FRESH BATCH OF YIMBY HOUSING BILLS CLASH WITH COASTAL PROTECTIONS (AGAIN)
After a legislative victory last year, pro-housing legislators and advocates want to strip the California Coastal Commission of more authority in order to spur housing development.
Ben Christopher CalMatters
Last year, state lawmakers broke from tradition by not including an exception for the California coast in a major housing law. That deliberate omission came despite opposition from the California Coastal Commission — the voter-created state agency tasked since 1976 with scrutinizing anything that gets built, demolished, dug, divvied up, fixed, tamped down or clear cut within the California Coastal Zone. A stretch of land that grazes the entirety of California’s 840-mile coast, the zone reaches inland from high tide, 1,000 feet at its narrowest and five miles at its thickest.
“Once you start exempting classes of development from the Coastal Act,” Sarah Christie, the commission’s legislative director, warned CalMatters at the time, “there will be no shutting that barn door.”
Sure enough, a small herd of bills now trotting through the Legislature would further erode the commission’s long-guarded authority in the interest of spurring more housing on some of California’s most exclusive, valuable and tightly regulated real estate.
The bills — all by Democrats — take different tacks:
• Exempt from the Coastal Act apartment projects that make use of density bonus law, a policy that lets developers build taller, higher and
with fewer restrictions if they set aside units for lower income residents. It’s by San Diego Assemblymember David Alvarez.
• Make the same exception for accessory dwelling units, often known as granny units or casitas. It’s by Encinitas Sen. Catherine Blakespear.
• Force the Commission to more quickly process appeals of locally-approved apartment
buildings, also a Blakespear bill.
• Put further restrictions on what kinds of projects can be appealed directly to the Commission. An earlier version of that bill would have cut a chunk of San Francisco out of the Coastal Zone entirely, but that proposal was removed.
The bill is authored by that city’s senator, Scott Wiener.
Together they show that many pro-housing
legislators have taken heart from last year’s battle for the coast.
“The Coastal Commission and the Coastal Act have been a bit of a sacred cow and that has meant that it has been carved out of a lot of bills,” said Sen. Blakespear. Reevaluating whether that should be the case is “an area of an emerging focus from the Legislature.”
The commission initially opposed Wiener’s bill, though it has since been dramatically amended. While it has yet to take formal positions on the new version or on the remaining bills, it’s clear they don’t welcome this legislative trend.
“We’re troubled by the number of bills this year that seek to undermine the Coastal Act in the name of promoting housing,” said Coastal Commission Executive Director Kate Huckelbridge in a written statement. “We know from experience that abundant housing and coastal resource protection are not mutually exclusive.”
The commission is likely swimming against the political current. Last year’s apartment boosting bill squeaked through the Assembly’s Natural Resources Committee over the opposition of its chair, Arletta Democratic Assemblymember Luz Rivas.
That committee has a new chair now: Culver City Democratic, Assemblymember Isaac Bryan, whom many expect to be more receptive to housing production bills. Ditto for the Assembly as a whole. The new Democratic speaker, Salinas’ Robert Rivas (no relation to Luz
7 EL OBSERVADOR | www.el-observador.com MAR 29, 2024 - APR 04, 2024 COMMUNITY
ENGLISH
Photo Credit: Wirestock / Freepik
Rivas), has signaled that he wants the Legislature to do more than “chip around the corners” on housing policy.
What needs protection?
In recent years, state lawmakers have passed a slew of bills stripping local governments of their ability to delay housing projects. In most of California now, a developer interested in building most forms of affordable housing or accessory dwelling units need not conduct an extensive environmental analysis, submit to public meetings or win over skeptical elected officials.
But whatever authority local governments have lost, the Coastal Commission has retained. That puts the Coastal Zone, which is largely undeveloped but also includes significant chunks of urbanized beach communities including Santa Monica, Venice, Long Beach, San Diego and Santa Cruz in a separate regulatory universe from the rest of the state.
And for good reason, say the commission and its defenders.
“Sea level rise is a serious threat along the coast and, in particular, in urbanized areas,” said Joel Reynolds, western director of the Natural Resources Defense Council, an environmental legal advocacy nonprofit. “The Legislature was very aware of the fact that the scope of the (Coastal Act) was going to cover developed areas in addition to undeveloped areas. I think the case for that has only gotten stronger.”
In 1972 voters — concerned that encroaching development was cutting off coastal access for all Californians, and outraged by the 1969 Santa Barbara oil spill — passed an initiative to create the California Coastal Commission. Its rallying cry was “Save our Coast” — a determination to keep California’s shores from becoming a West Coast version of Miami Beach.
Within a few years the Legislature made the commission a permanent agency with broad authority to protect the state’s coastal resources. Those include the natural variety, such as wetlands, estuaries, creeks and the state’s chalky, erosion-prone bluffs, but also humancentric benefits such as public access, cheap accommodations, ocean views, social and cultural diversity, and aesthetics.
Pro-housing advocates argue that the law should apply less rigidly in places where dense development already exists.
“A 10-unit mixed income project in Venice Beach simply does not have the environmental salience as the Santa Barbara oil spill,” said Louis Mirante, a lobbyist with the Bay Area Council, which is co-sponsoring the Alvarez density bonus bill. “The Coastal Act is so dubious of housing it harms the environment.”
The environmental case for more coastal construction goes like this: More apartments in downtown Santa Cruz or Santa Monica will allow more people to live closer to the state’s job centers without the need for long commutes and air-conditioned sprawl.
That view represents a break from the kind of environmentalism that birthed the Coastal Act, in which restricting development and democratizing the planning process was seen as the best way to protect the Earth. As public concern over climate change has eclipsed that conservationist impulse, a fissure has emerged within both the California and national Democratic coalition between development skeptics and a new coalition of liberal ‘build-baby-build’ers.
“The commission has very strong muscles to stop things, because that’s most of their job. But their muscles to help things happen are basically non-existent,” said Will Moore, policy director at Circulate San Diego, a transportation and housing advocacy nonprofit that is also cosponsoring the Alvarez bill. As a result, the commissioners “protect us from a lot of bad things,”
he said. “But housing is a good thing.”
He emphasized that the density bonus law, for example, only applies to places already zoned for multifamily housing: “Nobody is going out and building a skyscraper in the lagoon.”
Coastal elites
Just shy of 1 million people live in California’s coastal zone, according to an analysis provided to CalMatters by Nicholas Depsky, a climate change research consultant at the United Nations Development Programme.
That sliver of the state population — less than 2.5% — does not represent the state as a whole. Roughly two-thirds of those coastal dwellers are non-Hispanic whites, according to Depsky’s analysis. That would make the coastal zone roughly twice as white as California’s population.
It’s also an enclave of relative affluence. A UCLA School of Law research paper from 2011 found that neighborhoods just inside the Coastal Zone had lower population densities and fewer children than those just outside of it. The homes themselves were 20% more expensive, even after the researchers added statistical controls for a home’s distance from the beach.
The researchers attributed the difference to the introduction of the Coastal Act and its tighter regulatory scheme on new housing, which “triggered both supply and demand effects that on net have gentrified the area.”
Members of the Coastal Commission and its staff regularly counter that it has never rejected a proposed affordable housing project. In fact, even if rejecting housing projects was the commission’s goal — which the commission stresses is not the case — it rarely gets the opportunity to do so.
In most of the cities that dot the coast, regulatory enforcement has been delegated to local authorities through commission-sanctioned development plans. The public can appeal projects approved by those local authorities to the Coastal Commission itself, but only in designated areas especially close to the shore and other protected waterways.
Those appeals are relatively rare.
Of the 1,261 coastal development permits issued by local governments last year, just 48 were appealed, according to commission data. In roughly two-thirds of those cases, the commission deferred to the local government and declined to review the project. The Commission only denied two of the projects after accepting their appeals.
Commission critics argue that looking solely at the number of appeals ignores all the housing that was reduced, slowed down or saddled with higher costs as it made its way through the regulatory process. They also point to a hypothetical universe of developments that would have been proposed in a more developmentfriendly regulatory regime but weren’t, out of fear of the Coastal Act.
“I suspect a lot of projects don’t get proposed knowing that there’s going to be an additional delay and additional appeal risk,” said Nolan Gray, research director for pro-development California YIMBY. “We only see the projects where the developer is like, ‘YOLO!’”
A proposed condo development, Pisani Place, in Los Angeles’ Venice neighborhood, is one recent example of a housing project that wasn’t flat-out denied by the Coastal Commission, but died in the face of its regulatory scrutiny anyway.
Despite it being approved by the city of Los Angeles, the Coastal Commission took issue with the designs and overall benefits of the project. The project included affordable units, but they were half the size of the market-rate condos
and located partially below the sidewalk. Commission staff noted that the project raised concerns about the “equitable distribution of environmental benefits,” that its various density bonuses were not “the least impactful on coastal resources,” and that the proposed building was “out of character with the surrounding structures because it does not respect the prevailing height or mass of the existing residences.”
Rather than redesign the project under the Coastal Commission’s guidance, the developers withdrew their application this month.
A middle ground on the coast?
Robin Rudisill, co-founder of Citizens Preserving Venice who appealed the project, said the developer never made a compelling case that the project’s use of state density bonus law was consistent with the Coastal Act. She blamed the city of Los Angeles for approving the project anyway.
“If the city had done its job, this poor developer would have understood the correct regulations along the way and maybe he could have made modifications that would have made things work,” she said.
Current law requires that the Coastal Act and state density bonus law be “harmonized so as to achieve the goal of increasing the supply of affordable housing in the coastal zone while also protecting coastal resources and coastal access.”
What that means in practice — especially when the two statutes often seem to require opposite outcomes — isn’t always easy to say. Rud-
isill said she knows of a “reasonable” middle ground when she sees it, pointing to a handful of density bonus projects sitting in the planning pipeline for Venice.
“They’re getting a lot of extra units. They’re getting extra height and, you know, some variances and open space and yards and everything,” she said. “But they’re not asking for the max. They’re not getting greedy.”
The current regulatory system allows for a nuanced debate, said Rudisill. “It may take some hard meetings and listening to the community and really understanding the impact,” she said. “That’s why it’s a discretionary decision.”
From the outside, that nuanced debate — which the bills under consideration this year would do away with or severely limit — can look a lot like haggling.
In Santa Cruz, a density bonus project proposed along the San Lorenzo riverwalk was appealed to the Coastal Commission last October. The commission rejected the appeal, allowing the project to move forward, after the developer agreed to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on affordable housing and to construct a series of publicly accessible walkways through the property.
Exempting that project from the Coastal Act would mean “then we wouldn’t be having any of these debates about ‘community character,’” said Lee Butler, the city’s planning director. “But we could also be vulnerable to the scenario where we are seeing density bonus used to preclude public access.”
This story was updated to reflect changes to proposed legislation.
ESPAÑOL
UN NUEVO LOTE DE PROYECTOS DE LEY DE VIVIENDA TIPO ‘YIMBY’ CHOCA NUEVAMENTE
CON LAS PROTECCIONES COSTERAS
Después de una victoria legislativa el año pasado, los legisladores y defensores de la vivienda quieren despojar a la Comisión Costera de California de más autoridad para estimular el desarrollo de viviendas.
Ben Christopher CalMatters
Eaño pasado, los legisladores estatales rompieron con la tradición al no incluir una excepción para la costa de California en una importante ley de vivienda.
Esa omisión deliberada se produjo a pesar de la oposición de la Comisión Costera de California, la agencia estatal creada por los votantes encargada desde 1976 de escudriñar todo lo que se construye, demuele, excava, divide, repara, apisona o tala dentro de la zona costera de California. Una extensión de tierra que cubre la totalidad de la costa de 840 millas de California, la zona llega tierra adentro desde la marea alta, 1,000 pies en su parte más estrecha y cinco millas en su parte más gruesa.
“Una vez que se comience a eximir a las clases de desarrollo de la Ley de Costas “, advirtió a CalMatters en ese momento Sarah Christie, directora legislativa de la comisión, “no se podrá cerrar esa puerta del granero”. Efectivamente, un pequeño rebaño de proyectos de ley que ahora circulan por la Legislatura erosionaría aún más la autoridad guardada durante mucho tiempo de la comisión con el interés de estimular más viviendas en algunos de los bienes raíces más exclusivos, valiosos y estrictamente regulados de California.
• Los proyectos de ley, todos ellos de demócratas, adoptan rumbos diferentes:
• Están exentos de la Ley de Costas los proyectos de departamentos que hacen uso de la ley de bonificación de densidad, una política que permite a los desarrolladores construir más alto, y con menos restricciones si reservan unidades para residentes de bajos ingresos. Es del asambleísta de San Diego David Álvarez.
• Hace la misma excepción con las unidades de
vivienda accesorias, a menudo conocidas como unidades de abuela o casitas. Es de la senadora de Encinitas Catherine Blakespear.
• Obligar a la Comisión a procesar más rápidamente las apelaciones de edificios de apartamentos aprobados localmente, también un proyecto de ley Blakespear.
Eliminar por completo una parte de San Francisco de la zona costera Está escrito por el senador de esa ciudad, Scott Wiener.
Juntos muestran que muchos legisladores a favor de la vivienda se han animado con la batalla del año pasado por la costa.
“La Comisión de Costas y la Ley de Costas han sido una especie de vaca sagrada y eso ha significado que han sido extraídas de muchos proyectos de ley”, dijo el senador Blakespear. Reevaluar si ese debería ser el caso es “un área de atención emergente por parte de la Legislatura”.
La comisión se opone al proyecto de ley de Wiener para volver a trazar el límite costero de San Francisco a menos que se modifique drásticamente. Si bien todavía tiene que adoptar posiciones formales sobre los proyectos de ley restantes, está claro que no acogen con agrado esta tendencia legislativa.
“Estamos preocupados por la cantidad de proyectos de ley de este año que buscan socavar la Ley de Costas en nombre de la promoción de viviendas”, dijo la directora ejecutiva de la Comisión de Costas, Kate Huckelbridge, en una declaración escrita. “Sabemos por experiencia que la vivienda abundante y la protección de los recursos costeros no son mutuamente excluyentes”.
