no tiene abogado, son):
Karla Y. Lopez
623 W. Maitland Street, #B
Ontario, CA 91762
Telephone: 909-235-3041
DATE (Fecha): Sept., 06, 2018
Clerk, by (Secretario, por) Jocelyn Carias, Deputy (Asistente)
Published in San Bernardino County Sentinel on 2/15/19, 2/22/19, 3/1/19, 3/8/19

NOTICE OF PETITION TO ADMINISTER ESTATE OF CLAUDE L. GILES, CASE NO. PROPS1900141
To all heirs, beneficiaries, creditors, and contingent creditors of CLAUDE L. GILES, and persons who may be otherwise interested in the will or estate, or both: A petition has been filed by JENNIFER M. DANIEL, a creditor, in the Superior Court of California, County of SAN BERNARDINO. The petition requests that THE OFFICE OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 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 will avoid the need to obtain court approval for many actions taken in connection with the estate. However, before taking certain actions, the personal representative will be required to give notice to interested persons unless they have waived notice or have consented to the proposed action. The petition will be granted unless good cause is shown why it should not be.)
The petition is set for hearing in Dept. No. S35 at SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO SAN BERNARDINO DISTRICT – PROBATE DIVISION 247 W. 3rd STREET SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92415-0212 on APRIL 15, 2019 at 10:00 AM
IF YOU OBJECT to the granting of the petition, you should appear at the hearing and state your objections or file written objections with the court before the hearing. Your appearance may be in person or by your attorney.
IF YOU ARE A CREDITOR or a contingent creditor of the deceased, you must file your claim with the court and mail a copy to the personal representative appointed by the court within the later of either (1) four months from the date of first issuance of letters to a general personal representative, as defined in subdivision (b) of Section 58 of the California Probate Code, or (2) 60 days from the date of mailing or personal delivery of the notice to you under Section 9052 of the California Probate Code.
YOU MAY EXAMINE the file kept by the court. If you are interested in the estate, you may request special notice of the filing of an inventory and appraisal of estate assets or of any petition or account as provided in Section 1250 of the California Probate Code.
Petitioner: JENNIFER M. DANIEL, a creditor 256360 220 NORDINA STREET, REDLANDS, CA 92373 Telephone: (909) 792-9244
Date: February 14, 2019
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel 3/08, 3/15 & 3/22, 2019
NOTICE OF PETITION TO ADMINISTER ESTATE OF CLIFFORD RAY WHITE, CASE NO. PROPS1900167
To all heirs, beneficiaries, creditors, and contingent creditors of CLIFFORD RAY WHITE, and persons who may be otherwise interested in the will or estate, or both: A petition has been filed by JEROLD LEBYRON WHITE in the Superior Court of California, County of SAN BERNARDINO. The petition requests that JEROLD LEBYRON WHITE 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 will avoid the need to obtain court approval for many actions taken in connection with the estate. However, before taking certain actions, the personal representative will be required to give notice to interested persons unless they have waived notice or have consented to the proposed action. The petition will be granted unless good cause is shown why it should not be.)
The petition is set for hearing in Dept. No. S-37 at SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO SAN BERNARDINO DISTRICT – PROBATE DIVISION 247 W. 3rd STREET SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92415-0212 on APRIL 8, 2019 at 8:30 AM
IF YOU OBJECT to the granting of the petition, you should appear at the hearing and state your objections or file written objections with the court before the hearing. Your appearance may be in person or by your attorney.
IF YOU ARE A CREDITOR or a contingent creditor of the deceased, you must file your claim with the court and mail a copy to the personal representative appointed by the court within the later of either (1) four months from the date of first issuance of letters to a general personal representative, as defined in subdivision (b) of Section 58 of the California Probate Code, or (2) 60 days from the date of mailing or personal delivery of the notice to you under Section 9052 of the California Probate Code.
YOU MAY EXAMINE the file kept by the court. If you are interested in the estate, you may request special notice of the filing of an inventory and appraisal of estate assets or of any petition or account as provided in Section 1250 of the California Probate Code.
Attorney for the Petitioner: MICHAEL C. MADDUX 1894 S. COMMERCENTER DRIVE WEST SUITE 108 SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92408 Telephone: (909) 890-2350
Date: March 1, 2019
Published in the San Bernardino County Sentinel 3/08, 3/15 & 3/22, 2019
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE FOR CHANGE OF NAME CASE NUMBER  CIVDS1907076
TO  ALL INTERESTED PERSONS: Petitioner: POMING CHEN filed with this court for a decree changing names  as follows:
POAN CHEN to YOTING CHEN
[and]
PODI CHEN to YODI CHEN
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: 04/29/2019
Time: 8:30 a.m.
Department: S17
The address of the court is Superior Court of California, County of San Bernardino, San Bernardino District – Civil Division, 247 W Third Street, Same as above, San Bernardino, CA 92415-0210, San Bernardino
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this order be published in THE  SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL in San Bernardino County California, once a week for four successive weeks prior to the date set for hearing of the petition.
Dated: March 6, 2019
Michael A. Sachs
Judge of the Superior Court.
Published in SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL on 3/08/19 3/15/19, 3/22/19, 3/29/19.
ABANDONMENT OF USE OF FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME
Your registered FBN No. is 20190001686 and was filed in San Bernardino County on 2/7/2019. Your related FBN No. is 20160010230 and was filed in San Bernardino County on 9/13/2016. The following person(s) has (have) abandoned the business name(s) of: Hallway Global Enterprises & Associates, Like Water Publishing Company, Hallway Entertainment Group, Julanne Publishing Company, The Funeral Consultants, Like Water Studios, 14810 Bluegrass Road, Helendale, CA 92342
Mailing Address: PO Box 3183, Helendale, CA 92342, Brian Hall, 14434 California Ave., Victorville, CA 92392, Julia Hall, 14434 California Ave., Victorville, CA 92392
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 misdemeanor punishable by a fine not to exceed one thousand ($1,000) (B&P Code 17913). I am also aware that all information of this statement becomes Public Record upon filing pursuant to the California Public Records Act (Gov. Code 6250-6277).
s/Brian Hall
This business was conducted by: A General Partnership
Began transacting business on: N/A
County Clerk/s: CA, HES
Published: 03/8/19, 3/15/19, 3/22/19, 3/29/19

ABANDONMENT OF USE OF FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME
Your registered FBN No. is 20190001681 and was filed in San Bernardino County on 2/7/2019. Your related FBN No. is 20160003942 and was filed in San Bernardino County on 4/04/2016. The following person(s) has (have) abandoned the business name(s) of: Like Water Studios, Like Water Publishing Company, Hallway Entertainment & Event Planning, Hallway Publishing Group, Julanne Publishing Company, The Funeral Consultants, 14434 California Ave, Victorville, CA 92392
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 3183, Helendale, CA 92342, Brian S Hall, 14434 California Ave, Victorville, CA 92392, Julia Hall, 14434 California Ave, Victorville, CA 92392
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 misdemeanor punishable by a fine not to exceed one thousand ($1,000) (B&P Code 17913). I am also aware that all information of this statement becomes Public Record upon filing pursuant to the California Public Records Act (Gov. Code 6250-6277).
s/Brian Hall
This business was conducted by: A Married Couple
Began transacting business on: 8/10/2011
County Clerk/s: CA, HES
Published: 03/8/19, 3/15/19, 3/22/19, 3/29/19

FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME
STATEMENT FILE NO-20190001689
The following person(s) is(are) doing business as: Like Water Production Company, Hallway Entertainment Group, Like Water Studios, Julanne Publishing Company, 14810 Bluegrass Rd., Helendale, CA 92342
Mailing Address: PO Box 3183, Helendale, CA 92342, Brian Hall, 14810 Bluegrass Rd., Helendale, CA 92342, Julia Hall, 14810 Bluegrass Rd., Helendale, CA 92342
Business is Conducted By: A General Partnership
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/Brian Hall
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 2/07/2019
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/HES, CA
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).
3/8/2019, 3/15/2019, 3/22/2019, 3/29/2019

FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME
STATEMENT FILE NO-20190002570
The following person(s) is(are) doing business as: Incline Real Estate Services, 13483 Crocker Ct, Fontana, CA 92336, Sonny P Ortega, 13483 Crocker Ct, Fontana, CA 92336
Business is Conducted By: An Individual
Signed: BY SIGNING BELOW, I DECLARE THAT ALL INFORMATION IN THIS STATEMENT IS TRUE AND CORRECT. A registrant who declares as true information, which he or she knows to be false, is guilty of a crime. (B&P Code 17913) I am also aware that all information on this statement becomes Public Record upon filing.
s/Sonny P. Ortega
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 3/1/2019
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/SH
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).
3/8/2019, 3/15/2019, 3/22/2019, 3/29/2019

FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME
STATEMENT FILE NO-20190002607
The following person(s) is(are) doing business as: RC Endodontics, 10165 Foothill Blvd Ste. 21, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730, Sami Ali DDS. Inc., 10165 Foothill Blvd Ste 21, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Business is Conducted By: A Corporation
Signed: BY SIGNING BELOW, I DECLARE THAT ALL INFORMATION IN THIS STATEMENT IS TRUE AND CORRECT. A registrant who declares as true information, which he or she knows to be false, is guilty of a crime. (B&P Code 17913) I am also aware that all information on this statement becomes Public Record upon filing.
s/Sami Ali
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 3/1/2019
I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office.
Began Transacting Business: 11/24/2009
County Clerk, s/GAM
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).
3/8/2019, 3/15/2019, 3/22/2019, 3/29/2019

FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME
STATEMENT FILE NO-20190001823
The following person(s) is(are) doing business as: Close Enough Transportation, 1205 Tourmaline Ave, Mentone, CA 92359, Darryl L Jordon, 1205 Tourmaline Ave, Mentone, CA 92359, Mallory A Jordon, 1205 Tourmaline Ave, Mentone, CA 92359
Business is Conducted By: A Married Couple
Signed: BY SIGNING BELOW, I DECLARE THAT ALL INFORMATION IN THIS STATEMENT IS TRUE AND CORRECT. A registrant who declares as true information, which he or she knows to be false, is guilty of a crime. (B&P Code 17913) I am also aware that all information on this statement becomes Public Record upon filing.
s/Darryl L. Jordon
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 2/11/2019
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/RS
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).
3/8/2019, 3/15/2019, 3/22/2019, 3/29/2019

FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME

STATEMENT FILE NO-20190002167
The following person(s) is(are) doing business as: Sunflower Cleaning Service, 294 Loma Verde, Colton, CA 92324, Graciela N Desia, 294 Loma Verde, Colton, CA 92324
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/ Graciela N Desia
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 2/20/2019
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/DOM
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).

