Michael Shao v. Xiu Hong Li

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

5) 6 MICHAEL SHAO,) Case Number: FDI-25-801214) 7 Petitioner) Hearing Date: May 7, 2026) 8 VS.) Hearing Time: 9:00 AM) 9 XIU HONG LI,) Department: 403) 10 Respondent) Presiding: BOBBY P. LUNA) 11) 12 REQUEST FOR ORDER LEAVE OF COURT TO FILE SECOND AMENDED PETITION FOR 13 DISSOLUTION OF MARRIAGE; REQUEST FOR ORDER RE: SPOUSAL SUPPORT, ATTORNEY 14 FEES, AND RESTAURANT PROCEEDS 15 TENTATIVE RULING 16 Having read and considered the pleadings, declarations, and other evidence submitted in this matter, the 17 Court makes the following findings and orders: 18 I.

Petitioner’s Request for Order filed 1/5/26 19 A. Procedural History 20 1) The parties are Petitioner Michael Shao and Respondent Xiu Hong Li. 21 2) On 4/10/25, Petitioner filed a Petition for Dissolution. 22 3) On 5/5/25, Respondent filed a Response and Request for Dissolution, which indicates the date of 23 marriage is 1/17/03 and date of separation is 4/7/25 for a marriage of 22 years and 3 months. 24 4) On 5/9/25, Petitioner filed an amended Petition for Dissolution, which indicates the date of 25 marriage is 1/17/03 and date of separation is 4/7/24 for a marriage of 21 years and 3 months. 26 5) On 1/5/26, Petitioner filed a Request for Order and supportive declaration seeking leave of Court 27 to file a second amended petition to correct mistakes of fact regarding the date of separation and 28 listings of assets and debts and update the sections regarding spousal support and attorney’s fees. 29 Petitioner asserts he was not represented by counsel when the petition was filed.

1 6) On 1/5/26, Petitioner filed a Memorandum of Points and Authorities. 2 7) On 1/5/26, Petitioner field a supportive attorney declaration 3 8) On 4/22/26, Respondent filed a Responsive Declaration in opposition to Petitioner’s Request for 4 Order asserting that she would be prejudiced if Petitioner were permitted to file a second 5 amended petition. 6 B. Findings and Order 7 1) The Court sees no prejudice to Respondent in granting Petitioner’s request for leave of Court to 8 file a second amended petition to correct mistakes of fact regarding the date of separation and 9 listings of assets and debts and update the sections regarding spousal support and attorney’s fees. 10 2) Accordingly, and in the furtherance of justice, Petitioner’s request to file a second amended 11 petition is hereby granted. 12 II.

Respondent’s Request for Order filed 2/10/26 13 A. Procedural History 14 1) On 2/10/26, Respondent filed a Request for Order seeking guideline temporary spousal support, 15 $15,000 in attorney’s fees and costs, and an order for Petitioner to pay Respondent half the net 16 proceeds from five allegedly community property restaurants currently in Petitioner’s control. 17 Respondent claims that it is undisputed that that the five restaurants were opened during marriage 18 with community funds. Respondent asserts that according to Petitioner’s 2024 tax return (see 19 Exhibit A), Petitioner earned $552,831 in annual income and according to a jointly filed 2023 tax 20 return (see Exhibit B), Petitioner earned $714,937 in annual income.

Respondent attaches a 21 proposed XSpouse calculation (see Exhibit C). Respondent states that she is additionally 22 requesting the Court order Petitioner to pay Respondent 50% of restaurant proceeds for which she 23 has limited information though asserts she is entitled to half. Respondent believes Petitioner’s 24 share of the profit from the restaurants in 2024 was $330,251 and in 2023 was $461,778. 25 Respondent requests $15,000 in attorney’s fees and costs under Family Code section 2020 26 asserting that Petitioner’s monthly earnings is $46,049 while Respondent’s is $2,715.

The matter 27 was set for hearing on 5/5/26 and was continued to 5/7/26 on the Court’s own motion. 28 2) On 2/10/26, Respondent filed an Income and Expense Declaration. 29

1 3) On 2/10/26, Respondent filed an attorney declaration substantiating her request for $15,000 in 2 attorney’s fees and costs. 3 4) On 4/22/26, Petitioner filed a Responsive Declaration in opposition to Respondent’s Request for 4 Order. Petitioner asserts that division of property or debts is a trial issue therefore Respondent’s 5 request for a Court order that Petitioner pay Respondent half the net proceeds from the five 6 restaurants should be denied pending trial. Petitioner asserts that Respondent is self-supporting, 7 and he is nearing retirement age, so should not be ordered to pay temporary spousal support. 8 Petitioner asserts that if the net proceeds from the restaurants are divided, then the proceeds from 9 Respondent’s daycare should also be divided. 10 5) On 4/22/26, Respondent filed and Income and Expense Declaration. 11 6) On 4/29/26, Respondent filed a Reply Declaration reiterating her request and providing 12 clarification regarding her position on the parties’ respective financial situations. 13 B.

