Mark Patrick Longoria v. Julie Anita Pinales

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

5) 6 MARK PATRICK LONGORIA,) Case Number: FDV-19-814874) 7 Petitioner) Hearing Date: May 14, 2026) 8 VS.) Hearing Time: 9:00 AM) 9 JULIE ANITA PINALES,) Department: 403) 10 Respondent) Presiding: BOBBY P. LUNA) 11) 12 REQUEST FOR ORDER FOR ATTORNEYS FEES AND COSTS 13 TENTATIVE RULING 14 Having read and considered the pleadings, declarations, and other evidence submitted in this matter, the 15 Court makes the following findings and orders: 16 A. Procedural History 17 1) The parties are Petitioner Mark Patrick Longoria and Julie Anita Pinales. 18 2) On 12/3/25, the Court granted Respondent’s Request to Renew Domestic Violence Restraining 19 Order (DVRO).

The Court renewed the restraining order previously issued on 10/29/20 for 5- 20 years. See Order to Renew Domestic Violence Restraining Order filed 12/3/25. 21 3) On 12/16/25, Respondent filed a Request for Order seeking $16,311.68 in Family Code section 22 6344 attorney’s fees and costs. Respondent asserts she is the prevailing party in a 5-year DVRO. 23 The matter was set for hearing on 3/12/26. 24 4) On 12/16/25, Respondent’s attorney filed a declaration substantiating her request for $16,311.68 25 in Family Code section 6344 attorney’s fees and costs. 26 5) On 12/16/25, Respondent filed a supportive Memorandum of Points and Authorities asserting that 27 Respondent is entitled to recover fees as the prevailing party unless Petitioner demonstrates 28 inability to pay. 29

1 6) On 12/18/25, Respondent filed a Proof of Service by Mail and Proof of Electronic Service 2 indicating Respondent’s 12/16/25 Request for Order and supportive documents were served on 3 Petitioner on 12/18/25. 4 7) On 3/5/26, Respondent filed a Reply Declaration asserting that Petitioner did not serve a 5 Responsive Declaration. Respondent attached as Exhibit A an email wherein Petitioner 6 acknowledges Respondent’s 12/16/25 Request for Order. 7 8) Petitioner did not file a Responsive Declaration. 8 9) At the prior 3/12/26 hearing, the Court continued the matter to 5/14/26 at Petitioner’s request due 9 to a pending appeal.

See Findings and Order After Hearing filed 3/12/26. 10 10) On 4/21/26, an Order Dismissing Appeal was filed. 11 11) On 5/4/26, Respondent filed a Supplemental Declaration, supportive attorney declaration, and 12 Memorandum of Points and Authorities. Respondent asserts that Petitioner has the ability to pay 13 based on his own representations to the Court that he is employed (see Exhibit A), which aligns 14 with his public LinkedIn profile (see Exhibit B). Respondent further asserts that Petitioner’s 15 failure to disclose his income and expenses should not mean that he has met his burden to prove 16 inability to pay.