3/15/2019, 3/22/2019, 3/29/2019, 4/5/19

FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT FILE NO-20190002981
The following person(s) is(are) doing business as: New Waves Holistic, 123 E 9th St Ste 324, Upland, CA 91786, Tatone Enterprises Inc., 1426 N Euclid Ave, Upland, CA 91786
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/Karen L Tatone
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 3/12/2019
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/EF
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).
3/15/2019, 3/22/2019, 3/29/2019, 4/5/19

FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT FILE NO-20190002191

The following person(s) is(are) doing business as: Know No Limits, 1286 North Stoddard Ave, San Bernardino, CA 92405, Mailing Address: 1286 North Stoddard Ave, San Bernardino, CA 92405, Jesus D Cuellar, 1286 North Stoddard Ave, San Bernardino, CA 92405
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/Jesus D Cuellar
This statement was filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 2/20/2019
I hereby certify that this is a correct copy of the original statement on file in my office.
Began Transacting Business: 5/12/2017
County Clerk, s/DOM
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).
3/15/2019, 3/22/2019, 3/29/2019, 4/5/19
CNBB82019081914CH FILE NO.20190001879
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
ESPARZA DEMO & CONSTRUCTION.
1792 N. MACY ST
SAN BERNARDINO, CA, 92411
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) JAIME ESPARZA 1792 N. MACY SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92411. The business is conducted by: an Individual. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/12/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 02/22/2019, 03/01/2019, 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB82019081914CH

CNBB82019081913CH FILE NO.20190001873
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
SOSA’S SMOG CHECK.
8060 MANGO AVE
FONTANA, CA, 92336
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) SOSA’S SMOG SHOP, INC. 8196 1/2 OLEANDER AVE FONTANA, CA 92335; 8060 MANGO AVE FONTANA, CA, 92336;. The business is conducted by: a Corporation. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/12/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 02/22/2019, 03/01/2019, 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB82019081913CH

CNBB82019081912MT FILE NO.20190001906
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
CALIFORNIA PARENTS ASSOCIATION.
118 EAST 3RD STREET SUITE B
SAN BERNARDINO, CA, 92410
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) GILBERT R NAVARRO 118 EAST 3RD STREET SUITE B SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92410. The business is conducted by: an Individual. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/13/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 02/22/2019, 03/01/2019, 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB82019081912MT
CNBB82019081911MT FILE NO.20190001918
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
TRUJILLO HOME IMPROVEMENT.
8545 CALLE FELIZ
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA, 91730
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) CHRISTIAN R TRUJILLO 8545 CALLE FELIZ RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91730. The business is conducted by: an Individual. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/13/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 02/22/2019, 03/01/2019, 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB82019081911MT

CNBB82019081910MT FILE NO.20190001933
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
GOLDEN STATE REFINISHING.
4905 N D STREET
SAN BERNARDINO, CA, 92407
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) PAUL J LUJAN 4905 N D STREET SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92407. The business is conducted by: an Individual. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/13/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 02/22/2019, 03/01/2019, 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB82019081910MT

CNBB82019081909MT FILE NO.20190001900
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
CALIFORNIA HEALTH AND REHAB CENTER CTR.
601 N. EUCLID
ONTARIO, CA, 91762-3223
601 N. EUCLID
ONTARIO, CA, 91762-3223
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) KEVIN K GANSERT 147 W. ROUTE 66 GLENDORA, CA 91740. The business is conducted by: an Individual. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/13/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 02/22/2019, 03/01/2019, 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB82019081909MT

CNBB82019081908IR FILE NO.20190001895
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
C AND M 98 CENTS STORE.
2100 N RANCHO AVE #L AND M
COLTON, CA, 92324
2100 N RANCHO AVE #L AND M
COLTON, CA, 92324
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) VANNA NGUYEN 1778 BRITANY DR REDLANDS, CA 92374. The business is conducted by: an Individual. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/13/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 02/22/2019, 03/01/2019, 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB82019081908IR

CNBB82019081907IR FILE NO.20190001907
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
ER YARD CLEAN UP & YARD MAINTENANCE.
677 LONGVIEW DR.
TWIN PEAKS, CA, 92391
P.O BOX 1102
TWIN PEAKS, CA, 92391
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) ROBERTO RODRIGUEZ 677 LONGVIEW DR. TWIN PEAKS, CA 92391. The business is conducted by: an Individual. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/13/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on 01/10/2015. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 02/22/2019, 03/01/2019, 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB82019081907IR
CNBB82019081906CH FILE NO.20190001998
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
P. MUNOZ A. TRUCKING.
6325 TRUMAN ST.
CHINO, CA, 91710
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) PEDRO A MUNOZ 6325 TRUMAN ST CHINO, CA 91710. The business is conducted by: an Individual. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/14/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on 10/15/1998. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 02/22/2019, 03/01/2019, 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB82019081906CH

CNBB82019081905IR FILE NO.20190002010
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
SOFFEL’S RAW HONEY.
1545 E. SAN BERNARDINO AVE.
REDLANDS, CA, 92374Full name of registrant (s) is (are) DERRICK T SOFFEL 1545 E. SAN BERNARDINO AVE. REDLANDS, CA 92374. The business is conducted by: an Individual. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/14/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 02/22/2019, 03/01/2019, 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB82019081905IR

CNBB82019081904IR FILE NO.20190002011
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
SOFFEL APIARIE’S.
1545 E. SAN BERNARDINO AVE.
REDLANDS, CA, 92374
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) DERRICK T SOFFEL 1545 E. SAN BERNARDINO AVE. REDLANDS, CA 92374. The business is conducted by: an Individual. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/14/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 02/22/2019, 03/01/2019, 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB82019081904IR

CNBB82019081903IR FILE NO.20190001949
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
MACO TRUCKING.
14520 VILLAGE DR APT 215
FONTANA, CA, 92337
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) MIGUEL A CORONA 14520 VILLAGE DR APT 215 FONTANA, CA 92337. The business is conducted by: an Individual. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/13/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 02/22/2019, 03/01/2019, 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB82019081903IR

CNBB82019081902IR FILE NO.20190001966
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
R&F LOGISTICS.
18509 8TH ST
BLOOMINGTON, CA, 92316
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) FERNANDO ORTIZ 18509 8TH ST BLOOMINGTON, CA 92316. The business is conducted by: an Individual. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/14/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on 2/10/2019. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 02/22/2019, 03/01/2019, 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB82019081902IR

CNBB82019081901MT FILE NO.20190001968
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
EXPRESS GAS.
1724 SOUTH EUCLID AVE
OTARIO, CA, 91762
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) MARYTONY INC 17026 CERRITOS ST FONTANA, CA 92336; 1724 SOUTH EUCLID AVE OTARIO, CA, 91762;. The business is conducted by: a Corporation. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/14/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on 2/02/2016. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 02/22/2019, 03/01/2019, 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB82019081901MT

CNBB92019091929MT FILE NO.20190002210
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
THE INTIMACY SEMINARS AND PSYCHOLOGICAL SERVICES.
231 N. EUCLID AVE.
UPLAND, CA, 91786
6852 EARP WAY
FONTANA, CA, 92336
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) JESHANA E AVENT JOHNSON 6852 EARP WAY FONTANA, CA 92336. The business is conducted by: an Individual. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/21/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on 3/02/2018. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/01/2019, 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB92019091929MT

CNBB92019091928MT FILE NO.20190002219
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
JESSE POOL SERVICE & REPAIR’S.
519 W FOOTHILL BLVD SUITE E
RIALTO, CA, 92376
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) JOSE L BERRELLEZ 519 W FOOTHILL BLVD SUITE E RIALTO, CA 92376. The business is conducted by: an Individual. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/21/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/01/2019, 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB92019091928MT

CNBB92019091927CH FILE NO.20190002293
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
QUICK IN HOMES.
2794 ARBOR LN
ONTARIO, CA, 91762
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) ALEJANDRO T PEREZ-MUNOZ 33478 NAVAJO TRL. 3 CATHEDRAL CITY, CA 92234. The business is conducted by: an Individual. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/22/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on 11/01/2018. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/01/2019, 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB92019091927CH

CNBB92019091926CH FILE NO.20190002292
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
THE A TEAM REALTY.
2794 ARBOR LN
ONTARIO, CA, 91762
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) ALEJANDRO T PEREZ-MUNOZ 33478 NAVAJO TRL. #3 CATHEDRAL CITY, CA 92234. The business is conducted by: an Individual. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/22/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on 11/01/2018. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/01/2019, 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB92019091926CH

CNBB92019091925IR FILE NO.20190002294
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
ROBINHOOD MEDICAL BILLING.
925 DEL RANCHO CT
ONTARIO, CA, 91762
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) FARID SOFIAN 925 DEL RANCHO CT ONTARIO, CA 91762. The business is conducted by: an Individual. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/22/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/01/2019, 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB92019091925IR

CNBB92019091924IR FILE NO.20190002279
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
JB’S TILE.
5439 DOGWOOD ST.
SAN BERNARDINO, CA, 92404
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) JORGE D BARBOSA 5439 DOGWOOD ST. SAN BERNANRDINO, CA 92404. The business is conducted by: an Individual. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/22/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on 02/01/2019. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/01/2019, 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB92019091924IR