Es probable que la comisión nade contra la corriente política. El proyecto de ley para mejorar los apartamentos del año pasado logró ser aprobado por el Comité de Recursos Naturales de la Asam-
8 EL OBSERVADOR | www.el-observador.com MAR 29, 2024 - APR 04, 2024 COMMUNITY
ENGLISH
blea a pesar de la oposición de su presidenta, la asambleísta demócrata de Arletta, Luz Rivas.
Ese comité tiene ahora un nuevo presidente: el asambleísta demócrata de Culver City Isaac Bryan, de quien muchos esperan que sea más receptivo a los proyectos de ley de producción de viviendas . Lo mismo ocurre con la Asamblea en su conjunto. El nuevo presidente demócrata, Robert Rivas de Salinas (sin relación con Luz Rivas), ha señalado que quiere que la Legislatura haga más que “recortar las esquinas” en la política de vivienda .
¿Qué necesita protección?
En los últimos años, los legisladores estatales han aprobado una serie de proyectos de ley que despojan a los gobiernos locales de su capacidad para retrasar proyectos de vivienda. Actualmente, en la mayor parte de California, un desarrollador interesado en construir la mayoría de las formas de viviendas asequibles o unidades de vivienda accesorias no necesita realizar un análisis ambiental extenso, presentarse a reuniones públicas o ganarse a funcionarios electos escépticos.
Pero cualquier autoridad que los gobiernos locales hayan perdido, la Comisión Costera la ha conservado. Eso coloca a la Zona Costera, que en gran parte no está desarrollada pero que también incluye partes importantes de comunidades costeras urbanizadas, incluidas Santa Mónica, Venice, Long Beach, San Diego y Santa Cruz, en un universo regulatorio separado del resto del estado.
Y con razón, dicen la comisión y sus defensores. “El aumento del nivel del mar es una grave amenaza a lo largo de la costa y, en particular, en las zonas urbanizadas”, dijo Joel Reynolds, director occidental del Consejo de Defensa de los Recursos Naturales, una organización sin fines de lucro de defensa legal ambiental. “La Legislatura estaba muy consciente del hecho de que el alcance de la (Ley de Costas) iba a cubrir áreas desarrolladas además de áreas no desarrolladas. Creo que los argumentos a favor de eso no han hecho más que fortalecerse”.
En 1972, los votantes, preocupados porque el desarrollo invasivo estaba cortando el acceso a la costa para todos los californianos e indignados por el derrame de petróleo de Santa Bárbara en 1969, aprobaron una iniciativa para crear la Comisión Costera de California. Su lema fue “Salven nuestra costa”, una determinación de evitar que las costas de California se conviertan en una versión de Miami Beach en la costa oeste.
En unos pocos años, la Legislatura convirtió a la comisión en una agencia permanente con amplia autoridad para proteger los recursos costeros del estado. Entre ellos se incluyen la variedad natural, como humedales, estuarios, arroyos y los acantilados calcáreos propensos a la erosión del estado, pero también beneficios centrados en el ser humano, como acceso público, alojamiento barato, vistas al mar, diversidad social y cultural y estética.
Los defensores de la vivienda argumentan que la ley debería aplicarse con menos rigidez en lugares donde ya existe un desarrollo denso.
“Un proyecto de 10 unidades de ingresos mixtos en Venice Beach simplemente no tiene la importancia ambiental que tiene el derrame de petróleo de Santa Bárbara”, dijo Louis Mirante, cabildero del Concejo del Área de la Bahía, que copatrocina el proyecto de ley de bonificación de densidad de Álvarez. . “La Ley de Costas es tan dudosa en materia de vivienda que daña el medio ambiente”.
El argumento medioambiental a favor de más construcciones costeras es el siguiente: más apartamentos en el centro de Santa Cruz o Santa Mónica permitirán que más personas vivan más cerca de los centros de empleo del estado sin la necesidad de largos desplazamientos y expansión con aire acondicionado
Esa visión representa una ruptura con el tipo de ambientalismo que dio origen a la Ley de Costas, en la que restringir el desarrollo y democratizar el proceso de planificación se consideraba la mejor manera de proteger la Tierra. A medida que la preocupación pública por el cambio climático ha eclipsado ese impulso conservacionista, ha surgido una fisura dentro de la coalición demócrata nacional y de California entre los escépticos del desarrollo y una nueva coalición de partidarios liberales de la “construcción de bebés”
“La comisión tiene músculos muy fuertes para detener las cosas, porque esa es la mayor parte de su trabajo. Pero su fuerza para ayudar a que las cosas
ESPAÑOL
sucedan es básicamente inexistente”, dijo Will Moore, director de políticas de Circulate San Diego, una organización sin fines de lucro que defiende el transporte y la vivienda y que también copatrocina el proyecto de ley de Álvarez. Como resultado, los comisionados “nos protegen de muchas cosas malas”, afirmó. “Pero la vivienda es algo bueno”.
Enfatizó que la ley de bono de densidad, por ejemplo, sólo aplica en lugares ya zonificados para vivienda multifamiliar: “Nadie va a salir a construir un rascacielos en la laguna”.
Élites costeras
Poco menos de 1 millón de personas viven en la zona costera de California, según un análisis proporcionado a CalMatters por Nicholas Depsky, consultor de investigación sobre el cambio climático del Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Desarrollo.
Esa fracción de la población del estado (menos del 2,5%) no representa al estado en su conjunto. Aproximadamente dos tercios de esos habitantes costeros son blancos no hispanos, según el análisis de Depsky. Eso haría que la zona costera sea aproximadamente dos veces más blanca que la población de California.
También es un enclave de relativa riqueza. Un artículo de investigación de la Facultad de Derecho de la UCLA de 2011 encontró que los vecindarios justo dentro de la zona costera tenían densidades de población más bajas y menos niños que los que estaban fuera de ella. Las casas en sí eran un 20% más caras, incluso después de que los investigadores agregaron controles estadísticos para la distancia de una casa a la playa.
Los investigadores atribuyeron la diferencia a la introducción de la Ley de Costas y su esquema regulatorio más estricto sobre viviendas nuevas, que “desencadenó efectos tanto de oferta como de demanda que, en términos netos, han aburguesado el área”.
Los miembros de la Comisión Costera y su personal responden regularmente que nunca han rechazado una propuesta de proyecto de vivienda asequible. De
hecho, incluso si el objetivo de la comisión fuera rechazar proyectos de vivienda (lo cual, según la comisión, no es el caso), rara vez tiene la oportunidad de hacerlo.
En la mayoría de las ciudades que salpican la costa, la aplicación de las normas se ha delegado a las autoridades locales a través de planes de desarrollo aprobados por la comisión. El público puede apelar los proyectos aprobados por esas autoridades locales ante la propia Comisión Costera, pero sólo en áreas designadas, especialmente cerca de la costa y otras vías fluviales protegidas.
Esas apelaciones son relativamente raras.
De los 1.261 permisos de desarrollo costero emitidos por los gobiernos locales el año pasado, sólo 48 fueron apelados, según datos de la comisión. En aproximadamente dos tercios de esos casos, la comisión remitió el asunto al gobierno local y se negó a revisar el proyecto. La Comisión sólo denegó dos de los proyectos tras aceptar sus recursos.
Los críticos de la Comisión argumentan que mirar únicamente el número de apelaciones ignora todas las viviendas que se redujeron, desaceleraron o cargaron con costos más altos a medida que avanzaban a través del proceso regulatorio. También señalan un universo hipotético de desarrollos que se habrían propuesto en un régimen regulatorio más favorable al
CONDADO DE SANTA CLARA
OFICINA DE VIVIENDAS CON APOYO (Office of Supportive Housing)
AVISO DE PERIODO DE REVISIÓN Y COMENTARIOS DEL PÚBLICO
PLAN DE ACCIÓN ANUAL PARA EL AÑO FISCAL (FY) 2024-2025
Programas Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) y Home Investment Partnerships (HOME)
La Oficina de Viviendas con Apoyo (Office of Supportive Housing) del Condado de Santa Clara ha completado un borrador del Plan de Acción Anual para el año fiscal 2024-2025 (Annual Action Plan o AAP), que cubre el periodo del 1 de julio de 2024 al 30 de junio de 2025. El borrador del AAP es el quinto de cinco incrementos anuales del Plan Consolidado quinquenal 2020-2025, que fue adoptado por la Junta de Supervisores el 2 de junio de 2020.
El borrador del AAP establece metas y estrategias para el uso de recursos de viviendas, tantos federales como estatales, y locales para la asistencia de viviendas para personas con ingresos extremadamente bajos, muy bajos y bajos, como también establece otras necesidades de desarrollo comunitario, como proyectos de construcción, y servicios públicos.
El Departamento de Vivienda y Desarrollo Urbano de los Estados Unidos (U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development) requiere la preparación y adopción del AAP cada año para que el condado pueda solicitar y administrar fondos federales de ayuda de vivienda para los programas CDBG y HOME. El condado de Santa Clara administra el programa CDBG para las áreas no incorporadas del condado y las ciudades de Campbell, Los Altos, Los Altos Hills, Los Gatos, Monte Sereno, Morgan Hill, y Saratoga. El consorcio HOME del condado incluye las ciudades de Cupertino, Gilroy, y Palo Alto.
Este aviso sirve para informar al público sobre una audiencia pública programada y la oportunidad de comentarios públicos sobre el borrador del Plan AAP.
PERIODO DE REVISIÓN PÚBLICA y COMENTARIOS: El Condado de Santa Clara realizará una audiencia pública del Comité Asesor de Vivienda y Desarrollo Comunitario (HCDAC) el 5 de abril de 2024. El borrador del AAP para el año fiscal 2024-2025 estará disponible para revisión publica durante 30 días a partir del 5 de abril de 2024, y concluirá en la audiencia pública que se realizará el martes, 7 de mayo de 2024, en la reunión de la Junta de Supervisores del condado. Los comentarios escritos sobre el AAP se recibirán hasta el 7 de mayo de 2024. Estos comentarios se pueden enviar a la atención de Katrina Anderson: Office of Supportive Housing, 150 West Tasman Drive, San Jose, CA 95134 o a través de correo electrónico a Katrina.Anderson@hhs.sccgov.org. Personas que quieran asistir a la audiencia pública tendrán la oportunidad de compartir comentarios escritos u orales y sugerencias sobre el borrador del AAP. Estos comentarios se incluirán en el AAP que se presentará al HUD.
De conformidad con las Leyes de Derechos de Discapacitados y la Ley Brown (American with Disabilities Act and The Brown Act), personas que requieran adaptaciones para estas reuniones deben ponerse en contacto con la oficina del Clerk of the Board del condado 24 horas antes de la junta al (408) 299-5001 o boardoperations@cob.sccgov.org
Se pueden solicitar copias del borrador del AAP 1- enviando un correo electrónico a Katrina.Anderson@hhs.sccgov.org; 2 llamando al (408) 918-8626; o 3- visitando el sitio web: https://osh.sccgov.org/housing-community-development/urban-county-program. Para obtener más información, póngase en contacto con Katrina Anderson llamando al (408) 918-8626.
desarrollo pero que no lo fueron por temor a la Ley de Costas.
“Sospecho que muchos proyectos no se proponen sabiendo que habrá una demora adicional y un riesgo adicional de apelación”, dijo Nolan Gray, director de investigación de YIMBY, una organización pro-desarrollo de California. “Solo vemos los proyectos en los que el desarrollador dice: ‘¡YOLO!'”
Una propuesta de desarrollo de condominios, Pisani Place, en el vecindario Venice de Los Ángeles, es un ejemplo reciente de un proyecto de vivienda que no fue negado rotundamente por la Comisión Costera, pero que de todos modos murió ante su escrutinio regulatorio.
A pesar de haber sido aprobado por la ciudad de Los Ángeles, la Comisión Costera estuvo en desacuerdo con los diseños y los beneficios generales del proyecto. El proyecto incluía unidades asequibles, pero tenían la mitad del tamaño de los condominios a precio de mercado y estaban ubicadas parcialmente debajo de la acera.
El personal de la Comisión señaló que el proyecto generó preocupaciones sobre la “distribución equitativa de los beneficios ambientales”, que sus diversas bonificaciones de densidad no eran “las menos impactantes sobre los recursos costeros” y que el edificio propuesto “no encajaba con las estructuras circundantes porque no respeta la altura o masa predominante de las residencias existentes”.
En lugar de rediseñar el proyecto bajo la dirección de la Comisión Costera, los desarrolladores retiraron su solicitud este mes.
¿Un término medio en la costa?
Robin Rudisill, cofundador de Citizens Preserving Venice, quien apeló el proyecto, dijo que el desarrollador nunca presentó un caso convincente de que el uso de la ley estatal de bonificación de densidad por parte del proyecto fuera consistente con la Ley de Costas. Ella culpó a Los Ángeles por aprobar el proyecto de todos modos.
“Si la ciudad hubiera hecho su trabajo, este pobre desarrollador habría entendido las regulaciones correctas en el camino y tal vez podría haber hecho modificaciones que hubieran hecho que las cosas funcionaran”, dijo.
La ley actual requiere que la Ley de Costas y la ley estatal de bonificación por densidad se “armonicen para lograr el objetivo de aumentar la oferta de viviendas asequibles en la zona costera y al mismo tiempo proteger los recursos costeros y el acceso costero”. No siempre es fácil decir lo que eso significa en la práctica, especialmente cuando los dos estatutos a menudo parecen exigir resultados opuestos. Rudisill dijo que conoce un término medio “razonable” cuando lo ve, señalando un puñado de proyectos de bonificación de densidad que se encuentran en proceso de planificación para Venice.
“Están recibiendo muchas unidades adicionales. Están adquiriendo altura extra y, ya sabes, algunas variaciones y espacios abiertos, patios y todo”, dijo. “Pero no están pidiendo el máximo. No se están volviendo codiciosos”.
El actual sistema regulatorio permite un debate matizado, afirmó Rudisill. “Puede que sean necesarias algunas reuniones intensas, escuchar a la comunidad y comprender realmente el impacto”, dijo. “Por eso es una decisión discrecional”.
Desde fuera, ese debate matizado –que los proyectos de ley que se están considerando este año eliminarían o limitarían severamente– puede parecerse mucho a un regateo.