Findings and Order 14 1) Petitioner’s request for guideline temporary spousal support is GRANTED effective 2/10/26. 15 2) In accordance with the XSpouse report attached hereto and incorporated herein, Petitioner shall 16 pay to Respondent $1,784 per month in guideline temporary spousal support. Petitioner shall pay 17 this amount to Respondent no later than the 1st of every month. 18 3) Petitioner owes Respondent $6,498.85 in temporary guideline spousal support arrears for the 19 period of 2/10/26 – 5/30/26 ($1,146.85 for February + $5,352 ($1,784 x 3) for March – May). 20 Petitioner shall pay an additional $500 per month until this balance is paid in full. 21 4) The XSpouse is based on the following findings: 22 a.

Per Petitioner’s Income and Expense Declaration filed 4/22/26, Petitioner earns $11,000 23 in average monthly income. 24 b. Per Respondent’s Income and Expense Declaration filed 4/29/26, Respondent: 25 i. Receives $1,112 in average monthly social security retirement; 26 ii. Accrues $781 in average monthly dividends; 27 iii. Earns $1,000 in average monthly self-employment income; and 28 iv. Pays $203 in average monthly health insurance premiums. 29

1 5) Respondent’s request for $15,000 in Family Code section 2030 attorney’s fees is GRANTED. 2 The attached XSpouse shows that, after temporary guideline spousal support is paid, Petitioner 3 will have 57% of the parties’ combined net spendable income and Respondent will have 43% of 4 the parties’ combined net spendable income. Petitioner states that he has $700,000 in cash savings 5 while Respondent states she has $500,000 in cash savings. Based on the forgoing, the Court finds 6 an award of attorney's fees and costs is appropriate here because there is a demonstrated disparity 7 between the parties in access to funds to retain or maintain counsel and in the ability to pay for 8 legal representation.

The Court finds Petitioner has or is reasonably likely to have the ability to 9 pay for legal representation for both parties and $15,000 in attorney's fees and costs are 10 reasonable and necessary. Petitioner shall pay this balance in full by 6/7/26. 11 6) The Court reserves jurisdiction over Respondent’s request for a Court order that Petitioner pay 12 Respondent half the net proceeds from the five restaurants for trial. 13 7) Counsel for Respondent shall prepare the Findings and Order After Hearing. 14 8) Preparation of Order: If you are directed by the court to prepare the order after hearing – within 15 10 calendar days of the hearing you must either: (a) Serve the proposed order to the other 16 party/counsel for approval, and follow the procedures set forth in CA Rules of Court, Rule 17 5.125(c), or (b) If the other party did not appear or the matter was uncontested, submit the 18 proposed order after hearing directly to the court.

Failure to submit the order after hearing within 19 10 days may allow the other party to prepare a proposed order and submit it to the court in 20 accordance with CA Rules of Court, Rule 5.125(d). 21

25

29

26-05-07 XSpouse Shao v. Li 801214

Xspouse 2026-1-CA Monthly Figures 2026 Husband Wife Monthly Figures Cash Flow Fixed Shares 0 0 2026 Guideline Proposed Number of children Percent 0.00% 0.00% Combined net spendable 10214 10214 time with NCP Filing status SINGLE HH/MLA Percent change 0% 0% GUIDELINE Number of exemptions 1 1 Nets (adjusted) Husband Wages and salary 11000 0 Self employed income 0 1000 Husband 7656 Payment cost/benefit -1784 -1784 Other taxable income 0 1893 Wife 2558 Net spendable income 5873 5873 TANF CS received 0 0 Total 10214 Change from guideline 0 0 Other nontaxable income 0 0 Support % of combined spendable 57% 57% New spouse income 0 0 % of saving over guideline 0% 0% Addons 0 Employee 401-k contribution 0 0 Total taxes 3344 3344 Guideln CS 0 Adjustments to income 0 0 Dep. exemption value 0 0 S.Clara SS 1784 SS paid prev marriage 0 0 # withholding allowances 0 0 Total 1784 CS paid prev marriage 0 0 Net wage paycheck 7392 7392 - Health insurance 0 203 Wife Proposed Other medical expenses 0 0 Payment cost/benefit 1784 1784 Tactic 9 Property tax expenses 0 0 Net spendable income 4342 4342 Ded interest expense CS 0 0 0 Change from guideline 0 0 Contribution deduction SS 1784 0 0 % of combined spendable 43% 43% Misc tax deductions Total 1784 0 0 % of saving over guideline 0% 0% Qualified business income Saving 0 0 0 Total taxes 132 132 deduction Releases 0 Dep. exemption value 0 0 Required union dues 0 0 # withholding allowances 0 0 Mandatory retirement 0 0 Net wage paycheck 0 0 Hardship deduction 0 0 Other GDL deductions 0 0 Child care expenses 0 0

Husband pays Guideline SS, Proposed SS

FC 4055 checking: ON Per Child Information DOB Timeshare cce(F) cce(M) Addons Payor Basic CS Payor Pres CS Payor All children 0-0 0 0 0 Husband 0 Husband 0 Husband

Superior Court of California County of San Francisco