CNBB92019091923MT FILE NO.20190002268
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
COMFORT SUITES ONTARIO.
1811 EAST HOLT BLVD
ONTARIO, CA, 91761
1811 EAST HOLT BLVD
ONTARIO, CA, 91761Full name of registrant (s) is (are) AMML CORPORATION 23330 SUNNYMEAD BLVD MORENO VALLEY, CA 92553; 1811 EAST HOLT BLVD ONTARIO, CA, 91761; 1811 EAST HOLT BLVD ONTARIO, CA, 91761. The business is conducted by: a Corporation. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/22/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on 2/20/2019. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/01/2019, 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB92019091923MT

CNBB92019091922CH FILE NO.20190002047
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
MARIPOSA TIRE AND AUTO.
12011 MARIPOSA RD.
HESPERIA, CA, 92345
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) MRE MANAGEMENT GROUP LLC 12011 MARIPOSA RD HESPERIA, CA 92345; 12011 MARIPOSA RD. HESPERIA, CA, 92345;. The business is conducted by: a Limited Liability Company. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/15/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/01/2019, 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB92019091922CH
CNBB92019091921CH FILE NO.20190002030
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
VOYAGE TO A HEALTHIER YOU.
12847 SANTA ANA PL
CHINO, CA, 91710
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) DANIEL GARCIA 12847 SANTA ANA PL CHINO, CA 91710; CINDI GARCIA 12847 SANTA ANA PL CHINO, CA 91710. The business is conducted by: a Married Couple. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/15/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/01/2019, 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB92019091921CH
CNBB92019091920MT FILE NO.20190001232
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
HERNANDEZ EXHAUST CLEANING.
16395 FAIRFAX ST
FONTANA, CA, 92336
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) SABINO HERNANDEZ 16395 FAIRFAX ST FONTANA, CA 92336; JOEL HERNANDEZ 16395 FAIRFAX ST FONTANA, CA 92336. The business is conducted by: a General Partnership. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 01/29/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/01/2019, 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB92019091920MT

CNBB92019091919MT FILE NO.20190002027
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
MAPLE TREE SERVICE.
744 E F ST
ONTARIO, CA, 91764
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) MANUEL VALVERDE ANGULO 744 E F ST ONTARIO, CA 91764. The business is conducted by: an Individual. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/15/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on 2/14/2019. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/01/2019, 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB92019091919MT

CNBB92019091918MT FILE NO.20190002038
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
D. SIERRA FIBERGLASS EVERYTHING.
1875 W RIALTO AVE
SAN BERNARDINO, CA, 92410
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) JUAN C SIERRA 1515 N MIRAMONTE AVE ONTARIO, CA 91764. The business is conducted by: an Individual. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/15/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/01/2019, 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB92019091918MT

CNBB92019091917IR FILE NO.20190002031
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
PAPERMADE BY JACKIE.
7667 DATE AVE.
FONTANA, CA, 92336
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) JACQUELINE AMAYA 7667 DATE AVE. FONTANA, CA 92336. The business is conducted by: an Individual. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/15/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/01/2019, 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB92019091917IR
CNBB92019091916MT FILE NO.20190002123
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
THE HIVE BEAUTY STUDIO-PAHOLA.
123 E 9TH STREET STE #103
UPLAND, CA, 91786
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) PAHOLA YEPEZ 123 E 9TH STREET STE #103 UPLAND, CA 91786. The business is conducted by: an Individual. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/19/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/01/2019, 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB92019091916MT

CNBB92019091915MT FILE NO.20190002083
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
CHEMOURS INTERNATIONAL OPERATIONS SALES.
130 S MOUNTAIN AVE SUITE A
UPLAND, CA, 91762
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) CHRISTINA E BROWN 130 S MOUNTAIN AVE SUITE A UPLAND, CA 91762. The business is conducted by: an Individual. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/19/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/01/2019, 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB92019091915MT

CNBB92019091914MT FILE NO.20190002126
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
THE HIVE BEAUTY SALON-KARINA.
123 E 9TH STREET STE #103
UPLAND, CA, 91786
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) KARINA L REED 123 E 9TH STREET STE #103 UPLAND, CA 91786. The business is conducted by: an Individual. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/19/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/01/2019, 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB92019091914MT

CNBB92019091913MT FILE NO.20190002124
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
THE HIVE BEAUTY STUDIO.
123 E 9TH STREET STE #103
UPLAND, CA, 91786
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) ERIKA M GARCIA 123 E 9TH STREET STE #103 UPLAND, CA 91786. The business is conducted by: an Individual. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/19/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/01/2019, 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB92019091913MT

CNBB92019091912CH FILE NO.20190002097
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
NATIONAL RECOVERY SOLUTIONS.
5501 PINE AVE
CHINO HILLS, CA, 91709
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) JOYCE ARCE 5501 PINE AVE CHINO HILLS, CA 91709. The business is conducted by: an Individual. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/19/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/01/2019, 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB92019091912CH

CNBB92019091911CH FILE NO.20190002096
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
MCCOLLUM CONSULTING GROUP.
5501 PINE AVE
CHINO HILLS, CA, 91709
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) JOYCE ARCE 5501 PINE AVE CHINO HILLS, CA 91709. The business is conducted by: an Individual. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/19/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/01/2019, 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB92019091911CH

CNBB92019091910CH FILE NO.20190002102
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
ABOGADOS DE ACCIDENTES COLTON.
1265 NORTH LA CADENA DRIVE SPACE #2
COLTON, CA, 92324
714 WEST OLYMPIC BOULEVARD SUITE 940
LOS ANGELES, CA, 90015
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) CHAHINE LAW, APC 714 WEST OLYMPIC BOULEVARD SUITE 940 LOS ANGELES, CA 90015; 1265 NORTH LA CADENA DRIVE SPACE 2 COLTON, CA, 92324; 714 WEST OLYMPIC BOULEVARD SUITE 940 LOS ANGELES, CA, 90015. The business is conducted by: a Corporation. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/19/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/01/2019, 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB92019091910CH

CNBB92019091909CH FILE NO.20190002101
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
LOS ABOGADOS DE ACCIDENTES; ABOGADOS DE ACCIDENTES; ABOGADOS DE ACCIDENTES SAN BERNARDINO.
320 NORTH EAST STREET SUITE 205
SAN BERNARDINO, CA, 92401
714 WEST OLYMPIC BOULEVARD SUITE 940
LOS ANGELES, CA, 90015
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) CHAHINE LAW, APC 714 WEST OLYMPIC BOULEVARD SUITE 940 LOS ANGELES, CA 90015; 320 NORTH EAST STREET SUITE 205 SAN BERNARDINO, CA, 92401; 714 WEST OLYMPIC BOULEVARD SUITE 940 LOS ANGELES, CA, 90015. The business is conducted by: a Corporation. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/19/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on 02/01/2019. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/01/2019, 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB92019091909CH

CNBB92019091908CH FILE NO.20190002113
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
INNOVATIVE CHOICES UNLIMITED NETWORK.
473 E. CARNEGIE DR. SUITE 200
SAN BERNARDINO, CA, 92408
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) KIP BUSINESS VENTURES, INC. 473 E. CARNEGIE DR. SUITE 200 SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92404; 473 E. CARNEGIE DR. SUITE 200 SAN BERNARDINO, CA, 92408;. The business is conducted by: a Corporation. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/19/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on 2/01/2011. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/01/2019, 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB92019091908CH

CNBB92019091907IR FILE NO.20190002076
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
WRIGHTWOOD ARTISANS AND CRAFTERS.
5995 CEDAR ST
WRIGHTWOOD, CA, 92397
9944 ROSE DRIVE
OAK HILLS, CA, 92344
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) DEBRA GADEBUSCH 11929 JOHNSON RD PHELAN, CA 92371; ADRIANNA FOSTER 9944 ROSE DR OAK HILLS, CA 92344; JEFREY R ZUMKLEY 5995 CEDAR ST WRIGHTWOOD, CA 92397; ED EINBODEN 5995 CEDAR ST WRIGHTWOOD, CA 92397; VICKI ELEFANTE 5871 LONE PINE CNYN RD. WRIGHTWOOD, CA 92397; JENNIFER D CAMPBELL GANCE 3021 SILVER RIDGE DR. PINON HILLS, CA 92372. The business is conducted by: Copartners. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/19/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/01/2019, 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB92019091907IR

CNBB92019091906CH FILE NO.20190002136
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
D’LUXE PALLETS.
874 S LAMARR ST
RIALTO, CA, 92376
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) YOHANNA ROMO 874 S LAMARR ST RIALTO, CA 92376. The business is conducted by: an Individual. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/20/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/01/2019, 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB92019091906CH

CNBB92019091905CH FILE NO.20190002183
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
ESPINOZA COMPUTER REPAIR.
11232 CACTUS AVE
BLOOMINGTON, CA, 92316
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) JESUS ESPINOZA JR 11232 CACTUS AVE BLOOMINGTON, CA 92316. The business is conducted by: an Individual. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/20/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on 02/20/2017. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/01/2019, 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB92019091905CH

CNBB92019091904CH FILE NO.20190002165
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
PALM NAILS.
27254 BASELINE STREET
HIGHLAND, CA, 92346
7251 CATALPA AVE
HIGHLAND, CA, 92346
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) ANH T NGUYEN 7251 CATALPA AVE HIGHLAND, CA 92346. The business is conducted by: an Individual. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/20/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/01/2019, 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB92019091904CH

CNBB92019091903IR FILE NO.20190002137
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
PD INVESTMENTS.
30369 MISSIONS ST
HIGHLAND, CA, 92346
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) DONALD J YOUNG 30369 MISSION ST HIGHLAND, CA 92346; PATRICIA K YOUNG 30369 MISSION ST HIGHLAND, CA 92346. The business is conducted by: a General Partnership. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/20/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/01/2019, 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB92019091903IR