En Santa Cruz, en octubre pasado se apeló ante la Comisión Costera un proyecto de bonificación de densidad propuesto a lo largo del paseo del río San Lorenzo. La comisión rechazó la apelación, permitiendo que el proyecto avanzara, después de que el desarrollador aceptara gastar cientos de miles de dólares en viviendas asequibles y construir una serie de senderos de acceso público a través de la propiedad.
Eximir ese proyecto de la Ley de Costas significaba “entonces no tendríamos ninguno de estos debates sobre el ‘carácter comunitario’”, dijo Lee Butler, director de planificación de la ciudad. “Pero también podríamos ser vulnerables al escenario en el que veamos que se utiliza una bonificación de densidad para impedir el acceso público”.
9 EL OBSERVADOR | www.el-observador.com MAR 29, 2024 - APR 04, 2024 COMMUNITY
Photo Credit: frimufilms / Freepik
Durante
demasiado tiempo, las clases particulares y ayuda con la tarea ha estado fuera del alcance de muchos/as estudiantes y familias en California. Esta división entre quienes pueden salir adelante y quienes tan solo pueden soñar con ello a menudo da como resultado una base educacional desigual para estudiantes.
En su afán por fomentar la autonomía de los/as estudiantes y la igualdad de oportunidades, su biblioteca local brinda ahora a los/las estudiantes de California HelpNow, clases particulares y ayuda con la tarea en línea de forma gratuita.
Encuentre instrucciones de acceso paso a paso y otros recursos aquí: www.bit.ly/HelpNow-Spanish
Acerca del programa
HelpNow presta servicios GRATUITOS de clases particulares y ayuda con la tarea en línea para todo el alumnado desde kinder al 12° grado a través de las bibliotecas públicas locales de California mientras ofrece tutores cualificados/as y cumple con el plan de estudios y la norma educativa estatales. Visite tutoring. library.ca.gov para más información.
Diseñado para su estudiante
No hay que incluirlo en el presupuesto. Ni siquiera hay que tener una tarjeta de biblioteca. La plataforma fácil de usar facilita el acceso y la navegacióncualquiera con un dispositivo conectado a Internet puede acceder a HelpNow. Los tutores y las tutoras están disponibles las 24 horas del día, los 7 días de la semana para ayudar a los y las estudiantes en tiempo real, así garantizando un entorno interactivo y atractivo para el aprendizaje.
Las clases particulares están disponibles en múltiples idiomas, lo que garantiza una experiencia de aprendizaje personalizada para cada estudiante de California. Los idiomas que se utilizan son:
• Inglés
• Mandarín
• Vietnamita
• Español
• Cantonés
• Tagalog
Nada debe ser un obstáculo para una educación de calidad para usted o para su hijo/a.
Acceda a la ayuda con la tarea que se merezca a través de la página web de su biblioteca local o visite https://tutoring.library.ca.gov y amplíe sus horizontes ahora.
Este programa se financia con fondos procedentes del Estado de California, administrados por la Biblioteca Estatal de California.
CA FOSTER CARE ADVOCATES ASK LAWMAKERS TO FUND IN-PERSON RESPONSE TEAMS
Suzanne Potter California News Service
Advocates for foster families are pressing lawmakers to save the Family Urgent Response System from the budget ax.
California faces a $37.9 billion deficit and Gov. Gavin Newsom's initial proposal zeros out the program's $30 million budget.
Susanna Kniffen, senior director of child welfare policy for the nonprofit Children Now, said the program provides a 24-hour helpline for foster kids and their caregivers and funds a mobile emergency response unit in all 58 counties.
"We haven't seen a cut like that to foster care in a very long time. Decades," Kniffen pointed out. "Even when there are tough budget decisions to be made, generally you protect your children and you definitely protect your most vulnerable children, which are foster youth."
The state created the program in 2019. Then the pandemic hit, so counties got the mobile response teams up and running starting in 2021. California has about 46,000 children in the foster-care system. The helpline averages about 5,000 calls a year. More than a quarter involve requests for a team to come
to the home.
Kniffen noted more and more foster youths and their caregivers are starting to rely on the program for support and conflict mediation.
"We finally started to get youth trusting it and using it and, all of a sudden, we're just sort of pulling the rug out," Kniffen argued. "It's going to be very difficult for the adults in the system but it's going to hit the youth the hardest because this is one of the only options that they have to call and get support for themselves."
This issue will be heard in legislative committees in the State Assembly on April 3, and in the state Senate on April 25. Lawmakers have until June 15 to pass a balanced budget.
LOS DEFENSORES DEL HOGAR ADOPTIVO DE CALIFORNIA PIDEN A LOS LEGISLADORES QUE FINANCIEN EQUIPOS DE RESPUESTA EN PERSONA
Losdefensores de las familias de acogida están presionando a los legisladores para que salven el Sistema de Respuesta Urgente Familiar del corte presupuestario.
California enfrenta un déficit de $37.9 mil millones y la propuesta inicial del gobernador Gavin Newsom reduce a cero el presupuesto de $30 millones del programa.
Susanna Kniffen, directora principal de política de bienestar infantil de la organización sin fines de lucro Children Now, dijo que el programa proporciona una línea de ayuda las 24 horas para los niños en crianza temporal y sus cuidadores y financia una unidad móvil de respuesta a emergencias en los 58 condados.
"No hemos visto un recorte como ese en los hogares de acogida desde hace mucho tiempo. Décadas", señaló Kniffen.
"Incluso cuando hay que tomar decisiones presupuestarias difíciles, generalmente proteges a tus hijos y definitivamente proteges a tus hijos más vulnerables, que son jóvenes en hogares de crianza".
El estado creó el programa en 2019. Luego llegó la pandemia, por lo que los condados pusieron en funcionamiento los equipos de respuesta móviles a partir de 2021. California tiene alrededor de 46.000 niños en el sistema de cuidado de crianza. La línea de ayuda recibe un promedio de 5.000 llamadas al año.
Más de una cuarta parte implican solicitudes para que un equipo venga a casa.
Kniffen señaló que cada vez más jóvenes de crianza y sus cuidadores están comenzando a depender del programa para recibir apoyo y mediación de conflictos.
"Finalmente comenzamos a lograr que los jóvenes confiaran en él y lo usaran y, de repente, simplemente estábamos tirando la alfombra", argumentó Kniffen. "Va a ser muy difícil para los adultos en el sistema, pero afectará más a los jóvenes porque esta es una de las únicas opciones que tienen para llamar y obtener apoyo para sí mismos".
Este tema se tratará en los comités legislativos de la Asamblea estatal el 3 de abril y en el Senado estatal el 25 de abril. Los legisladores tienen hasta el 15 de junio para aprobar un presupuesto equilibrado.
10 EL OBSERVADOR | www.el-observador.com MAR 29, 2024 - APR 04, 2024 COMMUNITY
Photo Credit: CA State Library
Suzanne Potter
California News Service
El mandato del Sistema de Respuesta Familiar Urgente de California es estar disponible para enviar un equipo de atención de emergencia a cualquier familia de crianza de California en el plazo de una hora. Photo Credit: Freepik
California's Family Urgent Response System's mandate is to be available to send an emergency care team to any California foster family within one hour.
Photo Credit: DimaBerlin / Adobestock
ENGLISH ESPAÑOL
IA
Missouri lawmakers are concerned with protecting people from the potential risks of the increasing accessibility of AI-generated images and videos.
The Innovation and Technology Committee is planning to vote on the Taylor Swift Act, a bill aiming to make it illegal to publish or threaten to publish AI-generated sexually explicit images of people.
Rep. Adam Schwadron, R-St. Charles, authored the bill and said it is important to be proactive in protecting ordinary citizens.
"They were able to take it down for her," Schwadron acknowledged. "However, common Missourians would not have the same protections afforded to her. Not everyone is Taylor Swift."
The bill would allow victims of the fake image attacks to sue the creator in civil court and recover the offending images. Rep. Bridgette Walsh, D-St. Louis, also supports the bill and said it is necessary in this day and age, given how easy videos and images are to access and create.
Schwadron noted while they will need to learn how to track items originating from the dark web, he is optimistic the legislation will cover most common offenses.
"The cases that we are seeing across the country of classmates that are being attacked by other classmates of theirs that is creating these images and it's affecting young girls and even boys and those are a lot easier to track when they're being shared from phone to phone," Schwadron explained.
Schwadron added the name "Taylor Swift Act" was fitting due to her ties with the state of Missouri and her recent ordeal with explicit deepfakes.
LosFarah Siddiqi Public News Service
legisladores de Missouri están preocupados por proteger a las personas de los riesgos potenciales de la creciente accesibilidad de imágenes y videos generados por IA.
El Comité de Innovación y Tecnología planea votar sobre la Ley Taylor Swift, un proyecto de ley que tiene como objetivo hacer ilegal publicar o amenazar con publicar imágenes de personas sexualmente explícitas generadas por IA.
El representante Adam Schwadron, republicano por St. Charles, autor del proyecto de ley, dijo que es importante ser proactivo en la protección de los ciudadanos comunes.
"Pudieron quitarlas por ella", reconoció Schwadron. "Sin embargo, los habitantes comunes de Missouri no tendrían las mismas protecciones. No todo el mundo es Taylor Swift".
The bill would allow victims of the fake image attacks to sue the creator in civil court and recover the offending images. Rep. Bridgette Walsh, D-St. Louis, also supports the bill and said it is necessary in this day and age, given how easy videos and images are to access and create.
El proyecto de ley permitiría a las víctimas de ataques con imágenes falsas demandar al creador en un tribunal civil y recuperar las imágenes ofensivas. Representante Bridgette Walsh, demócrata por St. Louis, también apoya el proyecto de ley y dijo que es necesario hoy en día, dado lo fácil y accesible que es crear videos e imágenes.
Schwadron señaló que, si bien necesitarán aprender a rastrear elementos que se originan en la web oscura, es optimista de que la legislación cubrirá los delitos más comunes.
"Los casos que estamos viendo en todo el país de compañeros de clase que están siendo atacados por otros compañeros suyos crean estas imágenes y afectan a niñas e incluso a niños, y son mucho más fáciles de rastrear cuando se comparten de teléfono a teléfono", explicó Schwadron.
Schwadron añadió que el nombre "Ley Taylor Swift" era apropiado debido a sus vínculos con el estado de Missouri y su reciente experiencia con los deepfakes explícitos.
15 EL OBSERVADOR | www.el-observador.com MAR 29, 2024 - APR 04, 2024 NATIONAL
Farah Siddiqi Public News Service
ENGLISH ESPAÑOL
Social media platform X temporarily shutdown searches of "Taylor Swift" following the release of explicit deepfake images in early 2024. Photo Credit: Mdv Edwards / Adobe Stock
La plataforma de redes sociales X cerró temporalmente las búsquedas de "Taylor Swift" tras la publicación de imágenes explícitas deepfake a principios de 2024. Photo Credit: Freepik
JUNTA DE PODERES CONJUNTOS DEL CORREDOR DE LA PENÍNSULA (PCJPB)
COMITÉ CONSULTIVO DE CIUDADANOS (CAC)
AVISO DE AUDIENCIA PÚBLICA
Auditoría anual de los ingresos y gastos fiscales de la Medida RR para el ejercicio fiscal que finalizó el 30 de junio de 2023
El Comité Consultivo de Ciudadanos (CAC) de la Junta de Poderes Conjuntos del Corredor de la Península (Caltrain) celebrará una audiencia pública el miércoles 20 de marzo de 2024 a las 5:40 p.m. para recibir comentarios del público sobre las auditorías financieras y de cumplimiento de los fondos de la Medida RR para el año fiscal que finalizó el 30 de junio de 2023.
El 6 de agosto de 2020, Caltrain adoptó y solicitó la aprobación de los votantes para aplicar una resolución que imponía un impuesto sobre las transacciones minoristas y el uso de un octavo del uno por ciento para financiar los gastos operativos y de capital del servicio ferroviario de Caltrain (Resolución de la Medida RR). Los votantes de la ciudad y el condado de San Francisco y de los condados de San Mateo y Santa Clara aprobaron la Medida RR el 3 de noviembre de 2020. La Resolución de la Medida RR, Resolución 2020-40, exige a Caltrain que un auditor independiente audite anualmente los ingresos y gastos de los fondos fiscales de la Medida RR. Según los estatutos del CAC, modificados por Caltrain mediante la Resolución 2022-03, el CAC actúa como comité de supervisión independiente del impuesto sobre la venta de la Medida RR. En su calidad de comité de supervisión independiente, el CAC es responsable de verificar que los ingresos fiscales se invierten de forma coherente con la finalidad del impuesto mediante: (1) la recepción de la auditoría anual independiente de los ingresos y gastos de las recaudaciones fiscales; (2) la celebración de una audiencia pública; y (3) la emisión de un informe anual para proporcionar al público información sobre cómo se están gastando los ingresos fiscales.
Audiencia pública
El CAC de Caltrain celebrará una audiencia pública para debatir la Auditoría anual de los ingresos y gastos fiscales de la Medida RR para el ejercicio fiscal que finalizó el 30 de junio de 2023. La gente puede participar en persona, a través de un enlace web Zoom y/o por teléfono.
Miércoles, 20 de marzo de 2024, a las 5:40 p.m. (o tan pronto como el asunto pueda ser considerado)
En Persona: San Mateo County Transit District Bacciocco Auditorio Segundo Piso 1250 San Carlos Avenue, San Carlos, CA 94070
Información para conectarse por Zoom: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/83818142155?pwd= U3pFbithdUsxVFVBYVF0eklSWU5Vdz09
Identificación del seminario web: 838 1814 2155 Acceso por teléfono: 1.669.444.9171; Identificación de la reunión: 838 1814 2155
Para solicitar servicio de traducción o interpretación, llame a Caltrain al 1.800.660.4287 al menos tres días antes de la reunión.
Para traducción llama al 1.800.660.4287; 如需翻譯,請電 1.800.660.4287.