CNBB92019091902MT FILE NO.20190002132
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
RUSSELL PRIVATE SECURITY.
569 N. MOUNTAIN AVE. SUITE H
UPLAND, CA, 91786
1042 N. MOUNTAIN AVE. SUITE B114
UPLAND, CA, 91786
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) RUSSELL SECURITY AND STAFFING INC 569 N. MOUNTAIN AVE. SUITE H UPLAND, CA 91786; 569 N. MOUNTAIN AVE. SUITE H UPLAND, CA, 91786; 1042 N. MOUNTAIN AVE. SUITE B114 UPLAND, CA, 91786. The business is conducted by: a Corporation. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/20/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/01/2019, 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB92019091902MT

CNBB92019091901MT FILE NO.20190002170
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
THE INSURANCE AGENCY.
34161 LAKE BREEZE DR
YUCAIPA, CA, 92399
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) CHRISTINA M RAMOS 34161 LAKE BREEZE DR YUCAIPA, CA 92399. The business is conducted by: an Individual. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/20/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/01/2019, 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB92019091901MT
CNBB102019101940IR FILE NO.20190002442
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
CREATIVE METALS SIGN.
1217 W. ROSEWOOD CT. SUITE B
ONTARIO, CA, 91762
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) LORENZO QUINTERO GOMEZ 1217 W. ROSEWOOD CT. SUITE B ONTARIO, CA 91762. The business is conducted by: an Individual. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/27/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019, 03/29/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB102019101940IR

CNBB102019101939IR FILE NO.20190002473
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
TOKYO SUSHI & BBQ.
14741 7TH ST. STE A
VICTORVILLE, CA, 92395
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) TONY K LEE 14741 7TH ST STE A VICTORVILLE, CA 92395. The business is conducted by: an Individual. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/27/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019, 03/29/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB102019101939IR

CNBB102019101938CH FILE NO.20190002482
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
J.T. OCHOA LOGISTICS.
6155 N. PALM AVE. #402
SAN BERNARDINO, CA, 92407
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) JOSPEH T OCHOA 6155 N. PALM AVE. #402 SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92407. The business is conducted by: an Individual. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/27/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019, 03/29/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB102019101938CH

CNBB102019101937CH FILE NO.20190002469
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
E’S & M’S TRUCKING.
13079 11TH ST
CHINO, CA, 91710
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) EDUARDO SAMPERIO 13079 11TH ST CHINO, CA 91710. The business is conducted by: an Individual. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/27/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019, 03/29/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB102019101937CH

CNBB102019101936CH FILE NO.20190002456
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
ADORE LUXURY LASHES.
771 W. FOOTHILL BLVD
UPLAND, CA, 91786
10000 IMPERIAL HWY APT E-108
DOWNEY, CA, 90242
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) LADORI K MCNEAL 10000 IMPERIAL HWY APT E-108 DOWNEY, CA 90242. The business is conducted by: an Individual. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/27/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019, 03/29/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB102019101936CH

CNBB102019101935MT FILE NO.20190002440
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
L M FIXTURES.
6828 CORONA AVE APT B
BELL, CA, 90201
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) JOSE L MORELOS MARTINEZ 6828 CORONA AVE APT B BELL, CA 90201. The business is conducted by: an Individual. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/27/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019, 03/29/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB102019101935MT

CNBB102019101934MT FILE NO.20190002461
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
RV TREE SERVICE.
2069 W SAN BERNARDINO AVE APT #1228
COLTON, CA, 92324
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) EMMANUEL URTUZUASTEGUI GARCIA 2069 W SAN BERNARDINO AVE APT #1228 COLTON, CA 92324; ALMA L URTUZUASTEGUI-SERVIN 2069 W SAN BERNARDINO AVE APT 1228 COLTON, CA 92324. The business is conducted by: a Married Couple. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/27/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019, 03/29/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB102019101934MT

CNBB102019101933MT FILE NO.20190002476
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
NO GRIND NO GLORY.
25422 EUREKA ST
SAN BERNARDINO, CA, 92404
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) VERONICA M CONCHA 25422 EUREKA ST SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92404. The business is conducted by: an Individual. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/27/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019, 03/29/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB102019101933MT

CNBB102019101932CH FILE NO.20190002514
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
VALUE AUTO HUB.
161 W. MILL ST SUITE 103H
SAN BERARDINO, CA, 92408
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) VALUE AUTO HUB LLC 161 W. MILL ST SUITE 103H SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92408; 161 W. MILL ST SUITE 103H SAN BERARDINO, CA, 92408;. The business is conducted by: a Limited Liability Company. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/28/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on 02/13/2019. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019, 03/29/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB102019101932CH

CNBB102019101931CH FILE NO.20190002508
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
GOWNS BY MARLA.
889 N D ST
SAN BERNARDINO, CA, 92401
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) YVETTE WRIGHT 6184 MANDY LN SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92407. The business is conducted by: an Individual. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/28/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019, 03/29/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB102019101931CH

CNBB102019101930MT FILE NO.20190002522
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
ALBERTOS MEXICAN FOOD.
10358 MOUNTAIN VIEW AVE SUITE 102
LOMA LINDA, CA, 92354
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) DAVID BERMUDEZ 10358 MOUNTAIN VIEW AVE SUITE 102 LOMA LINDA, CA 92354. The business is conducted by: an Individual. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/28/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019, 03/29/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB102019101930MT

CNBB102019101929MT FILE NO.20190002512
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
CALIFORNIA GOLD LOGISTICS.
11595 WINTER PL. #15
ADELANTO, CA, 92301
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) JAMIE S MATLOCK 11595 WINTER PL. #15 ADELANTO, CA 92301. The business is conducted by: an Individual. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/28/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019, 03/29/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB102019101929MT

CNBB102019101928MT FILE NO.20190002510
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
TELECOMM TECH.
2509 E EUCLID CRESCENT EAST
UPLAND, CA, 91786
14421 SAN REMO DR
EASTVALE, CA, 92880
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) ALFREDO J CORREA 14421 SAN REMO DR EASTVALE, CA 92880. The business is conducted by: an Individual. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/28/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on 2/16/2012. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019, 03/29/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB102019101928MT

CNBB102019101927MT FILE NO.20190002495
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
VICUNA TRANSPORT.
16059 LOS CEDROS AVE
FONTANA, CA, 92336
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) LUIS M VICUNA 16059 LOS CEDROS AVE FONTANA, CA 92336. The business is conducted by: an Individual. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/28/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019, 03/29/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB102019101927MT

CNBB102019101926MT FILE NO.20190002375
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
M&C LIQUOR.
1560 N ORANGE ST
REDLANDS, CA, 92374
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) IMAD GHANEM 7466 STAR PINE CIR HIGHLAND, CA 92346; ANTWANET ZIDAN 7466 STAR PINE CIR HIGHLAND, CA 92346. The business is conducted by: a Married Couple. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/26/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019, 03/29/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB102019101926MT

CNBB102019101925MT FILE NO.20190002486
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
LEO’S PAINTING.
9755 ALMERIA AVE
FONTANA, CA, 92335
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) LEONARDO F GASPAR 9755 ALMERIA AVE FONTANA, CA 92335. The business is conducted by: an Individual. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/28/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on 1/01/2014. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019, 03/29/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB102019101925MT

CNBB102019101924IR FILE NO.20190002515
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
UPKEEP COMMERCIAL MAINTENANCE.
25590 PROSPECT AVE. #16H
LOMA LINDA, CA, 92354
P.O. BOX 290
LOMA LINDA, CA, 92354
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) BRYAN FERRARIS 25590 PROSPECT AVE. #16H LOMA LINDA, CA 92354. The business is conducted by: an Individual. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/28/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019, 03/29/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB102019101924IR

CNBB102019101923IR FILE NO.20190002490
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
KALI DREAMZ.
1554 N PENNSYLVANIA AVE
SAN BERNARDINO, CA, 92411
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) GAKEVA A CHURCHILL 1554 N PENNSYLVANIA AVE SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92411; GLYNIS M MASON 1554 N PENNSYLVANIA AVE SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92411; JACKINA L FOSTER 1554 N PENNSYLVANIA AVE SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92411. The business is conducted by: a General Partnership. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/28/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019, 03/29/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB102019101923IR

CNBB102019101922CH FILE NO.20190002604
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
SOFT ESTHETICS.
8560 VINEYARD AVE #510
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA, 91730
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) DIANA M JOHNS 8560 VINEYARD AVE #510 RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91730. The business is conducted by: an Individual. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 03/01/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on 07/15/2018. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019, 03/29/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB102019101922CH

CNBB102019101921CH FILE NO.20190002577
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
PAPARAZZI.
14762 SHADOW DR.
FONTANA, CA, 92337
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) JANAYA N HENDERSON 14762 SHADOW DR. FONTANA, CA 92337. The business is conducted by: an Individual. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 03/01/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019, 03/29/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB102019101921CH

CNBB102019101920CH FILE NO.20190002574
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
THE SOCIAL CODE.
1443 N. SAGE AVE
RIALTO, CA, 92376
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) APRL C BLACKBURN 1443 N. SAGE AVE RIALTO, CA 92376. The business is conducted by: an Individual. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 03/01/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019, 03/29/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB102019101920CH

CNBB102019101919CH FILE NO.20190002590
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
BALDY CONNECT.
6761 MT BALDY RD
MT BALDY, CA, 91759
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) GETZZZDONE LLC 6761 MT BALDY RD MT BALDY, CA 91759; 6761 MT BALDY RD MT BALDY, CA, 91759;. The business is conducted by: a Limited Liability Company. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 03/01/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019, 03/29/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB102019101919CH

CNBB102019101918CH FILE NO.20190002533
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
AMH TRANSPORT.
8350 ARCHIBALD AVE STE 210
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA, 91730
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) AMH MEDICAL TRANSPORTATION LLC 8350 ARCHIBALD AVE STE 210 RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91730; 8350 ARCHIBALD AVE STE 210 RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA, 91730;. The business is conducted by: a Limited Liability Company. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/28/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019, 03/29/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB102019101918CH

CNBB102019101917IR FILE NO.20190002356
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
HEALTHCARE ADVOCATE NETWORK.
23865 ZURICH DR.
CRESTLINE, CA, 92325
PO BOX 222
BLUE JAY, CA, 92317
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) GINA DAGOSTINO 23865 ZURICH DR. CRESTLINE, CA 92317. The business is conducted by: an Individual. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/25/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on 1/15/2017. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019, 03/29/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB102019101917IR

CNBB102019101916IR FILE NO.20190002354
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
SC TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS.
1201 WEST BADILLO ST
COVINA, CA, 91722
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) SAMANTHA S CAMARENA 1201 WEST BADILLO ST COVINA, CA 91722. The business is conducted by: an Individual. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/25/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019, 03/29/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB102019101916IR

CNBB102019101915IR FILE NO.20190002349
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
HAIR FARM BEAUTY CLUB.
5466 MORENO ST
MONTCLAIR, CA, 91763
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) STEVENIE E FARMER 5466 MORENO ST MONTCLAIR, CA 91763. The business is conducted by: an Individual. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/25/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019, 03/29/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB102019101915IR

CNBB102019101914IR FILE NO.20190002335
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
JUICE IT UP REDLANDS PATIO.
629 ORANGE ST
REDLANDS, CA, 92374
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) ACA JUICE COMPANY 629 ORANGE ST REDLANDS, CA 92374; 629 ORANGE ST REDLANDS, CA, 92374;. The business is conducted by: a Corporation. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/25/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019, 03/29/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB102019101914IR

CNBB102019101913MT FILE NO.20190002352
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
R M TRACKING.
1247 PORFIRIO ELIAS WAY
COLTON, CA, 92324
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) RONALD MARTINEZ 1247 PORFIRIO ELIAS WAY COLTON, CA 92324. The business is conducted by: an Individual. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/25/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019, 03/29/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB102019101913MT

CNBB102019101912MT FILE NO.20190002348
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
LAFUME TRANSPORT.
1700 E DATE ST #1044
SAN BERNARDINO, CA, 92404
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) CYNTHIA D LAFUME 1700 E DATE ST #1044 SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92404; JEFFREY LAFUME 1700 E DATE ST #1044 SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92404. The business is conducted by: a Married Couple. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/25/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019, 03/29/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB102019101912MT

CNBB102019101911MT FILE NO.20190002334
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
FEEL THAT FIRE R.B.C MUZIK.
4100 HARRISON CANYON ROAD #7
SAN BERNARDINO, CA, 92404
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) CRYSTAL E BERRY 4100 HARRISON CANYON ROAD #7 SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92404; RYAN E BERRY-VIERWINDEN 4100 HARRISON CANYON ROAD #7 SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92404. The business is conducted by: a Married Couple. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/25/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019, 03/29/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB102019101911MT

CNBB102019101910MT FILE NO.20190002331
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
CABINETS ESPARZA.
2727 PACIFIC ST SPACE #53
HIGHLAND, CA, 92346
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) JOSE ESPARZA GONZALEZ 2727 PACIFIC ST SPACE #53 HIGHLAND, CA 92346. The business is conducted by: an Individual. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/25/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019, 03/29/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB102019101910MT

CNBB102019101909MT FILE NO.20190002323
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
TMIX HOTSPOT.
738 S WATERMAN AVE #C46
SAN BERNARDINO, CA, 92408
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) TMIX LLC 738 S WATERMAN AVE #C46 SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92408; 738 S WATERMAN AVE C46 SAN BERNARDINO, CA, 92408;. The business is conducted by: a Limited Liability Company. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/25/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019, 03/29/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB102019101909MT

CNBB102019101908MT FILE NO.20190002248
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
INFINITY AUTO GLASS.
17243 HAWTHORNE AVE
FONTANA, CA, 92335-5827
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) ORLANDO ALONSO 17243 HAWTHORNE AVE FONTANA, CA 92335. The business is conducted by: an Individual. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/21/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019, 03/29/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB102019101908MT

CNBB102019101906CV FILE NO.20190002421
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
SALON VOYD.
829 W FOOTHILL BLVD STE B
UPLAND, CA, 91786
8200 HAVEN AVE APT 8211
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA, 91730
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) SAMANTHA L RAFFOUL 829 W FOOTHILL BLVD STE B UPLAND, CA 91786. The business is conducted by: an Individual. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/26/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on 2/26/2019. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019, 03/29/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB102019101906CV

CNBB102019101905MT FILE NO.20190002397
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
J P FIXTURES.
1515 ARROW HWY SPACE #55
UPLAND, CA, 91786
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) ADIED J PINTO MEJIA 1515 ARROW HWY SPACE #55 UPLAND, CA 91786. The business is conducted by: an Individual. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/26/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019, 03/29/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB102019101905MT

FILE NO.20190002415 CNBB102019101904MT
STATEMENT OF ABANDONMENT OF USE OF FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME
The following person (s) has (have) abandoned the use of the fictitious name::
SERVEU PROPERTY RENNOVATION.
11750 MT VERNON AVE GRAND TERRACE, CA, 92313
PO BOX 1501 COLTON, CA, 92324
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) AHMAD ALFAGIR 15251 SENECA RD APT 112 VICTORVILLE, CA 92392; DINA ABDELHADI 15251 SENECA RD APT 112 VICTORVILLE, CA 92392. The business is conducted by: a General Partnership. The fictitious business name referred to above was filed on 02/01/2019. Original File #20190001419.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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/26/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019, 03/29/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB102019101904MT

FILE NO.20190002413 CNBB102019101903MT
STATEMENT OF ABANDONMENT OF USE OF FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME
The following person (s) has (have) abandoned the use of the fictitious name::
LEGACY RENOVATIONS SERVICES.
11750 MT VERNON AVE GRAND TERRACE, CA, 92313
PO BOX 1501 COLTON, CA, 92324
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) AHMAD ALFAGIR 11750 MT VERNON AVE GRAND TERRACE, CA 92313; DINA ABDELHADI 11750 MT VERNON AVE GRAND TERRACE, CA 92313. The business is conducted by: a General Partnership. The fictitious business name referred to above was filed on 02/07/2019. Original File #20190001653.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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/26/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on 02/06/2019. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019, 03/29/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB102019101903MT

FILE NO.20190002414 CNBB102019101902MT
STATEMENT OF ABANDONMENT OF USE OF FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME
The following person (s) has (have) abandoned the use of the fictitious name::
LEGACY APARTMENT SERVICES.
15251 SENECA RD VICTORVILLE, CA, 92392
PO BOX 1501 COLTON, CA, 92324
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) AHMAD R ALFAGIR 15251 SENECA RD VICTORVILLE, CA 92392; DINA A ABDELHADI 15251 SENECA RD VICTORVILLE, CA 92392. The business is conducted by: a General Partnership. The fictitious business name referred to above was filed on 01/29/2019. Original File #20190001186.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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/26/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on 1/29/2019. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019, 03/29/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB102019101902MT