CNSB #3785883
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE FOR CHANGE OF NAME
NO. 24CV428691
Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara-In the matter of the application of: Nancy Patricia Narvaez Diaz
INTERESTED PERSONS:
1. Petitioner(s) Nancy Patricia Narvaez Diaz has filed a petition for Change of Name with the clerk of this court for a decree changing names as follows: a. Emiliano Narvaez to Emiliano Leon Narvaez
2. 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 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: 3/26/2024 at 8:45 am, Probate Dept., located
Electronics Engineer: Design & develop Electrical Systems including part selection, prototyping, test/bring-up, circuit design & simulation, schematic capture, layout. Develop tools from requirements based on electronics hardware schematics & datasheets. Work on electrical design for IOT device; create & review analog/digital or Mixed signal High speed circuit/schematics & layout relative to sensors. Manage device subsystems design including touch displays, batteries, input/output devices, sensors, high speed communication components & interface protocols. Perform simulations of electrical circuits, developing prototypes, system bringup, debugging, design verification. Reqd: BS in Electrical/ Electronics Eng. Job location: Santa Clara, CA. Contact: Xekera, 2350 Walsh Ave, Santa Clara, CA 95051
La Autoridad de Vivienda del Condado de Santa Clara (SCCHA, por sus siglas en inglés), anteriormente conocida como HACSC (por sus siglas en inglés), debe presentar un aviso público de los fondos en su custodia que han quedado inactivos según la ley estatal de California. Si no se reclama, el dinero pasará a ser propiedad de SCCHA el 8 de abril de 2024. Si cree que SCCHA le debe dinero, llame al (408) 993-2924 o envíe un correo electrónico a Christy.Hang@scchousingauthority.org y proporcione el nombre del reclamante, la dirección actual, el número de teléfono y la dirección donde se encontrará durante el período de examinación. Tenga en cuenta que los representantes primero determinarán si usted es un receptor del pago de fondos inactivos. Si se determina que usted es un receptor del pago de fondos inactivos, el representante solicitará la documentación para verificar su identidad a fin de poder reembolsar el dinero adeudado.
der the fictitious business name(s) listed above on N/A. This is a new filing. “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.)
/s/ Eric Ingram President
at 191 N. First Street, San Jose, CA 95113. 3. A copy of the Order to Show cause shall be published at least once a week for four successive weeks prior to the date set for hearing on the petition in El Observador, a newspaper of general circulation, printed in the county of Santa Clara.
Jan 08, 2024
Jacqueline M. Arroyo Judge of the Superior Court
February 16, 23, March 1, 8, 2024
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT NO. 704296
The following person(s) is (are) doing business as: THE BBQ PIT, BBQ PIT, THE BARBEQUE PIT, BARBEQUE PIT, BARBECUE PIT 1349 Blossom Hill Road, San Jose, CA 95118, Santa Clara County. This business is owned by a corporation. The name and residence address of the registrant(s) is (are): RSBBQ, INC, 8021 Carmel Street, Gilroy, CA 95020. The registrant began transacting business under the fictitious business name(s) listed above on N/A. This is a new filing. “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.)
/s/ Lawrence Ingram, Jr. RSBBQ, INC.
TREASURY Article/Reg#: C3603209, CA
This statement was filed with the Co. ClerkRecorder of Santa Clara County on 3/20/2024.
Regina Alcomendras, County Clerk Recorder
By: /s/ Elaine Fader, Deputy File No. FBN 704296
March 29, April 5, 12, 19, 2024
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS
NAME STATEMENT NO. 704255
The following person(s) is (are) doing business as: HIGH & MIGHTY PIZZA JOINT, HIGH AND MIGHTY PIZZA JOINT, HIGH & MIGHTY PIZZA 7661 Monterey Road, Gilroy, CA 95020, Santa Clara County. This business is owned by a corporation. The name and residence address of the registrant(s) is (are): RSBBQ, INC, 8021 Carmel Street, Gilroy, CA 95020. The registrant began transacting business un-
This statement was filed with the Co. ClerkRecorder of Santa Clara County on 3/19/2024.
Regina Alcomendras, County Clerk Recorder
By: /s/ Elaine Fader, Deputy File No. FBN 704255
March 29, April 5, 12, 19, 2024
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS
NAME STATEMENT NO. 704441
The following person(s) is (are) doing business as: EVA’S HOUSECLEANING 465 Royale Park Dr, San Jose, CA 95126203, Santa Clara County. This business is owned by an individual. The name and residence address of the registrant(s) is (are): Eva Prasad, 465 Royale Park Dr, San Jose, CA 95126203. The registrant began transacting business under the fictitious business name(s) listed above on 02/20/2014. This filing is a refile [Change(s) in facts from previous filing] of previous file #: FBN700799. “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.)
INC, 1005 South 5th Ste D, San Jose, CA 95112. The registrant began transacting business under the fictitious business name(s) listed above on 05/28/2013. This filing is a refile [Change(s) in facts from previous filing] of previous file #: FBN648855. “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.)
/s/ Leticia Ramirez Rodriguez SOUTH BAY PRODUCE INC CEO
Article/Reg#: C4730590
This statement was filed with the Co. ClerkRecorder of Santa Clara County on 3/22/2024.
Regina Alcomendras, County Clerk Recorder
By: /s/ Corinne Vasquez, Deputy File No. FBN 704356
March 29, April 5, 12, 19, 2024
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT NO. 703670
Dominguez
This statement was filed with the Co. ClerkRecorder of Santa Clara County on 3/18/2024.
Regina Alcomendras, County Clerk Recorder
By: /s/ Corinne Vasquez, Deputy File No. FBN 704183
March 29, April 5, 12, 19, 2024
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT NO. 704384
The following person(s) is (are) doing business as:
/s/ Eva Prasad
This statement was filed with the Co. ClerkRecorder of Santa Clara County on 3/26/2024.
Regina Alcomendras, County Clerk Recorder
By: /s/ Ronald Nguyen, Deputy File No. FBN 704441
March 29, April 5, 12, 19, 2024
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT NO. 704435
The following person(s) is (are) doing business as:
COLLEGE AID PLANNING, 465 Royale Park Dr, San Jose, CA 95136, Santa Clara County This business is owned by an individual. The name and residence address of the registrant(s) is (are): Eva Agripina Prasad, 465 Royale Park Dr, San Jose, CA 95136. The registrant began transacting business under the fictitious business name(s) listed above on N/A. This filing is a first filing. “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.)
/s/ Eva Agripina Prasad
This statement was filed with the Co. ClerkRecorder of Santa Clara County on 3/26/2024.
Regina Alcomendras, County Clerk Recorder
By: /s/ Ronald Nguyen, Deputy File No. FBN 704435
March 29, April 5, 12, 19, 2024
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS
NAME STATEMENT NO. 704254
The following person(s) is (are) doing business as: DGO SERVICE
CLEANING 779 Villa Ave, San Jose, CA 95126, Santa Clara County. This business is owned by an individual. The name and residence address of the registrant(s) is (are): Teresa Angelica Diego Francisco, 779 Villa Ave, San Jose, CA 95126. The registrant began transacting business under the fictitious business name(s) listed above on 03/14/2024. This filing is a first filing. “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.)
/s/ Teresa Angelica Diego Francisco
This statement was filed with the Co. ClerkRecorder of Santa Clara County on 3/19/2024. Regina Alcomendras, County Clerk Recorder
By: /s/ Patty Camarena, Deputy File No. FBN 704254
March 29, April 5, 12, 19, 2024
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT NO. 704356
The following person(s) is (are) doing business as: SOUTH BAY PRODUCE INC, 1005 South 5th Ste D, San Jose, CA 95112, Santa Clara County. This business is owned by a corporation. The name and residence address of the registrant(s) is (are):
SOUTH BAY PRODUCE
The following person(s) is (are) doing business as: ONNECAPS, 2453 COUNTRYBROOKS, San Jose, CA 95132, Santa Clara County. This business is owned by an individual. The name and residence address of the registrant(s) is (are): Angie Natalia Jimenez Romero, 2453 COUNTRYBROOKS, San Jose, CA 95132. The registrant began transacting business under the fictitious business name(s) listed above on N/A. This filing is a first filing. “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.)
/s/ Angie Jimenez This statement was filed with the Co. ClerkRecorder of Santa Clara County on 2/29/2024.
Regina Alcomendras, County Clerk Recorder
By: /s/ Corinne Vasquez, Deputy File No. FBN 703670
March 29, April 5, 12, 19, 2024
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT NO. 704183
The following person(s) is (are) doing business as: BURGARA’S LANDSCAPING 1041 Eat William St, San Jose, CA 95116, Santa Clara County. This business is owned by an individual. The name and residence address of the registrant(s) is (are): Juan Ramon BurgaraDominguez, 1041 East William St, San Jose, CA 95116. The registrant began transacting business under the fictitious business name(s) listed above on 02/26/2024. This filing is a first filing. “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.) /s/ Juan Ramon Burgara-
ANGELOU’S MEXICAN GRILL 78 S. 1st St, San Jose, CA 95113, Santa Clara County. This business is owned by a corporation. The name and residence address of the registrant(s) is (are): ANGELOU’S TS ENTERPRISES INC, 17446 Belletto Dr, Morgan Hill, CA 95037. The registrant began transacting business under the fictitious business name(s) listed above on 09/01/2012. This filing is a refile [Change(s) in facts from previous filing] of previous file #: FBN654191. “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.)
/s/ Sergio Lopez
ANGELOU’S TS ENTERPRISES INC
President Article/Reg#: 3787157
Above entity was formed in the state of CA
This statement was filed with the Co. ClerkRecorder of Santa Clara County on 3/22/2024.
Regina Alcomendras, County Clerk Recorder
By: /s/ Patty Camarena, Deputy File No. FBN 704384
March 29, April 5, 12, 19, 2024
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT NO. 704284
The following person(s) is (are) doing business as: COLOMBIAN SHOP, 2086 Lucretia Ave Apt 103, San Jose, CA 95122, Santa Clara County. This business is owned by an individual. The name and residence address of the registrant(s) is (are): Laura Mercedes Garcia, 2086 Lucretia Ave Apt 103, San Jose, CA 95122.
The registrant began transacting business under the fictitious business name(s) listed above on 03/20/2014. This filing is a first filing. “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.)
/s/ Laura Mercedes Garcia
This statement was filed with the Co. ClerkRecorder of Santa Clara County on 3/20/2024.
Regina Alcomendras, County Clerk Recorder By: /s/ Corinne Vasquez, Deputy File No. FBN 704284
March 29, April 5, 12, 19, 2024
16 EL OBSERVADOR | www.el-observador.com MAR 29, 2024 - APR 04, 2024
JOBS / CLASSIFIEDS / LEGALS
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS
NAME STATEMENT NO. 704357
The following person(s) is (are) doing business as:
JIA YI HEALTH CARE
10475 S De Anza Blvd, Cupertino, CA 95014, Santa Clara County. This business is owned by a corporation. The name and residence address of the registrant(s) is (are):
JIA YI HEALTH CARE INC, 10475 S De Anza Blvd, Cupertino, CA 95014. The registrant began transacting business under the fictitious business name(s) listed above on N/A. This filing is a first filing. “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.)
/s/ Sonny Lim
JIA YI HEALTH CARE INC
CEO Article/Reg#: 6115985
Above entity was formed in the state of CA
This statement was filed with the Co. ClerkRecorder of Santa Clara County on 3/22/2024. Regina Alcomendras, County Clerk Recorder
By: /s/ Corinne Vasquez, Deputy File No. FBN 704357
March 29, April 5, 12, 19, 2024
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE FOR CHANGE OF NAME NO. 24CV431224
Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara-In the matter of the application of: Kaia Izu
INTERESTED PERSONS:
1. Petitioner(s) Kaia Izu has filed a petition for Change of Name with the clerk of this court for a decree changing names as follows: a. Kaia Izu to Akira Adah Thella Tokarczuk b. Kaia Sayaka Trinn to Akari Isaac Tokatczuk 2. 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 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: 5/07/2024 at 8:45 am, Probate Dept., located at 191 N. First Street, San Jose, CA 95113. 3. A copy of the Order to Show cause shall be published at least once a week for four successive weeks prior to the date set for hearing on the petition in El Observador, a newspaper of general circulation, printed in the county of Santa Clara.
Feb 21, 2024
Le Jacqueline Duong
Judge of the Superior Court
March 29, April 5, 12, 19, 2024
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE FOR CHANGE OF NAME NO. 24CV431269
Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara-In the matter of the application of: Vesilina Siuli Kalati INTERESTED
PERSONS: 1. Petitioner(s)
Vesilina Siuli Kalati has filed a petition for Change of Name with the clerk of this court for a decree changing names as follows: a. Vesilina Siuli Kalati to Elina Vesilina Sevesi-Kalati b. Elgielyn Elina WoodsKalati to Elgielyn Emmaleah Sevesi-Kalati 2. 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 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: 5/07/2024 at 8:45 am, Probate Dept., located at 191 N. First Street, San Jose, CA 95113. 3. A copy of the Order to Show cause shall be published at least once a week for four successive weeks prior to the date set for hearing on the petition in El Observador, a newspaper of general circulation, printed in the county of Santa Clara.
Feb 21, 2024
Le Jacqueline Duong Judge of the Superior Court
March 29, April 5, 12, 19, 2024
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE FOR CHANGE OF NAME NO. 24CV432924
Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara-In the matter of the application of: Sandra Nichole Lupercio
INTERESTED PERSONS:
1. Petitioner(s) Sandra Nichole Lupercio has filed a petition for Change of Name with the clerk of this court for a decree changing names as follows: a. Sandra Nichole Lupercio to Sandra Nichole Garcia
2. 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 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: 5/28/2024 at 8:45
am, Probate Dept., located at 191 N. First Street, San Jose, CA 95113. 3. A copy of the Order to Show cause shall be published at least once a week for four successive weeks prior to the date set for hearing on the petition in El Observador, a newspaper of general circulation, printed in the county of Santa Clara.
Mar 12, 2024
Le Jacqueline Duong Judge of the Superior Court
March 29, April 5, 12, 19, 2024
ORDER TO SHOW
CAUSE FOR CHANGE OF NAME NO. 243CV426122
Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara-In the matter of the application of: Cladia Judith Perez IN-
TERESTED PERSONS: 1.