CNBB102019101901MT FILE NO.20190002394
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT
The following person (s) is (are) doing business as:
M AND C DETAILS AND MORE.
1018 ALTA ST
REDLANDS, CA, 92374
Full name of registrant (s) is (are) MAURICIO VARGAS ALEJANDRE 1018 ALTA ST REDLANDS, CA 92374. The business is conducted by: an Individual. 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.) This statement was filed with the County Clerk of Los Angeles County on 02/26/2019. The registrant (s) has (have) NOT commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on N/A. NOTICE-The 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 14411 at seq. Business and Profession Code). First filing 03/08/2019, 03/15/2019, 03/22/2019, 03/29/2019
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SENTINEL CNBB102019101901MT
FBN 20190002941
The following person is doing business as: PARADIME 11465 CASA BLANCA ST. YUCAIPA, CA 92399; JOSHUA R BRAZE 11465 CASA BLANCA ST. YUCAIPA, CA 92399
This 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/ JOSHUA R. BRAZE, OWNER
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 3/11/2019
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 03/15; 03/22; 03/29 & 04/05/2019 CNBB111901IR
FBN 20190002557
The following person is doing business as: BUCK’S STAIR TREADS 15641 BOYLE AVE FONTANA, CA 92337;[ MAILING ADDRESS 15641 BOYLE AVE FONTANA, CA 92337]; DJ ENTERPRISE LLC 15641 BOYLE AVNENUE FONTANA, CA 92337
This 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/ DARYL J BUCK, MANAGING MEMBER
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on: 3/01/2019
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 03/15; 03/22; 03/29 & 04/05/2019 CNBB111902MT
FBN 20190002558
The following person is doing business as: BLOOMINGTON SUBWAY SANDWICHES 18790 VALLEY BLVD #B BLOOMINGTON, CA 92316;[ MAILING ADDRESS 15641 BOYLE AVE FONTANA, CA 92337]; DM FOODS LLC 18790 VALLEY BLVD #B BLOOMINGTON, CA 92316
This 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/ DARYL J BUCK, MANAGING MEMBER
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on 03/01/2019
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 03/15; 03/22; 03/29 & 04/05/2019 CNBB111903MT
FBN 20190002556
The following person is doing business as: PRIMEROCARS.COM 1680 S. “E” ST. SUITE B-57 SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92408;[ MAILING ADDRESS 6789 QUAIL HILL PKWY #502 IRVINE, CA 92603]; AP DISTRIBUTION INC 1680 S. “E” ST. SUITE B-57 SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92408
This 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/ REGAN HSU, CEO
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on 03/01/2019
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 03/15; 03/22; 03/29 & 04/05/2019 CNBB111904IR
FBN 201900002576
The following person is doing business as: THE JET BAR & NIGHT CLUB 25214 3RD ST SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92410; ANGEL A MORENO 25214 3RD ST SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92410
This business is conducted by: AN INDIVIDUAL
The registrant commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on: 11/08/2012
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/ ANGEL A MORENO, OWNER
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on 3/01/2019
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 03/15; 03/22; 03/29 & 04/05/2019 CNBB111905IR
FBN 201900002681
The following person is doing business as: ELITE DETAILING; ELITE COATING 452 TENNESSEE ST REDLANDS, CA 92373; NEIL C GLINES 452 TENNESSEE ST REDLANDS, CA 92373
This 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/ NEIL C GLINES, OWNER
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on 3/05/2019
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 03/15; 03/22; 03/29 & 04/05/2019 CNBB111906MT
FBN 201900002700
The following person is doing business as: IMAM ALI CENTER 10925 ADMIRALS BAY ST. VICTORVILLE, CA 92392; IMAM ALI SEMINARY INC 275 LAKE MARY BLVD SANFORD, FL 32773
This 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/ SYED FARMAN ALI RIZVI, TREASURER
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on 3/05/2019
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 03/15; 03/22; 03/29 & 04/05/2019 CNBB111907IR
FBN 20190002689
The following person is doing business as: ALIEN ROCKS& MINERALS 12949 3RD ST YUCAIPA. CA 92399; JAMES D BURNHAM 12949 3RD ST YUCAIPA, CA 92399
This 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/ JAMES D. BURNHAM, OWNER
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on 3/05/2019
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 03/15; 03/22; 03/29 & 04/05/2019 CNBB111908IR
FBN 20190002710
The following person is doing business as: FINE FINISH PAINTING AND RESTORATION 3694 N. TAMARIND RIALTO, CA 92377; DAHARRION J LYONS 3694 N. TAMARIND RIALTO, CA 92377
This 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/ DAHARRION J LYONS
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on 3/05/2019
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 03/15; 03/22; 03/29 & 04/05/2019 CNBB111909CH
FBN 20190002688
The following person is doing business as: SUPERSHUTTLE LA 12202 BRIDLEWOOD DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91739; M&N RIDES LLC 12202 BRIDLEWOOD DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91739
This 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/ MICHAEL SHEHATA, MANAGING MEMBER
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on 3/05/2019
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 03/15; 03/22; 03/29 & 04/05/2019 CNBB111910CH
FBN 20190002633
The following person is doing business as: ELITEONE CONCRETE PUMPING 740 W BELMONT ST ONTARIO, CA 91762; EVERARDO MAGALLON 740 W BELMONT ST ONTARIO, CA 91762
This business is conducted by an: 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/ EVERARDO MAGALLON, OWNER
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on 3/04/2019
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 03/15; 03/22; 03/29 & 04/05/2019 CNBB111911MT
FBN 20190002634
The following person is doing business as: KC MATTRESS DISCOUNT 26122 BASELINE ST SPACE #29 HIGHLAND, CA 92346; CESAR E BUENO MORALES 26122 BASELINE ST SPACE #29 HIGHLAND, CA 92346
This business is conducted by an: 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 E. BUENO MORALES, OWNER
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on 3/04/2019
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 03/15; 03/22; 03/29 & 04/05/2019 CNBB111912MT
FBN 20190002653
The following person is doing business as: THE GOOD DOG 7890 HAVEN AVE SUITE 12 RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91730; MIGUEL A MACIAS 7890 HAVEN AVE SUITE 12 RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91730
This business is conducted by: AN INDIVIDUAL
The registrant commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on: 12/26/2018
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. MACIAS, OWNER
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on 3/04/2019
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 03/15; 03/22; 03/29 & 04/05/2019 CNBB111913MT
FBN 20190002623
The following person is doing business as: THE REPUBLIC BOOT CAMP 33111 YUCAIPA BLVD YUCAIPA, CA 92399; BRYAN M SULLIVAN 33111 YUCAIPA BLVD YUCAIPA, CA 92399; MIKE R MICHAELS 33111 YUCAIPA BLVD YUCAIPA, CA 92399
This 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/ BRYAN M. SUVILLAN, GNEREAL PARTNER
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on 3/04/2019
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 03/15; 03/22; 03/29 & 04/05/2019 CNBB111914MT
FBN 20190003121
The following person is doing business as: OUR TIME TRANSPORTATION COMPANIONSHIP SERVICES 16971 MONTGOMERY AVE FONTANA, CA 92336; TIAIRA K PERDUE 16791 MONTGOMERY AVE FONTANA, CA 92336
This business is conducted by an: 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/ TIAIRA K. PERDUE
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on 3/14/2019
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 03/15; 03/22; 03/29 & 04/05/2019 CNBB111915IR
FBN 20190002622
The following person is doing business as: CALDERON CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT 13264 JANUARY CT CORONA, CA 92879; TINA M CALDERON 13264 JANUARY CT CORONA, CA 92879
This 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/ TINA M. CALDERON
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on 3/04/2019
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 01/04; 01/11; 01/18 & 01/25/2019 CNBB111916IR
FBN 20190002628
The following person is doing business as: SARAS BEAUTY STUDIO 2409 S. GROVE AVE ONTARIO, CA 91761;[ MAILING ADDRESS 2409 S. GROVE AVE ONTARIO, CA 91761]; LETICIA M HERNANDEZ 4329 RIDGERIDER CT RIVERSIDE, CA 92509
This 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/ LETICIA M. HERNANDEZ
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on 3/04/2019
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 03/15; 03/22; 03/29 & 04/05/2019 CNBB111917IR

FBN 20190002650
The following person is doing business as: JUMBO SAVINGS 125 W. VALLEY BLVD COLTON, CA 92324; AHMAD M DAHBRA 810 CARSON ST UPLAND, CA 91784
This business is conducted by: AN INDIVIDUAL
The registrant commenced to transact business under the fictitious business name or names listed above on: 3/04/2019
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/ AHMAD M DAHABRA, OWNER
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on 3/04/2019
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 03/15; 03/22; 03/29 & 04/05/2019 CNBB111918IR
FBN 20190002646
The following person is doing business as: ROYALTY AIR DUCT AND HOOD SERVICES 4938 N. MAYFIELD AVE SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92407; EDGAR Y RODRIGUEZ 4938 N. MAYFIELD AVE SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92407; NICHOLE M JARA-RODRIGUEZ 4938 N. MAYFIELD AVE SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92407
This business is conducted by an: 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/ NICHOLE M JARA-RODRIGUEZ, WIFE
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on 3/04/2019
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 03/15; 03/22; 03/29 & 04/05/2019 CNBB111919CH
FBN 20190002630
The following person is doing business as: KEEP YOUR CROWN RIGHT; HAIRCUTS ARE MEDICINE; THE GOOD HAND OIL 24557 ALESSNDRO BLVD MORENO VALLEY, CA 92553; AMANDA M CLAUSON 15326 BOLERO DR. FONTANA, CA 92337
This business is conducted by an: 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/ AMANDA M CLAUSON, OWNER
Statement filed with the County Clerk of San Bernardino on 3/04/2019
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 03/15; 03/22; 03/29 & 04/05/2019 CNBB111920CH

Click on the blue portal below to read the March 8 San Bernardino County Sentinel.

Sentinel 03-08-19

Inmates at the Adelanto Detention Center, in particular ones with both mental and physical disabilities, are being subjected to abusive and inhumane conditions and treatment, according to a just-released report by the Disability Rights Center of California.
The report confirms in separate detail the findings of other studies and reports relating to the Adelanto Detention Facility.
The Adelanto Detention Center is the largest of the holding facilities maintained under the auspices of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement division of the Department of Homeland Security in California and one of the largest in the country, with an average detainee population of almost 2,000 people.
The facility is owned and operated by a private contractor, the GEO Group, Inc., pursuant to an intergovernmental service agreement between the Immigration and Customs Enforcement division and the City of Adelanto.
According to the Disability Rights Center of California, “Recent government policy changes regarding immigration enforcement priorities has made a significant increase in the detention of people with disabilities all but certain. Most notable is the January 2017 presidential order that terminated the exercise of ‘prosecutorial discretion’ for people with disabilities and other special populations. There has also been a dramatic rise in the detention of asylum seekers, who often carry with them experiences of trauma and have significant mental health needs.”
In a 64-page report “There Is No Safety Here” prepared for the Disability Rights Center of California by Aaron J. Fischer, litigation counsel; Pilar Gonzalez, supervising attorney; Richard Diaz, staff attorney; and Disability Rights Center subject matter experts Altaf Saadi, M.D., M.S.H.S. and Erica Lubliner, M.D., it is stated, “People held at Adelanto are subjected to punitive, prison-like conditions that harm people with disabilities. Adelanto is infused with unnecessarily harsh – and in effect, punitive – conditions, raising questions as to whether Immigration and Customs Enforcement and GEO Group are violating the constitutional rights of the people held there as civil detainees. Adelanto looks, feels and operates like a prison, from the extreme idleness and regimented daily schedule to the use of solitary confinement-type housing. In fact, the east side of the facility was constructed to be and was operated as a prison for many years. Immigration Customs Enforcement is underutilizing feasible alternatives to detention for people who can be effectively supervised in the community. The facility’s prison-like conditions disproportionately harm people with mental illness and other disabilities.”
The report continues, “Adelanto has an inadequate mental health care and medical care system, made worse by the facility’s counter-therapeutic conditions and practices. We identified many people with serious mental health needs who have suffered in detention. They receive inadequate clinical contacts and ineffective, non-individualized treatment. GEO Group fails to provide structured mental health programming to meet Adelanto detainees’ clinical treatment needs. GEO Group also restricts people’s ability to engage in self-directed activities, including something as simple as reading books that help them cope in detention. Men and women at the facility are further harmed by the facility’s harsh and non-therapeutic institutional responses to people in psychiatric crisis. When people are in crisis, they are met with pepper spray and extreme isolation. We also found several examples of deficient medication management practices that are dangerous and harmful. Overall, conditions at Adelanto are antithetical to the therapeutic, trauma-informed approach to treatment that is recommended by mental health professionals and that many people at the facility need. We found that GEO Group operates administrative and disciplinary segregation units that are extremely restrictive and in some cases reflect solitary confinement-type conditions. These segregation units put people with mental health disabilities at substantial risk of psychological and even physical harm. We found people who had suffered greatly in these units, and even attempted suicide. The specter of being placed in solitary confinement hangs over all Adelanto detainees. More than 50 offenses can result in a detainee’s placement in solitary confinement, including minor infractions like ‘refusal to clean assigned living area,’ ‘refusing to obey a staff member officer’s order,’ ‘being in an unauthorized area,’ or ‘failure to stand [during] count.'”
In an effort to hang onto its contract and minimize problems at the Adelanto facility and avoid scrutiny, thus reducing chances of corrective action, the GEO Group has hidden what is going on at the Adelanto Detention Center, according to the report.
“GEO Group significantly underreports data on the number of suicide attempts that occur at Adelanto, according to Fischer, Gonzalez, Diaz, Saadi and Lubliner. “The frequency with which detainees engage in self-harm or attempt suicide at the facility demands attention. However, we found that GEO Group’s reporting practices result in significant underreporting of this information. For example, GEO Group’s data, as reported to the Department of Homeland Security and Immigration and Customs Enforcement, show zero suicide attempts at the facility for the first ten months of 2018. Our investigation showed this to be demonstrably false.”
Whether those in the Adelanto Detention Center can be considered criminal inmates is a matter of definition. While some, many or perhaps all are technically in violation of United States immigration law, at least some have legitimate political asylum claims. The number of asylum seekers at Adelanto is substantial. According to Immigration and Customs Enforcement, as of March 2018, there were 445 detainees who were seeking asylum, or 27 percent of the facility’s population. More than 50 percent of the women held at the facility were seeking asylum.
Two such prisoners seeking asylum were a man and wife, identified in the report only as Sofia and Aleksei.
According to the report, “Sofia sought asylum in the United States due to persecution she faced in Russia. She and her husband, Aleksei, were both detained at the Adelanto Detention Center starting in 2017. During our first interview, Sofia spoke in a whisper as she described her experiences in detention. A thick bandage covered her wrist. She had recently been hospitalized following an attempted suicide by cutting herself. Sofia explained how visits with her husband were rare and how requests to send him a letter or speak with him on the phone were denied. In addition to the distress caused by not being able to communicate with her husband, Sofia described feeling anxious and depressed based on her living conditions and lack of medical treatment at Adelanto. When she experienced intense headaches, her requests for medical care went unanswered. Other requests for small sources of comfort, such as a book in Russian or a sweater, were also denied. She requested to see mental health staff but found that ‘they make me feel worse.’ She explained: ‘Their advice or therapy are not suitable for my case . . . they tell us to exercise or breathe.’ Sofia, like her fellow detainees, has very limited and inconsistent access to outdoor recreation time, making it difficult to exercise regularly. Clinical staff also directed Sofia to use ‘religious coping’ even though she is not religious. A review of her medical records reveals that mental health staff persisted with these ill-fitting recommendations even as Sofia reported worsening mental health, had suicidal thoughts, and finally reached the point of wanting to kill herself. Approximately four-and-a-half months into her detention, Sofia attempted suicide. She had no history of suicidal thoughts or self-harm prior to her detention at Adelanto. She recalled: ‘I was tired of being here, of being detained. It was just too stressful.’”
According to the report, “Aleksei was apprehended by immigration agents along with his wife. He has diagnoses of pancreatitis and gastroesophageal reflux disease, a condition that causes intense abdominal and chest pain. His medications were discontinued when he arrived at Adelanto. Within a few weeks, his pain had become so severe that he could not walk or stand. Staff provided him ibuprofen repeatedly, which according to the Disability Rights Center experts is inappropriate for a patient with his condition and could lead to dangerous internal bleeding. After more than a year in detention with worsening symptoms, including symptoms of internal bleeding, Aleksei still had not received clinically indicated follow-up, such as an endoscopy ordered by medical staff. Records show that Aleksei had filed repeated grievances, and that the facility’s responses were inadequate. Aleksei described how he and other detainees felt that staff ‘treat us like animals.’ They were summarily punished for minor violations of facility rules. On one occasion, facility staff forced his entire housing unit to get up in the early hours of the morning and stand outside in the cold because some detainees had complained about one officer’s behavior towards them. Many of the men had no shoes and wore only underwear. After being unable to receive updates on his immigration case, Aleksei’s distress became unbearable and he began a hunger strike. He was placed in a suicide watch cell for two days. Aleksei recalled his time there as ‘torture. I could not sleep. They keep the lights on at all times. I had no water or food, no clothing.’ Aleksei’s trauma in the suicide watch cell lingered, and his depression worsened. He attempted suicide by lacerating a vein in his arm. The razor was too dull to inflict fatal harm, but he was again placed in the suicide watch cell. Aleksei recalls being so distraught that he yelled for someone to end his life. He was allowed no time outside the cell, no contact with his wife, and no clothes other than a heavy, tear-proof smock. After four days in the suicide watch cell, health care staff told him that the only way he would be released is if he said he was OK. So he did. After this second experience in the suicide watch cell, Aleksei withdrew from Adelanto’s mental health staff. He explained, as his hands visibly shook, ‘I am afraid of being sent back to the suicide room. I do not tell the doctor how I feel. I say everything is fine because I don’t want to go back . . . but I can’t sleep, there’s nightmares and I shake. I do not want to do anything but lay in bed.’”
According to the report’s authors, “We witnessed one incident firsthand that illustrated GEO Group’s punitive and counter-therapeutic response to a detainee’s psychiatric crisis. The detainee was being discharged from suicide watch when he suddenly ran down the hallway, an act that clinical staff described to us as related to his still unstable mental health condition. Notwithstanding this assessment, custody staff treated the incident as an ‘attempted escape’ and immediately placed the detainee in disciplinary segregation. Things got worse in the segregation unit. The man started banging his head against the wall and kicking his legs at custody staff who tried to restrain him. After some time, clinical staff directed that he be taken to an inpatient psychiatric hospital. A clinician who had evaluated this man told us that disciplinary segregation was not an appropriate placement for him.”
According to Fischer, Gonzalez, Diaz, Saadi and Lubliner, “Conditions at Adelanto pose serious risks to people with mental illness and other disabilities. The situation demands action. Access to treatment and disability-related accommodations must improve, and steps to reduce unnecessarily punitive conditions at the facility must be a top priority. At the same time, given the extraordinary risks and the harms to people with mental illness and disabilities detained at Adelanto, it is essential to ask: ‘Is it necessary to imprison this population? Are there less restrictive and less damaging alternatives that better serve the country’s constitutional freedoms and commitment to the rights, safety, and dignity of all?’”
The Disability Rights Center of California report does not exist in a vacuum. Questions regarding and criticism of the conditions imposed on detainees at the Adelanto Detention Center have been raised elsewhere. In February, California Attorney General Xavier Becerra issued a report that found immigrant detainees – people who typically are held for civil, not criminal actions – are treated like prisoners, kept in their cells up to 22 hours a day, and offered inadequate access to medical care and legal counsel in multiple California facilities that hold migrant detainees.
-Mark Gutglueck