Petitioner(s) Cladia Judith Perez has filed a petition for Change of Name with the clerk of this court for a decree changing names as follows: a. Cladia Judith Perez to Claudia Judith Perez. 2. 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 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: 4/23/2024 at 8:45 am, Probate Dept., located at 191 N. First Street, San Jose, CA 95113. 3. A copy of the Order to Show cause shall be published at least once a week for four successive weeks prior to the date set for hearing on the petition in El Observador, a newspaper of general circulation, printed in the county of Santa Clara.
Mar 26, 2024
Le Jacqueline Duong Judge of the Superior Court
March 29, April 5, 12, 19, 2024
Notice of Petition to Administer Estate of Teresita C. Tan
Case No. 24PR196817
1.To all heirs, beneficiaries, creditors, contingent creditors, and persons who may be interested in the will or estate, or both, of Teresita C. Tan. 2. A Petition for Probate has been filed by Kathleen Go in the Superior Court
of California, County of Santa Clara. 3.The Petition for Probate requests that Kathleen Go be appointed as personal representative to administer the estate of the decedent.
5. The petition requests authority to administer the estate under the Independent Administer of Estate Act. (This authority will allow the personal representative to take any 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 consent to the proposed action.) The independent administration authority will be granted unless an interested person Files and objection to the petition and shows good cause why the court should not grant the authority. 6. A hearing on the petition will be held in this court as follows: May 06, 2024, at 9:01am, Dept. 2, located at 191 North First Street, San Jose, CA 95113. 7 If you object to the granting of this 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. 8. If you are a creditor or 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. 9. 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.
10. Attorney for Petitioner: Shahram Miri 80 Gilman Ave Suite 27, Campbell, CA 95008 (408)866-8382
Run Date: March 29, April 5, 12, 2024
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT NO. 703547
The following person(s) is (are) doing business as: DTECH PRODUCTIONS, 410 N White Rd, Apt 5106, San Jose, CA 95127, Santa Clara
County. This business is owned by a limited liability company. The name and residence address of the registrant(s) is (are): FURNISH TECH LLC, 410 N White Rd, Apt 5106, San Jose, CA 95127. The registrant began transacting business under the fictitious business name(s) listed above on N/A. This filing is a first filing. “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.)
/s/ Mushfiour Rahman FURNISH TECH LLC
Managing Member
Article/Reg#: 202359816524
Above entity was formed in the state of CA
This statement was filed with the Co. ClerkRecorder of Santa Clara County on 2/28/2024.
Regina Alcomendras, County Clerk Recorder
By: /s/ Elaine Fader, Deputy File No. FBN 703547
March 22, 29, April 5, 12, 2024
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT NO. 704055
The following person(s) is (are) doing business as: NICO’S FINE FINISHING 10338 Sienna Dr, San Jose, CA 95127, Santa Clara County. This business is owned by an individual. The name and residence address of the registrant(s) is (are): NICOLAS AGUILAR, 10338 Sienna Dr, San Jose, CA 95127. The registrant began transacting business under the fictitious business name(s) listed above on 2/12/2024. This filing is a first filing. “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.)
/s/ Nicolas Aguilar
This statement was filed with the Co. ClerkRecorder of Santa Clara County on 3/14/2024. Regina Alcomendras, County Clerk Recorder
By: /s/ Patty Camarena, Deputy File No. FBN 704055
March 22, 29, April 5, 12, 2024
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT NO. 704000
The following person(s) is (are) doing business as: C&T FOOD 597 Crystalberry Ter, San Jose, CA 95129, Santa Clara County. This business is owned by an individual. The name and residence address of the registrant(s) is (are): Tae Hee Lee, 597 Crystalberry Ter, San Jose, CA 95129. The registrant began transacting business under the fictitious business name(s) listed above on 07/23/1998. This filing is a first filing. “I declare that all informa-
tion 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.)
/s/ Tae Hee Lee
This statement was filed with the Co. ClerkRecorder of Santa Clara County on 3/12/2024. Regina Alcomendras, County Clerk Recorder By: /s/ Elaine Fader, Deputy File No. FBN 704000
March 22, 29, April 5, 12, 2024
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT NO. 704030
The following person(s) is (are) doing business
as: TOP SHELF FADES
HQ, 2746 Aborn Rd, San Jose, CA 95121, Santa Clara County
This business is owned by a limited liability company. The name and residence address of the registrant(s) is (are): TSF INVESTMENT GROUP LLC, 2746 Aborn Rd, San Jose, CA 95121. The registrant began transacting business under the fictitious business name(s) listed above on N/A. This filing is a first filing. “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.)
/s/ Luciano Gomez TSF INVESTMENT GROUP LLC
Managing Member Article/Reg#: 202461211578
Above entity was formed in the state of CA
This statement was filed with the Co. ClerkRecorder of Santa Clara County on 3/13/2024. Regina Alcomendras, County Clerk Recorder By: /s/ Patty Camarena, Deputy File No. FBN 704030
March 22, 29, April 5, 12, 2024
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT NO. 703811
The following person(s) is (are) doing business as: XTREME KUTZ BARBERSHOP, 1184 E. Santa Clara St, San Jose, CA 95116, Santa Clara County This business is owned by an individual. The name and residence address of the registrant(s) is (are): DANIEL PEREZ GUZMAN, 1500 Almaden Rd Apt #201, San Jose, CA 95125. The registrant began transacting business under the fictitious business name(s) listed above on 09/02/2023. This filing is a refile [Change(s) in facts from previous filing] of previous file #: FBN698988. “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.)
/s/ Daniel Perez This statement was filed with the Co. Clerk-
Recorder of Santa Clara County on 3/05/2024.
Regina Alcomendras, County Clerk Recorder
By: /s/ Ronald Nguyen, Deputy File No. FBN 703811
March 22, 29, April 5, 12, 2024
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT NO. 703597
The following person(s) is (are) doing business as: CAUSOR CONTRUCTION 3056 Van Sansul Ave #8, San Jose, CA 95128, Santa Clara County. This business is owned by an individual. The name and residence address of the registrant(s) is (are): Ricardo J Causor
Naranjo, 5056 Van Sansul Ave #8, San Jose, CA 95128. The registrant began transacting business under the fictitious business name(s) listed above on 10/17/2021. This filing is a refile [Change(s) in facts from previous filing] of previous file #: FBN703302. “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.)
/s/ Ricardo J Causor Naranjo
This statement was filed with the Co. ClerkRecorder of Santa Clara County on 2/28/2024.
Regina Alcomendras, County Clerk Recorder
By: /s/ Patty Camarena, Deputy File No. FBN 703597
March 22, 29, April 5, 12, 2024
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT NO. 703977
The following person(s) is (are) doing business as: MAMMA’S HAPPY TART, 3539 Monroe Street Apt 224, Santa Clara, CA 95051, Santa Clara County. This business is owned by an individual. The name and residence address of the registrant(s) is (are): LEE
YABUSHITA HIDEKO, 3539 Monroe Street Apt 224, Santa Clara, CA 95051. The registrant began transacting business under the fictitious business name(s) listed above on 1/23/2023.
This filing is a first filing. “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.)
/s/ Hideko Lee
This statement was filed with the Co. ClerkRecorder of Santa Clara County on 3/12/2024.
Regina Alcomendras, County Clerk Recorder
By: /s/ Ronald Nguyen, Deputy File No. FBN 703977
March 22, 29, April 5, 12, 2024
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT NO. 704012
The following person(s) is (are) doing business as:
INBAR FISH PILATES, 1031 Persimmon Ave, Sunnyvale, CA 94087, Santa Clara County. This business is owned by an individual. The name and residence address of the registrant(s) is (are): INBAR FISH, 1031 Persimmon Ave, Sunnyvale, CA 94087. The registrant began transacting business under the fictitious business name(s) listed above on 06/10/2023. This filing is a first filing. “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.)
/s/ INBAR FISH
This statement was filed with the Co. ClerkRecorder of Santa Clara County on 3/13/2024.
Regina Alcomendras, County Clerk Recorder By: /s/ Ronald Nguyen, Deputy File No. FBN 704012
March 22, 29, April 5, 12, 2024
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT NO. 704089
The following person(s) is (are) doing business as: LATINA SKIN, 1944 Mandarin Way, San Jose, CA 95122, Santa Clara County. This business is owned by a general partnership. The name and residence address of the registrant(s) is (are): Lorena Torres, 1944 Mandarin Way, San Jose, CA 95122. Cynthia O Martinez, PO BOX 51090, San Jose, CA 95151. The registrant began transacting business under the fictitious business name(s) listed above on 03/14/2024. This filing is a first filing. “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.)
/s/ Lorena Torres
This statement was filed with the Co. ClerkRecorder of Santa Clara County on 3/14/2024.
Regina Alcomendras, County Clerk Recorder
By: /s/ Elaine Fader, Deputy
File No. FBN 704089
March 22, 29, April 5, 12, 2024
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT NO. 703623
The following person(s) is (are) doing business as: SHUMILOVA INTERIORS, 77 N Almaden Ave, San Jose, CA 95110, Santa Clara County. This business is owned by an individual. The name and residence address of the registrant(s) is (are): KHRYSTYNA SHUMILOVA, 77 N Almaden Ave, San Jose, CA 95110. The registrant began transacting business under the fictitious business name(s) listed above on 02/22/2024.
17 EL OBSERVADOR | www.el-observador.com
29, 2024 - APR 04, 2024 JOBS / CLASSIFIEDS / LEGALS
MAR
CLASSIFIEDS / LEGALS
This filing is a first filing. “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.)
/s/ KHRYSTYNA SHUMILOVA
This statement was filed with the Co. ClerkRecorder of Santa Clara County on 2/28/2024.
Regina Alcomendras, County Clerk Recorder
By: /s/ Ronald Nguyen, Deputy File No. FBN 703623
March 22, 29, April 5, 12, 2024
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS
NAME STATEMENT NO. 704018
The following person(s) is (are) doing business as: A&P Cleaning 1415 Lexington Dr Apt 1, San Jose, CA 95117, Santa Clara County. This business is owned by an individual. The name and residence address of the registrant(s) is (are): Angie P Jimenez Campino, 1415 Lexington Dr Apt 1, San Jose, CA 95117. The registrant began transacting business under the fictitious business name(s) listed above on N/A. This filing is a first filing. “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.)
/s/ Angie Paola Jimenez Campino
This statement was filed with the Co. ClerkRecorder of Santa Clara County on 3/13/2024.
Regina Alcomendras, County Clerk Recorder
By: /s/ Ronald Nguyen, Deputy File No. FBN 704018
March 22, 29, April 5, 12, 2024
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS
NAME STATEMENT NO. 704182
The following person(s) is (are) doing business as: SPACORALS 1501 Berryessa Rd, San Jose, CA 95133, Santa Clara County. This business is owned by an individual. The name and residence address of the registrant(s) is (are): NINI KATHERINE
JUNCA TAMAYO, 1501 Berryessa Rd, San Jose, CA 95133. The registrant began transacting business under the fictitious business name(s) listed above on 03/18/2024.
This filing is a first filing. “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.)
/s/ NINI KATHERINE
JUNCA TAMAYO
This statement was filed with the Co. ClerkRecorder of Santa Clara County on 3/18/2024.
Regina Alcomendras, County Clerk Recorder
By: /s/ Patty Camarena, Deputy
File No. FBN 704182
March 22, 29, April 5, 12, 2024
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE FOR CHANGE OF NAME NO. 24CV432935
Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara-In the matter of the application of: David Scott Goehring INTERESTED PERSONS: 1.
Petitioner(s) David Scott Goehring has filed a petition for Change of Name with the clerk of this court for a decree changing names as follows: a. David Scott Goehring to David Scott Freed 2. 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 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. NO-
TICE OF HEARING: Date:
5/28/2024 at 8:45 am, Probate Dept., located at 191 N. First Street, San Jose, CA 95113. 3. A copy of the Order to Show cause shall be published at least once a week for four successive weeks prior to the date set for hearing on the petition in El Observador, a newspaper of general circulation, printed in the county of Santa Clara. Mar 12, 2024
Le Jacqueline Duong Judge of the Superior Court
March 22, 29, April 5, 12, 2024
ORDER TO SHOW
CAUSE FOR CHANGE OF NAME NO. 24CV4331120
Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara-In the matter of the application of: Jennifer Villanueva INTERESTED
PERSONS: 1. Petitioner(s)
Jennifer Villanueva has filed a petition for Change of Name with the clerk of this court for a decree changing names as follows: a. Cruz Elijah Daily to Cruz Elijah Daily Villanueva 2. 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 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. NO-
TICE OF HEARING: Date:
5/28/2024 at 8:45 am, Probate Dept., located at 191 N. First Street, San Jose, CA 95113. 3. A copy of the Order to Show cause shall be published at least once a week for four successive weeks prior to the date set for hearing on the petition in El Observador, a newspaper of general circulation, printed in the county of Santa Clara.
Mar 14, 2024
Le Jacqueline Duong Judge of the Superior Court
March 22, 29, April 5, 12, 2024
ORDER TO SHOW
CAUSE FOR CHANGE OF NAME NO. 24CV432448
Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara-In the matter of the application of: Rema Odaini Beidalah
INTERESTED PERSONS:
1. Petitioner(s) Rema Odaini Beidalah has filed a petition for Change of Name with the clerk of this court for a decree changing names as follows: a. Rema Odaini Beidalah AKA Rema Hassan Alodaini AKA
Rema Hassan Beidalah to Rema Hassan Alodaini 2. 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 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. NO-
TICE OF HEARING: Date: 5/21/2024 at 8:45 am, Probate Dept., located at 191 N. First Street, San Jose, CA 95113. 3. A copy of the Order to Show cause shall be published at least once a week for four successive weeks prior to the date set for hearing on the petition in El Observador, a newspaper of general circulation, printed in the county of Santa Clara.
Mar 05, 2024
Le Jacqueline Duong Judge of the Superior Court
March 22, 29, April 5, 12, 2024
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE FOR CHANGE OF NAME NO. 24CV432943
Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara-In the matter of the application of:
Katherine Panameno INTERESTED PERSONS:
1. Petitioner(s) Katherine Panameno has filed a petition for Change of Name with the clerk of this court for a decree changing names as follows: a. Moises Ezequiel Panameno Garcia to Moises Ezequiel Arias Panameno 2. 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 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. NO-
TICE OF HEARING: Date: 5/28/2024 at 8:45 am, Probate Dept., located at 191 N. First Street, San Jose, CA 95113. 3. A copy of the Order to Show cause shall be published at least once a week for four successive weeks prior to the date set for hearing on the petition in El Observador, a newspaper of general circulation, printed in the county of Santa Clara.
Mar 12, 2024
Le Jacqueline Duong Judge of the Superior Court
March 22, 29, April 5, 12, 2024
Amended Notice of Petition to Administer Estate of JEAN ANN FEARINGTON
Case No. 24PR196698
1.To all heirs, beneficiaries, creditors, contingent creditors, and persons who may be interested in the will or estate, or both, of JEAN ANN FEARINGTON AND JEAN FEARINGTON. 2. A Petition for Probate has been filed by JAMES WILLIAM BURGESS in the Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara.
3.The Petition for Probate requests that JAMES WILLIAM BURGESS be appointed as personal representative to administer the estate of the decedent. 4. The petition requests the decedent’s will and codicils, if any, be admitted to probate. The will and any codicils are available for examination in the file kept by the court. 5. The petition requests authority to administer the estate under the Independent Administer of Estate Act. (This authority will allow the personal representative to take any 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 consent to the proposed action.) The independent administration authority will be granted unless an interested person Files and objection to the petition and shows good cause why the court should not grant the authority. 6. A hearing on the petition will be held in this court as follows: April 22, 2024, at 9:01am, Dept. 2, located at 191 North First Street, San Jose, CA 95113. 7 If you object to the granting of this 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. 8. If you are a creditor or 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. 9. 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.
10. Attorney for Petitioner: ROBERT P. BERGMAN 3535 Ross Avenue, Ste. 200, San Jose, CA 95124 (408)247-0444
Run Date: March 22, 29, April 5, 2024
NOTICE OF DEATH OF David L. Davis
To all heirs, beneficiaries, creditors, contingent creditors, and persons who may otherwise be interested in the will or estate, or both of David L. Davis, who was a resident of Santa Clara County, State of California, and died on January 12, 2024, in the City of San Jose, County of Santa Clara, State of California.
IF YOU ARE A CREDITOR or a contingent creditor of the deceased, you must file your claim within four months from the date of first publication with the DERMER LAW FIRM, 5448 Thornwood Drive, Suite 200, San Jose, California
95123 (408) 395-5111
Joseph D. Dermer, Esq.
DERMER LAW FIRM 5448 Thornwood Drive, Ste 200 San Jose, CA 95123 Tel (408) 395-5111 Fax (408) 354-2797
March 22, 29, April 5, 12, 2024
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT NO. 703291
The following person(s) is (are) doing business as: LA SUGARING STUDIO. 2666 Aida Avenue, San Jose, CA 95111, Santa Clara County. This business is owned by an individual. The name and residence address of the registrant(s) is (are): Jessica Thi Le, 5080 Haven Place, Apt 112, Dublin, CA 94568. The registrant began transacting business under the fictitious business name(s) listed above on N/A. This filing is a first filing. “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.)
/s/ Jessica Thi Le This statement was filed with the Co. ClerkRecorder of Santa Clara County on 2/15/2024. Regina Alcomendras, County Clerk Recorder
By: /s/ Ronald Nguyen, Deputy File No. FBN 703291
March 15, 22, 29, April 5, 2024
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS
NAME STATEMENT NO. 703791
The following person(s) is (are) doing business as: DUROTEK MACHINING COMPANY, 969 Berryessa Rd Ste A, San Jose, CA 95133, Santa Clara County. This business is owned by an individual. The name and residence address of the registrant(s) is (are): Jose Canales, 969 Berryessa Rd Ste A, San Jose, CA 95133. The registrant began transacting business under the fictitious business name(s) listed above on 4/27/1993. This filing is a refile [Change(s) in facts from previous filing] of previous file #: FBN263903. “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.)
/s/ Jose Canales This statement was filed with the Co. ClerkRecorder of Santa Clara County on 3/05/2024. Regina Alcomendras, County Clerk Recorder By: /s/ Elaine Fader, Deputy File No. FBN 703791
March 15, 22, 29, April 5, 2024
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT NO. 703961
The following person(s)
is (are) doing business as:
MR. GROOMER LLC, 2202 Peachtree Lane, San Jose, CA 95128, Santa Clara County This business is owned by a limited liability company. The name and residence address of the registrant(s) is (are):
MR. GROOMER LLC, 2202 Peachtree Lane, San Jose, CA 95128. The registrant began transacting business under the fictitious business name(s) listed above on 4/08/2019. This filing is a refile [Change(s) in facts from previous filing] of previous file #: FBN653457. “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.)
/s/ Aldo R Araujo
MR. GROOMER LLC
OWNER
Article/Reg#:
202102811248
Above entity was formed in the state of CA
This statement was filed with the Co. ClerkRecorder of Santa Clara County on 3/11/2024.
Regina Alcomendras, County Clerk Recorder
By: /s/ Elaine Fader, Deputy File No. FBN 703861
March 15, 22, 29, April 5, 2024
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT NO. 703861
The following person(s) is (are) doing business as: NOVEDADED
VERONICA, 3021
Lone Bluff Wy, San Jose, CA 95111, Santa Clara County. This business is owned by an individual. The name and residence address of the registrant(s) is (are): Veronica Martinez, 3021 Lone Bluff, San Jose, CA 95111. The registrant began transacting business under the fictitious business name(s) listed above on 2/02/2023. This filing is a refile [Change(s) in facts from previous filing] of previous file #: FBN692314. “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.)
/s/ Veronica Martinez
This statement was filed with the Co. ClerkRecorder of Santa Clara County on 3/06/2024.
Regina Alcomendras, County Clerk Recorder
By: /s/ Patty Camarena, Deputy File No. FBN 703861
March 15, 22, 29, April 5, 2024
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT NO. 703946
The following person(s) is (are) doing business as: LEARNING LADDER HOME DAYCARE, 21869 Oakview Ln, Cupertino, CA 95014, Santa Clara County. This business is owned by
an individual. The name and residence address of the registrant(s) is (are): Katherine Stephanie Panameno, 21869 Oakview Ln, Cupertino, CA 95014. The registrant began transacting business under the fictitious business name(s) listed above on 5/20/2019.
This filing is a first filing. “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.)
/s/ Katherine Stephanie Panameno
This statement was filed with the Co. ClerkRecorder of Santa Clara County on 3/11/2024.
Regina Alcomendras, County Clerk Recorder
By: /s/ Ronald Nguyen, Deputy File No. FBN 703946
March 15, 22, 29, April 5, 2024
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT NO. 703678
The following person(s) is (are) doing business as: PITKANEN DESIGN & BUILD, 301 Acalenes Drive #29, Sunnyvale, CA 94086, Santa Clara County. This business is owned by an individual. The name and residence address of the registrant(s) is (are):
Brian William Pitkanen, 301 Acalenes Drive, Sunnyvale, CA 94086.
The registrant began transacting business under the fictitious business name(s) listed above on N/A. This filing is a first filing. “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.)
/s/ Brian William Pitkanen
This statement was filed with the Co. ClerkRecorder of Santa Clara County on 2/29/2024.
Regina Alcomendras, County Clerk Recorder
By: /s/ Ronald Nguyen, Deputy File No. FBN 703678
March 15, 22, 29, April 5, 2024
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT NO. 703753
The following person(s) is (are) doing business as: CONSTELLATION BAKING COMPANY 1791 Flint Creek Way, San Jose, CA 95148, Santa Clara County. This business is owned by an individual. The name and residence address of the registrant(s) is (are): Enrique Sterling, 1791 Flint Creek Way, San Jose, CA 95148. The registrant began transacting business under the fictitious business name(s) listed above on 3/01/2024.
This filing is a first filing. “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
18
| www.el-observador.com MAR 29, 2024 - APR 04, 2024
EL OBSERVADOR
MAR 29, 2024 - APR 04, 2024
false is guilty of a crime.)
/s/ Enrique Sterling
This statement was filed with the Co. ClerkRecorder of Santa Clara County on 3/04/2024.
Regina Alcomendras, County Clerk Recorder
By: /s/ Corinne Vasquez, Deputy File No. FBN 703753
March 15, 22, 29, April
5, 2024
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS
NAME STATEMENT NO. 703903
The following person(s) is (are) doing business as: JADE FLOWERS, 552 Toyon Ave Apt5, San Jose, CA 95127, Santa Clara County This business is owned by an individual. The name and residence address of the registrant(s) is (are): Wendy N Vargas, 552 Toyon Ave Apt5, San Jose, CA 95127. The registrant began transacting business under the fictitious business name(s) listed above on 12/06/2022. This filing is a first filing. “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.)
/s/ Wendy N Vargas
This statement was filed with the Co. ClerkRecorder of Santa Clara County on 3/08/2024.
Regina Alcomendras, County Clerk Recorder
By: /s/ Corinne Vasquez, Deputy File No. FBN 703903
March 15, 22, 29, April
5, 2024
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS
NAME STATEMENT NO. 703868
The following person(s) is (are) doing business as: O and B Painting & Cleaning, 3353 San Onofre Ct, San Jose, CA 95127, Santa Clara County. This business is owned by an individual. The name and residence address of the registrant(s) is (are): Oscar Ayala, 3353 San Onofre Ct, San Jose, CA 95127. The registrant began transacting business under the fictitious business name(s) listed above on N/A. This filing is a first filing. “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.)
/s/ Oscar Ayala
This statement was filed with the Co. ClerkRecorder of Santa Clara County on 3/07/2024.
Regina Alcomendras, County Clerk Recorder
By: /s/ Corinne Vasquez, Deputy File No. FBN 703868
March 15, 22, 29, April 5, 2024
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS
NAME STATEMENT NO. 703789
The following person(s) is (are) doing business as: MGA TREE SERVICE,
659 Meadow Creek Dr, San Jose, CA 95136, Santa Clara County. This business is owned by an individual. The name and residence address of the registrant(s) is (are): Martha Gabriela Gonzalez Angulo, 659 Meadow Creek Dr, San Jose, CA 95136. The registrant began transacting business under the fictitious business name(s) listed above on 11/13/2018. This filing is a refile [Change(s) in facts from previous filing] of previous file #: FBN652227. “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.)
/s/ Martha G Gonzalez Angulo
This statement was filed with the Co. ClerkRecorder of Santa Clara County on 3/05/2024. Regina Alcomendras, County Clerk Recorder
By: /s/ Corinne Vasquez, Deputy File No. FBN 703789
March 15, 22, 29, April 5, 2024
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT NO. 703673
The following person(s) is (are) doing business as: Brilliant House Cleaning Mary, 871 San Aleso Ave Apt 4, Sunnyvale, CA 94085, Santa Clara County. This business is owned by an individual. The name and residence address of the registrant(s) is (are): Maria Magdalena Sanchez Hernandez, 871 San Aleso Ave Apt 4, Sunnyvale, CA 94085. The registrant began transacting business under the fictitious business name(s) listed above on N/A. This filing is a first filing. “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.)
/s/ Maria Magdalena
Sanchez Hernandez
This statement was filed with the Co. ClerkRecorder of Santa Clara County on 2/29/2024.
Regina Alcomendras, County Clerk Recorder
By: /s/ Corinne Vasquez, Deputy File No. FBN 703673
March 15, 22, 29, April 5, 2024
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT NO. 703837
The following person(s) is (are) doing business as: GALERIQUE 117 Rosewell Way, San Jose, CA 95138, Santa Clara County. This business is owned by an individual. The name and residence address of the registrant(s) is (are): JEANETH JULIETA
DUARTE RAMIREZ, 117 Rosewell Way, San Jose, CA 95138. The registrant began transacting busi-
ness under the fictitious business name(s) listed above on N/A. This filing is a first filing. “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.)
/s/ Jeaneth Julieta Duarte Ramirez
This statement was filed with the Co. ClerkRecorder of Santa Clara County on 3/06/2024. Regina Alcomendras, County Clerk Recorder
By: /s/ Corinne Vasquez, Deputy File No. FBN 703837
March 15, 22, 29, April 5, 2024
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS
NAME STATEMENT NO. 703847
The following person(s) is (are) doing business as: CIMA PLUMBING, 4300 The Woods Dr Apt D1021, San Jose, CA 95136, Santa Clara County. This business is owned by an individual. The name and residence address of the registrant(s) is (are):
YASIR A CERVANTES, 4300 The Woods Dr Apt D1021, San Jose, CA 95136. The registrant began transacting business under the fictitious business name(s) listed above on 3/06/2024. This filing is a first filing. “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.)
/s/ YASIR A CERVANTES
This statement was filed with the Co. ClerkRecorder of Santa Clara County on 3/06/2024.
Regina Alcomendras, County Clerk Recorder
By: /s/ Patty Camarena, Deputy File No. FBN 703847
March 15, 22, 29, April 5, 2024
ORDER TO SHOW
CAUSE FOR CHANGE OF NAME
NO. 24CV431784
Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara-In the matter of the application of: Manuela Lopez Torres
INTERESTED PERSONS:
1. Petitioner(s) Manuela Lopez Tores has filed a petition for Change of Name with the clerk of this court for a decree changing names as follows: a. MANUELA LOPEZ TORRES to MANUELA CODY b. CATALINA ROSE MENDOZA to CATALINA CODY 2. 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 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. NO-
TICE OF HEARING: Date:
5/14/2024 at 8:45 am, Probate Dept., located at 191 N. First Street, San Jose, CA 95113. 3. A copy of the Order to Show cause shall be published at least once a week for four successive weeks prior to the date set for hearing on the petition in El Observador, a newspaper of general circulation, printed in the county of Santa Clara.