By Mark Gutglueck
Federal and local investigators are seeking to define the length, breadth and depth of collusion in the bribery and kickback scheme involving San Bernardino municipal officials and the slew of entrepreneurs given licenses by the city to operate cannabis-related businesses in the county seat on February 21.
At issue is not only how much money and by what means those payoffs were delivered to Mayor John Valdivia and members of the city council, but what knowledge City Manager Andrea Travis-Miler, senior elements within the police department, city consultant HdL and city staff within the community development division have regarding the provision of those inducements and whether they were involved in the distribution of that largesse from the project applicants meant to influence the selection process or are perhaps themselves recipients of some of it.
After years of resisting the legalized distribution of medical marijuana in San Bernardino that was permissible under the auspices of the passage of 1996’s Proposition 215/Compassionate Use of Marijuana Act and the delaying by more than two years compliance with voter mandates approved in 2016 legalizing in California and in San Bernardino the sale of marijuana as an intoxicant, the city council on February 21 voted to provide 16 of 39 applicants with permits to engage in commercial activity of one sort or another involving marijuana.
An evaluation of the applications for those permits and the city’s ordinance, zoning requirements, codes and municipal regulations shows that seven of those operations are out of compliance with the requirements in at least one, and in four of the cases at least two of the applicable standards. Meanwhile, at least four of the applicants which had defined operations and locations which were, or appeared to be, in total compliance were denied licenses to operate.
There is emerging evidence suggesting that city officials were shaking down applicants for either bribes or campaign donations. City officials or those speaking on their behalf have pointed out that reports of graft and bribery in the awarding of the permits are in error or are outright fabrications, which they insist is borne out by the consideration that many of the applicants who were turned down had made donations to the mayor and council. Still, an in-depth analysis indicates that those who were more liberal in their application of money in “taking care of” the city’s decision makers fared better in the commercial cannabis operation permitting sweepstakes than did those who were more parsimonious in the charity they exhibited toward the council and especially the mayor.
On February 20, Empire Connect, Pure Dispensaries, Have a Heart, JIVA, and PTRE Management, all of which are located in San Bernardino’s 3rd Ward at the extreme south end of the city, were given retail licenses. Microbusiness licensees went to Orange Show Cultivators, which is to engage in cultivation, manufacturing and distribution; SOCA Farms, involving retailing, cultivation and distribution; Central Avenue Nursery, a cultivator, retailer and distributor; and Nibble This, which is to entail retailing, manufacturing and distribution. All of those are located in the 3rd District. Nibble This was also provided with a second permit to open a second retailing, manufacturing and distribution operation at a location in the 6th Ward, on the northwestern corner of the city. Accessible Options was given a license to grow marijuana in an indoor nursery in the southeastern 1st Ward; 14 Four and GWC Real Estate Services were given agricultural clearance in the 3rd Ward; and Organtix Orchards was granted a cultivator’s license in the 6th Ward. AM-PM Management, located in the centrally-positioned 2nd Ward, was the recipient of a manufacturing permit and Blunt Brothers, a distributor, is to operate its warehouse and dispatch office in the 3rd Ward.
The day before the special meeting of the council on February 21 at which the 16 licenses were handed out, on February 20, a contingent of San Bernardino police officers traveled 77 miles west across the San Bernardino County/Los Angeles County boundary and descended upon the Pacific Palisades home of Stephanie Smith to serve a search warrant. Smith is the proprietor of Washington LLC, an entity that had applied for a permit. In Smith’s residence, which Smith shares with plastic surgeon Dr. Craig Alan Bittner and four of their five children, officers came across a substantial quantity of outdated oxycodone and hydrocodone, along with $200,000 in cash. The opioids were part of the painkiller supply utilized by Bittner in his now defunct plastic surgery practice. The $200,000 in cash at Smith’s residence was rent money paid by Smith’s tenants engaged in marijuana-related enterprises primarily consisting of cultivation operations who are leasing a substantial portion of the two million square feet of industrial space, primarily in Southern California, she owns. With those tenants, Smith deals primarily in cash because federal laws prohibit banks, which are federally insured, from engaging with businesses trafficking in marijuana, which is yet considered an illegal substance under federal law.
In a clear effort to wing Smith, the police police department took Smith into custody, booking her into the Lynwood Detention Facility in Los Angeles County and presenting the seized materials and the cash to the Los Angeles County District Attorneys Office, along with a report stating that Smith was in possession of controlled substances which were being sold. Those charges are not likely to stick. Smith spent two nights in custody, largely because the San Bernardino Police Department prevailed upon the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office to require that the $30,000 in bail she was able to immediately post be established as not being the proceeds of criminal activity. On February 22, she was released after such proof was provided.
Three days later, Smith came roaring back. On Monday February 25, Smith’s attorney, Ben Eilenberg, lodged on Washington LLC’s behalf a lawsuit against the City of San Bernardino.
According to Eilenberg, city officials, and all of them, are on the take. “The effects of the ‘pay for play’ corruption led to the city issuing a large number of licenses that were illegal,” according to the suit. In awarding the permits, according to Eilenberg, the city had failed to adhere to its own declared standards.
The suit states that “Over 50 percent of the issued licenses were illegal, thereby throwing the entire process into doubt.” Identified as out of compliance with the city’s codes, policies, municipal plan, zoning codes and/or general plan were Organtix Orchards, AM-PM Mgmt. Inc., Orange Show Cultivators, both Nibble This LLC operations, A Bud & Beyond, Blunt Brothers, and Accessible Options.
According to the suit, money originating with applicants for the licenses was being passed around to the city’s elected officials, and on occasion city staff in positions as high ranking as the city manager were coordinating how the money, disguised as political donations, was to be vectored and to whom, in return for which the licenses were granted.
Smith was able to marshal proof of her allegations. A private investigator employed by Smith succeeded in retrieving texts and emails that passed between city officials and cannabis operation applicants or their representatives in which preparations for the exchange of approval for money took place. The proof that something is amiss exists in the consideration that several of the cannabis operations that are out of compliance with the city’s standards were given permits while others which were in compliance came away empty-handed at the end of the February 21 special meeting, Eilenberg asserts.
Eilenberg’s accusations passed muster with the San Bernardino Superior Court in the person of Judge Janet M. Frangie, who on February 27 issued temporary restraining orders against seven of the businesses Washington LLC claims gained approval for operational plans that are in violation of the city’s municipal codes, policies, municipal standards, zoning codes and/or general plan. Those companies are Organtix Orchards, AM-PM Mgmt. Inc., Orange Show Cultivators, both Nibble This LLC operations, Blunt Brothers and Accessible Options. A Bud and Beyond, which Smith also alleged to be noncompliant, was not included in those restrained because the city had not granted it a permit.
When it rains, it pours. On March 1, Connected Cannabis Co., also known as EEL Holdings, LLC., represented by attorney Jeff Augustini, filed suit against the city in an action that mirrors the suit Smith brought. Connected Cannabis maintains that not only should the permits on the seven operations already suspended be rescinded but that all 16 that were approved be prohibited from proceeding. Several of those given licenses, and others, were not certified by the San Bernardino Community Development Department as being a requisite 600 feet or more away from schools, parks, churches, youth centers, operations where alcohol is served or sold as well as residences, according to Augustini. Moreover, Augustini suggests that “the credibility of the city’s selection process” has come into question “amid growing rumors and allegations of corruption, cronyism, political maneuvering, and the use of the process to score political points and to carry out political vendettas.”
Connected Cannabis wants the previous permitting process to be scratched in its entirety and the city to start over.
Spicing up an already hot dish is that two former members of the city council, Benito Barrios and Wendy McCammack, had an interest in two of the 39 applications. McCammack’s application, Central Avenue Nursery, succeeded in pulling down one of the licenses. A close examination of the details of McCammack’s application show it failed to meet two of the criteria, several of her competitors who were turned down by the city have said.
Moreover, it has recently come to light that seven separate entities – HC Club LLC, HAH 3 LLC, RZNHead Inc, Pure Dispensaries LLC, SB Pharma Holdings, Inc, Raquel Origel and AM-PM Management Inc. dba Cold Creek Organics – all obtained letters of authorization from the City of San Bernardino in December, issued in advance of the February 21, 2016 council meeting. According to Amna Haslam, a senior environmental scientist and specialist with the California Department of Public Health’s Manufactured Cannabis Safety Branch which serves as the licensing agency for commercial cannabis operations, HC Club, HAH 3, RZNHead, Pure Dispensaries, SB Pharma Holdings, Raquel Origel and AM-PM Management were provided with their temporary licenses from the Bureau of Cannabis Control based on their each having a local permit or letter of authorization from the jurisdiction in which they are to operate.
Councilman Fred Shorett, who on February 21 voted with his colleagues to confer licenses upon the 16 anointed of the 39 applicants and reject the applications of the other 23, defended that action, saying “We had the attorney constantly weighing in on it. As to the innuendo of pay-to-play, I can only tell you that from my perspective on it what was done. The giving of the first fifteen or sixteen permits was done in accordance with the recommendations we had.”
There was no favoritism shown to any one, Shorett said, and the council did the best it could within the limitations of the knowledge it possessed relating to the applicants. “There was some discussion of moving one or two up,” he said, suggesting those discussions were not acted upon ultimately and the staff recommendation was followed in its entirety.
The licenses were evenly and fairly distributed, he said, within the limitation of how many were to be granted. “There was only one that I am aware of where more than one permit was given,” Shorett said. “I personally followed the recommendations. I’m just going to say that this was certainly a new process. I got all of my information on the applicants from our staff.”
Though Shorett acknowledged things went differently at the courthouse, he indicated no official complaints had been launched at City Hall. “Everything I heard from the applicants was our staff did an outstanding job,” Shorett said. “They worked hard and did a diligent job. Andrea [Travis-Miller] maintained more than an arms-length distance from this other than getting answers to questions, but she knew nothing more of the process than she needed to know. She was not involved in the process beyond that. And these claims that [former Mayor] Carey Davis was involved in pay-to-play and Carey Davis was asking for money from some of the people who were applying for marijuana licenses is a bunch of hooey. Carey Davis wouldn’t take money from somebody who was spitting on the sidewalk if there was an ordinance against that. I am absolutely positive that never occurred. He was adamantly opposed to letting marijuana into this city every step of the way until when the attorney explained we had to acquiesce,and even then we had to delay it.”
Shorett said complaints from those who did not succeed in their application for permits is par for the course, and that lawsuits from at least some of those who would not be chosen would be inevitable.
“We were aware there were problems with no matter how we did this and that we were going to get sued by a lot of people,” Shorett said. “We couldn’t do anything about that.”
Shorett also suggested a possible explanation of why the city jumped the gun in giving some applicants licensing late last year without a vote by the city council
“At the same time,” said Shorett, “we were being pushed to speed up the process because people who had applied had gone to the state to get temporary licenses and could not get permanent licenses until they had a license approved by the city, and if they didn’t get the approval right then, they would have to go to the back of the line and that is why we stepped up, to be as business friendly as we could have been. Maybe some of those would have been approved, maybe some would not have been approved by the state. I don’t know. I personally, right or wrong, followed entirely what the staff recommendations were, with the exception, as I said, with what came out of our discussion during the night of the special meeting, where all of the applicants had the opportunity to be heard from.”
Reluctantly, Shorett was critical of HdL, the firm the city hired to guide it through the granting of licenses to marijuana-related commercial operations in the city. While a representative of HdL was at the meeting on February 21, he sat silent throughout the hearing, and many people were not even aware of his presence.
“They could have done a much better job, as well,” said Shorett. “They were never asked to speak up. They did not make their position known to staff or council. They were never asked and they never said anything, one way or the other. I still don’t know what their position was or is. That was perhaps a failure on our part.”
Valdivia sought to distance himself from the the selection process, indicating neither he nor the council had a role in reviewing or rating the applicants. He said charges of graft hovering over the process were “baseless accusations” made by “disappointed and unsuccessful applicants.”
Meanwhile, investigators have obtained warrants to place taps on both the office and home phones of virtually every elected official in San Bernardino, some half dozen city staff members, and the more than three dozen entrepreneurs who are seeking commercial licenses relating to cannabis in the city, and are taking advantage of the latitude in the law which allows them to listen in, without warrants, on communications carried out on cellular or mobile devices.