Feb 26, 2024
Le Jacqueline Duong Judge of the Superior Court
March 15, 22, 29, April 5, 2024
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE FOR CHANGE OF NAME NO. 24CV431928
Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara-In the matter of the application of: Omid Ghasemalizadeh, Seyedeh Negar Hashemian INTERESTED
PERSONS: 1. Petitioner(s)
Seyedeh Negar Hashemian has filed a petition for Change of Name with the clerk of this court for a decree changing names as follows: a. Omid Ghasemalizadeh to Omid Alizadeh b. Seyedeh Negar Hashemian to Nora Hashemian 2. 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 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. NO-
TICE OF HEARING: Date: 4/23/2024 at 8:45 am, Probate Dept., located at 191 N. First Street, San Jose, CA 95113. 3. A copy of the Order to Show cause shall be published at least once a week for four successive weeks prior to the date set for hearing on the petition in El Observador, a newspaper of general circulation, printed in the county of Santa Clara. Feb 23, 2024
Le Jacqueline Duong Judge of the Superior Court
March 15, 22, 29, April 5, 2024
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE FOR CHANGE OF NAME NO. 24CV432412
Superior Court of Cali-
fornia, County of Santa Clara-In the matter of the application of: SOON OK KIM INTERESTED
PERSONS: 1. Petitioner(s)
LINDA SOON OK KIM has filed a petition for Change of Name with the clerk of this court for a decree changing names as follows: a. SOON OK KIM to LINDA SOON OK KIM 2. 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 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: 5/21/2024 at 8:45 am, Probate Dept., located at 191 N. First Street, San Jose, CA 95113. 3. A copy of the Order to Show cause shall be published at least once a week for four successive weeks prior to the date set for hearing on the petition in El Observador, a newspaper of general circulation, printed in the county of Santa Clara.
March 05, 2024
Le Jacqueline Duong Judge of the Superior Court
March 15, 22, 29, April 5, 2024
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE FOR CHANGE OF NAME
NO. 24CV432402
Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara-In the matter of the application of: Barvara Saenz INTERESTED PERSONS: 1. Petitioner(s) Barvara Saenz has filed a petition for Change of Name with the clerk of this court for a decree changing names as follows: a. Barvara Saenz to Barbara Saenz 2. 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 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: 5/24/2024 at 8:45 am, Probate Dept., located at 191 N. First Street, San Jose, CA 95113. 3. A copy
of the Order to Show cause shall be published at least once a week for four successive weeks prior to the date set for hearing on the petition in El Observador, a newspaper of general circulation, printed in the county of Santa Clara.
Mar 05, 2024
Le Jacqueline Duong Judge of the Superior Court
March 15, 22, 29, April 5, 2024
ORDER TO SHOW
CAUSE FOR CHANGE OF NAME
NO. 24CV432825
Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara-In the matter of the application of: MARIELENA BORRAYO INTERESTED PERSONS: 1. Petitioner(s) MARIELENA BORRAYO has filed a petition for Change of Name with the clerk of this court for a decree changing names as follows: a. JULIANNA ROSE RIVERA BORRAYO to JULIANNA ROSE BORRAYO RIVERA 2. 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 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: 5/28/2024 at 8:45 am, Probate Dept., located at 191 N. First Street, San Jose, CA 95113. 3. A copy of the Order to Show cause shall be published at least once a week for four successive weeks prior to the date set for hearing on the petition in El Observador, a newspaper of general circulation, printed in the county of Santa Clara. Mar 11, 2024
Le Jacqueline Duong Judge of the Superior Court
March 15, 22, 29, April 5, 2024
ORDER TO SHOW
CAUSE FOR CHANGE OF NAME
NO. 24CV432851
Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara-In the matter of the application of: Silvestr Vadimovich Balbuz & Evgeniia Sergeyevna Bykova INTERESTED PERSONS: 1. Petitioner(s) Silvestr Vadimovich Baibuz & Evgeniia Sergeyevna Bykova have filed a petition for Change of Name with the clerk of this court for a decree changing names as follows: a. Silvestr Vadimovich Baibuz to Sylves-
ter Baybuz b. Evgeniia
Sergeyevna Bykova to Jenny Baybuz 2. 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 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. NO-
TICE OF HEARING: Date: 5/28/2024 at 8:45 am, Probate Dept., located at 191 N. First Street, San Jose, CA 95113. 3. A copy of the Order to Show cause shall be published at least once a week for four successive weeks prior to the date set for hearing on the petition in El Observador, a newspaper of general circulation, printed in the county of Santa Clara. Mar 11, 2024
Le Jacqueline Duong Judge of the Superior Court
March 15, 22, 29, April 5, 2024
ORDER TO SHOW
CAUSE FOR CHANGE OF NAME NO. 24CV432897
Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara-In the matter of the application of: Andee Nguyen INTERESTED
PERSONS: 1. Petitioner(s)
Andee Nguyen has filed a petition for Change of Name with the clerk of this court for a decree changing names as follows: a. Andee Nguyen to Andee Ton 2. 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 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. NO-
TICE OF HEARING: Date: 5/28/2024 at 8:45 am, Probate Dept., located at 191 N. First Street, San Jose, CA 95113. 3. A copy of the Order to Show cause shall be published at least once a week for four successive weeks prior to the date set for hearing on the petition in El Observador, a newspaper of general circulation, printed in the county of Santa Clara.
Mar 12, 2024
Le Jacqueline Duong Judge of the Superior Court
March 15, 22, 29, April
5, 2024
Notice of Petition to Administer Estate of NEOMI MIZRACHI AKA NAOMI MIZRACHI
Case No. 24PR196711
1.To all heirs, beneficiaries, creditors, contingent creditors, and persons who may be interested in the will or estate, or both, of NEOMI MIZRACHI AKA NAOMI MIZRACHI. 2. A Petition for Probate has been filed by MOSHE (“MOE”) MIZRACHI in the Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara.
3.The Petition for Probate requests that MOSHE (“MOE”) MIZRACHI be appointed as personal representative to administer the estate of the decedent. 4. The petition requests the decedent’s will and codicils, if any, be admitted to probate. The will and any codicils are available for examination in the file kept by the court. 5. The petition requests authority to administer the estate under the Independent Administer of Estate Act. (This authority will allow the personal representative to take any 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 consent to the proposed action.) The independent administration authority will be granted unless an interested person Files and objection to the petition and shows good cause why the court should not grant the authority. 6. A hearing on the petition will be held in this court as follows: May 01, 2024, at 9:01am, Dept. 1, located at 191 North First Street, San Jose, CA 95113. 7 If you object to the granting of this 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. 8. If you are a creditor or 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
19 EL OBSERVADOR | www.el-observador.com
CLASSIFIEDS / LEGALS
to consult with an attorney knowledgeable in California law. 9. 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.
10. Attorney for Petitioner:
JEREMY A. BURNS
2625 Middlefield Road, No. 655, Palo Alto, CA 94306 (650)316-8281
Run Date: March 15, 22, 29, 2024
Notice of Petition to Administer Estate of JEAN ANN FEARINGTON
Case No. 24PR196698
1.To all heirs, beneficiaries, creditors, contingent creditors, and persons who may be interested in the will or estate, or both, of JEAN FEARINGTON. 2. A Petition for Probate has been filed by JAMES WILLIAM BURGESS in the Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara.
3.The Petition for Probate requests that JAMES WILLIAM BURGESS be appointed as personal representative to administer the estate of the decedent. 4. The petition requests the decedent’s will and codicils, if any, be admitted to probate. The will and any codicils are available for examination in the file kept by the court. 5. The petition requests authority to administer the estate under the Independent Administer of Estate Act. (This authority will allow the personal representative to take any 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 consent to the proposed action.) The independent administration authority will be granted unless an interested person Files and objection to the petition and shows good cause why the court should not grant the authority. 6. A hearing on the petition will be held in this court as follows:
April 22, 2024, at 9:01am, Dept. 2, located at 191 North First Street, San Jose, CA 95113. 7 If you object to the granting of this 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. 8.
If you are a creditor or 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. 9. 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.
10. Attorney for Petitioner: ROBERT P. BERGMAN 3535 Ross Avenue, Ste. 200, San Jose, CA 95124 (408)247-0444
Run Date: March 15, 22, 29, 2024
Notice of Petition to Administer Estate of GLENDA L. LEMAN
Case No. 24PR196683
1.To all heirs, beneficiaries, creditors, contingent creditors, and persons who may be interested in the will or estate, or both, of GLENDA L. LEMAN. 2. A Petition for Probate has been filed by MEGAN SALVATORI in the Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara. 3.The Petition for Probate requests that MEGAN SALVATORI be appointed as personal representative to administer the estate of the decedent. 5. The petition requests authority to administer the estate under the Independent Administer of Estate Act. (This authority will allow the personal representative to take any 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 consent to the proposed action.) The independent administration authority will be granted unless an interested person Files and objection to the petition and shows good cause why the court should not grant the authority. 6. A hearing on the petition will be held in this court as follows:
April 22, 2024, at 9:01am, Dept. 2, located at 191 North First Street, San Jose, CA 95113. 7 If you object to the granting of this 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. 8. If you are a creditor or 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. 9. 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.
10. Attorney for Petitioner: Thomas K. Murray 4920 Twain Ave., San Diego, CA 92120 (619)471-6775
Run Date: March 15, 22, 29, 2024
PETITION TO DECLARE MINOR FREE FROM PARENTAL
CUSTODY AND CONTROL
Family Code Section 7800
Probate Code Section 1516
Case No. 23AD025988
Superior Court of California County of Santa Clara
Petitioners allege:
1. Petitioner, LISA PITZER PARRAZ (“Lisa”), is the Paternal Aunt and legal guardian of AIDEN BELL (“Aiden”) (DOB: 7/29/2020). Petitioner, ALFONSO PARRAZ (“Alfonso”), is the spouse of Lisa Pitzer Parraz.
2. The mother of the minor is CASSANDRA SCHICK-ROPOZA.
3. The father of the minor is JOHN BELL.
4. Lisa and Alfonso seek to have sole parental rights and responsibility for the minor child upon termination of the minor child’s parents’ rights to custody and control.
5. Aiden is an unmarried minor child. The child resides with the Lisa and Alfonso in Santa Clara County, California.
6. Lisa and Alfonso have filed an Adoption Request for the minor child, Aiden.
7. The minor child has been left in the care and custody of Lisa and Al-
fonso for a period of over six months without any provision for his support and without communication with an intent to abandon the child.
8. The parents do not have legal custody of the child and the child has been in the physical custody of Lisa for a period of over two years.
WHEREFORE, Lisa and Alfonso pray for Judgment as follows:
9. That Aiden be free from the custody and control of his parents, CASSANDRA SCHICKROPOZA AND JOHN BELL;
10. For such other further relief as the Court may deem proper.
Dated: 6/14/23
/s/ Lisa Pitzer Parraz, Petitioner
/s/ Alfonso Parraz, Petitioner
/s/ Kathryn Schlepphorst Attorney for Petitioner
Run Dates: March 8, 15, 22 and 29, 2024
ADOPTION REQUEST ADOPT-200
Case No. 23AD025988
1. Adopting Parent (s)
a. LISA PITZER PARRAZ
b. ALFONSO PARRAZ
Relationship to child: Paternal Aunt/Guardian
Street Address: 570 Rucker Avenue, #1 Gilroy, CA 95020
Telephone: (408)5002738
Lawyer : Kathryn Schlepphorst, Esq. 1361 S. Winchester, Suite 208 San Jose, CA 95128 (408)993-1120
Email: krs@kidlaw.com
SBN: 161202
2. County of filing: This Adoption Request is filed in this court because: The adopting parent or parents live in this county; The child was born in or the child now lives in this county;
3. Type of adoption Independent: relative
4. Information about the child
a. The child’s new name will be: AIDEN BELL
PARRAZ
b. Sex: Male
c. Date of birth: 7/29/2020, Age: 2
g. Date child was placed in the physical care of the adopting parents: 12/5/2020
5. Child’s name before adoption: Child’s name before adoption: AIDEN BELL
6. Birth Parents
Name of birth parents, if known: Cassandra Schick-Ropoza & Aiden Bell
7. Legal guardian
Does the child have a legal guardian – YES
a. Date guardianship ordered: 5/11/2023
b. County: Santa Clara
c. Case Number: 2`PR189409
8. Inquiry and notice under the Indian Child Welfare Act
b. A completed version of Parental Notification of Indian Status (form ICWA-020) is attached OR a good faith attempt has been made to provide the form to the parents, Indian custodian, or guardian of the child and inform them that they are required to complete and submit the form to the court. Note: In agency adoptions, the adoption service provider, CDSS Regional Office, or delegated county adoption agency is responsible.
11. Independent adoption questions
b.All persons with parental rights agree to the adoption and have signed the Independent Adoptive Placement Agreement or consent on the California Department of Social Services form. - NO
If no, list the name and relationship of each person who has not signed the agreement form: CASSANDRA SCHICKROPOZA
c. I/We will file promptly with the department or delegated county adoption agency the information required by the department in the investigation of the proposed adoption.
14. Contact after adoption
Contact After Adoption Agreement (form ADOPT-310) will not be used
15. Consent for adoption
f. I/We will ask the court to end the parental rights of:
Name: CASSANDRA SCHICK-ROPOZA
Relationship to Child: Bio Mother
Name: JOHN BELL, Bio Father h. The child has been abandoned as follows:
(2) The child has been left in the custody of another person by both parents or the sole parent for six months without providing for the child’s support, or without communications from the parent or parents, with the intent to abandon the child.
16. Suitability for adoption
Each adopting parent:
a. Is at least 10 years older than the child or meets the criteria in the Family Code Section 8601(b);
b. Will treat the child as their own;
c. Will support and care for the child;
d. Has a suitable home for the child, and e. Agrees to adopt the child.
17. Requests to court I/We ask the court to approve the adoption and to declare that the adopting parents and the child have the legal relationship of parent and child, with all the rights and duties of this relationship, including the right of inheritance.
18. If a lawyer is representing you in this case, the lawyer must sign here:
Date: June 14, 2023
Lawyers Name: Kathryn Schlepphorst, Esq
/s/ Kathryn Schlepphorst
19. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the information in this form and all its attachments is true and correct to my knowledge. This means that if I lie on this form, I am guilty of a crime.
Date: June 14, 2023
/s/ Lisa Pitzer Parraz
Adopting Parent
/s/ Alfonso Parraz
Adopting Parent
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT NO. 703826
The following person(s) is (are) doing business as: LOS ALTO POOL SERVICE, LOS ALTO POOL CARE, AFFORDABLE POOL CARE, ACCURATE POOL CARE, 426 Mundell Way, Los Altos, CA 94022, Santa Clara County. This business is owned by an individual. The name and residence address of the registrant(s) is (are): Gregory Loren Flanagan, 426 Mundell Way, Los Alto, CA 94022. Registrant began transacting business under the fictitious business name(s) listed above on 6/1/2005. This filing is a first filing. “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.) /s/ Greg Flanigan This statement was filed with the Co. ClerkRecorder of Santa Clara County on 3/6/2024. Regina Alcomendras, County Clerk Recorder
By: /s/ Corinne Vasquez, Deputy File No. FBN 703826
March 8, 15, 22, 29, 2024
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT NO. 702515
The following person(s) is (are) doing business as: IRISES BEAUTY, 1101 S Winchester Blvd. Suite M-253, San Jose, CA 95128, Santa Clara County. This business is owned by an individual. The name and residence address of the registrant(s) is (are): Iris Maricela Milano, 3001 Walgrove Way Apt 4, San Jose, CA 95128. The registrant began transacting business under the fictitious business name(s) listed above on 3/15/2019. This filing is a refile [Change(s) in facts from previous filing] of previous file #: FBN650742. “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.)
/s/ Iris Milano This statement was filed with the Co. ClerkRecorder of Santa Clara County on 1/24/2024.
Regina Alcomendras, County Clerk Recorder
By: /s/ Eric Hoang, Deputy
File No. FBN 702515
March 8, 15, 22, 29, 2024
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT NO. 703724
The following person(s) is (are) doing business as: EDGAR’S JANITORIO SERVICES, 552 E Maude Ave Apt 2, Sunnyvale, CA 94085, Santa Clara County. This business is owned by an individual. The name and residence address of the registrant(s) is (are): Edgar Nevarez, 552 E Maude Ave, Sunnyvale, CA 95085. The registrant began transacting business under the fictitious business name(s) listed above on 3/01/2024.
This filing is a first filing. “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.)
/s/ Edgar Nevarez
This statement was filed with the Co. ClerkRecorder of Santa Clara County on 3/01/2024.
Regina Alcomendras, County Clerk Recorder By: /s/ Ronald Nguyen, Deputy File No. FBN 703724
March 8, 15, 22, 29, 2024
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT NO. 703790
The following person(s) is (are) doing business as: APEX ROOFING
7571 Church St, Gilroy, CA 95020, Santa Clara County. This business is owned by an individual. The name and residence address of the registrant(s) is (are): Damian Rodriguez, 7571 Church St, Gilroy, CA 95020. The registrant began transacting business under the fictitious business name(s) listed above on 11/02/2017. This filing is a refile [Change(s) in facts from previous filing] of previous file #: FBN648166. “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.)
/s/ Damian Rodriguez
This statement was filed with the Co. ClerkRecorder of Santa Clara County on 3/05/2024.
Regina Alcomendras, County Clerk Recorder
By: /s/ Corinne Vasquez, Deputy File No. FBN 703790
March 8, 15, 22, 29, 2024
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT NO. 703752
The following person(s) is (are) doing business as: CAMINOS DE MICHOACAN RESTAURANT INC 5138 Monterey Hwy, Ste A, San Jose, CA 95111, Santa Clara County. This business is owned by a corpora-
tion. The name and residence address of the registrant(s) is (are):
CAMINOS DE MICHOACAN RESTAURANT INC, 5138 Monterey Hwy, Ste A, San Jose, CA 95111. The registrant began transacting business under the fictitious business name(s) listed above on 11/02/2022. This filing is a first filing. “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.) /s/ Ana Maria Morales
Perez Caminos de Michoacan Restaurant Inc President
Article/Reg#: 5319658
Above entity was formed in the state of CA
This statement was filed with the Co. ClerkRecorder of Santa Clara County on 3/04/2024.
Regina Alcomendras, County Clerk Recorder By: /s/ Corinne Vasquez, Deputy File No. FBN 703752
March 8, 15, 22, 29, 2024
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT NO. 703780
The following person(s) is (are) doing business as:
AH GRANITE QUARTZ
TILE INC, 4063 San Bernardino Way, San Jose, CA 95111, Santa Clara County. This business is owned by a corporation. The name and residence address of the registrant(s) is (are):
AH GRANITE QUARTZ
TILE INC, 4063 San Bernardino Way, San Jose, CA 95111. The registrant began transacting business under the fictitious business name(s) listed above on N/A. This filing is a first filing. “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.)
/s/ ANGEL A MANCIA
HERNANDEZ
AH GRANITE QUARTZ
TILE INC
President
Article/Reg#: 5711947
Above entity was formed in the state of CA
This statement was filed with the Co. ClerkRecorder of Santa Clara County on 3/05/2024.
Regina Alcomendras, County Clerk Recorder By: /s/ Elaine Fader, Deputy File No. FBN 703780
March 8, 15, 22, 29, 2024
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT NO. 703746
The following person(s) is (are) doing business as:
C. ESTRADA TRANSPORT, LLC, 205 Rio Chico Drive, San Jose, CA 95111, Santa Clara County. This business is owned by a limited liability company. The name and residence address of the registrant(s) is (are):
20 EL OBSERVADOR | www.el-observador.com MAR 29, 2024 - APR 04, 2024 CLASSIFIEDS / LEGALS
C. ESTRADA TRANS-
PORT, LLC, 205 Rio Chico Drive, San Jose, CA 95111. The registrant began transacting business under the fictitious business name(s) listed above on 2/01/2024. This filing is a first filing. “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.)
/s/ Clemente Estrada
C. ESTRADA TRANSPORT, LLC Manager
Article/Reg#:
202360212062
Above entity was formed in the state of CA
This statement was filed with the Co. ClerkRecorder of Santa Clara County on 3/04/2024.
Regina Alcomendras, County Clerk Recorder
By: /s/ Elaine Fader, Deputy File No. FBN 703746
March 8, 15, 22, 29, 2024
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS
NAME STATEMENT NO. 702871
The following person(s) is (are) doing business as: New Land Landscaping, 2350 Senter Rd #494, San Jose, CA 95112, Santa Clara County. This business is owned by a married couple. The name and residence address of the registrant(s) is (are): Regino Flores Hernandez, 322 Checkers Dr #206, San Jose, CA 95133. Yesenia Garcia Ojeda, 322 Checkers Dr #206, San Jose, CA 95133. The registrant began transacting business under the fictitious business name(s) listed above on N/A. This filing is a refile [Change(s) in facts from previous filing] of previous file #: FBN701359. “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.)
/s/ Yesenia Garcia Ojeda
This statement was filed with the Co. ClerkRecorder of Santa Clara County on 2/05/2024.
Regina Alcomendras, County Clerk Recorder
By: /s/ Ronald Nguyen, Deputy
File No. FBN 702871
March 8, 15, 22, 29, 2024
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS
NAME STATEMENT
NO. 703637
The following person(s) is (are) doing business as: NAGLEE PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION 499
Patton Avenue, San Jose, CA 95128, Santa Clara County. This business is owned by a corporation. The name and residence address of the registrant(s) is (are): CAMPUS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION, INC, PO BOX 90038, San Jose, CA 95109. The registrant began transacting busi-
ness under the fictitious business name(s) listed above on 1/01/2019. This filing is a refile [Change(s) in facts from previous filing] of previous file #: FBN653193. “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.)
/s/ Rebecca Stamm CAMPUS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION, INC BOOKKEEPER
Article/Reg#: C1242672
Above entity was formed in the state of CA
This statement was filed with the Co. ClerkRecorder of Santa Clara County on 2/29/2024.
Regina Alcomendras, County Clerk Recorder
By: /s/ Corinne Vasquez, Deputy File No. FBN 703637
March 8, 15, 22, 29, 2024
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT NO. 703667
The following person(s) is (are) doing business as:
VALDIBIA GARDENING SERVICES 620 E Maude Ave #405, Sunnyvale, CA 94085, Santa Clara County. This business is owned by an individual. The name and residence address of the registrant(s) is (are): Manuel
Arturo Valdibia Najera, 620 E. Maude Ave #405, Sunnyvale, CA 94085.
The registrant began transacting business under the fictitious business name(s) listed above on N/A. This filing is a first filing. “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.)
/s/ Manuel Arturo
Valdibia Najera
This statement was filed with the Co. ClerkRecorder of Santa Clara County on 2/29/2024.
Regina Alcomendras, County Clerk Recorder
By: /s/ Corinne Vasquez, Deputy File No. FBN 703667
March 8, 15, 22, 29, 2024
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT NO. 702590
The following person(s) is (are) doing business as:
Susy’s face & Body Design, 2425 S BASCOM AVE SUITE B, Campbell, CA 95008, Santa Clara County. This business is owned by an individual. The name and residence address of the registrant(s) is (are): MARIA AZUCENA PENA AMADOR, 22262 S Garden Ave, Hayward, CA 94541. The registrant began transacting business under the fictitious business name(s) listed above on 2/27/2024. This filing is a first filing. “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.)
/s/ Maria Azucena Pena
This statement was filed with the Co. ClerkRecorder of Santa Clara County on 2/28/2024.
Regina Alcomendras, County Clerk Recorder
By: /s/ Patty Camarena, Deputy File No. FBN 703590
March 8, 15, 22, 29, 2024
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS
NAME STATEMENT NO. 703706
The following person(s) is (are) doing business as: Streamlined Health Insurance 1821 S Bascom Ave #363, Campbell, CA 95008, Santa Clara County. This business is owned by an individual. The name and residence address of the registrant(s) is (are): David E Juarez, 208 S 1st St, Campbell, CA 95008. The registrant began transacting business under the fictitious business name(s) listed above on 3/15/2024. This filing is a first filing. “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.)
/s/ David E Juarez
This statement was filed with the Co. ClerkRecorder of Santa Clara County on 3/01/2024.
Regina Alcomendras, County Clerk Recorder
By: /s/ Ronald Nguyen, Deputy File No. FBN 703706
March 8, 15, 22, 29, 2024
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS
NAME STATEMENT NO. 703602
The following person(s) is (are) doing business as: A-J Bros Dumpsters 586 N. First St, Suite 215, San Jose, CA 95112, Santa Clara County. This business is owned by a limited liability company. The name and residence address of the registrant(s) is (are): Hernandez Bros. Debris Demoral LLC, 4400 The Woods Dr Apt 1823, San Jose, CA 95126. The registrant began transacting business under the fictitious business name(s) listed above on 11/01/2022. This filing is a refile [Change(s) in facts from previous filing] of previous file #: FBN696650. “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.)
/s/ Andrea Hernandez Hernandez Bros. Debris Demoral LLC
Owner Article/Reg#: 202252811969
Above entity was formed in the state of CA This statement was filed with the Co. ClerkRecorder of Santa Clara
County on 2/28/2024.
Regina Alcomendras, County Clerk Recorder
By: /s/ Patty Camarena, Deputy File No. FBN 703602
March 8, 15, 22, 29, 2024
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT NO. 703631
The following person(s) is (are) doing business as: HAPPY BOWL ACAI, 7500 Monterey St, Gilroy, CA 95020, Santa Clara County. This business is owned by an individual. The name and residence address of the registrant(s) is (are): LUNNA RAMOS MENDEZ, 7412 Monterey Street, Apt 201, Gilroy, CA 95020. The registrant began transacting business under the fictitious business name(s) listed above on N/A. This filing is a first filing. “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.)
/s/ Lunna Ramos Mendez
This statement was filed with the Co. ClerkRecorder of Santa Clara County on 2/28/2024.
Regina Alcomendras, County Clerk Recorder
By: /s/ Corinne Vasquez, Deputy File No. FBN 703631
March 8, 15, 22, 29, 2024
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS
NAME STATEMENT NO. 703442
The following person(s) is (are) doing business as: Cintya House Cleaning, 1937 Edgecrest Dr, San Jose, CA 95127, Santa Clara County. This business is owned by an individual. The name and residence address of the registrant(s) is (are): Cintya Johanna Perez Aguirre, 1937 Edgecrest Dr, San Jose, CA 95127. The registrant began transacting business under the fictitious business name(s) listed above on 2/22/2024. This filing is a first filing. “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.)
/s/ Cintya Johanna Perez Aguirre
This statement was filed with the Co. ClerkRecorder of Santa Clara County on 2/22/2024.
Regina Alcomendras, County Clerk Recorder
By: /s/ Corinne Vasquez, Deputy
File No. FBN 703442
March 8, 15, 22, 29, 2024
FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME STATEMENT NO. 703579
The following person(s) is (are) doing business as: FLORECE FLOWERS and MORE, 3335 Homestead Rd 54, Santa
Clara, CA 95051, Santa Clara County. This business is owned by an individual. The name and residence address of the registrant(s) is (are):
Sergio Hernandez, 3335 Homestead Rd 54, Santa Clara, CA 95051. The registrant began transacting business under the fictitious business name(s) listed above on 2/27/2024. This filing is a first filing. “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.)
/s/ Sergio Hernandez
This statement was filed with the Co. ClerkRecorder of Santa Clara County on 2/27/2024.
Regina Alcomendras, County Clerk Recorder
By: /s/ Ronald Nguyen, Deputy File No. FBN 703579
March 8, 15, 22, 29, 2024
STATEMENT OF ABANDONMENT OF USE OF FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME NO. 703672
The following person(s) has / have abandoned the use of the fictitious business name(s): AztecGraphic Designs, 571 Tully Rd, San Jose CA, 95111. Filed in Santa Clara County on 04/13/2022 under file no. FBN684128.
Veronica Sanchez, 571 Tully Rd, San Jose, CA 95111. Jaime Sanchez, 571 Tully Rd, San Jose, CA 95111. This business was 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.)
/s/ Jaime Sanchez
This statement was filed with the Co. Clerk Recorder of Santa Clara County on 2/29/2024.
Regina Alcomendras, County Clerk Recorder
By: /s/ Corinne Vasquez, Deputy File No. FBN703672
February 2, 9, 16, 23, 2024
ORDER TO SHOW
CAUSE FOR CHANGE OF NAME NO. 24CV431496
Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara-In the matter of the application of: Jeroen Antonius Egidius Habraken, Tracie Parkes Carroll INTERESTED
PERSONS: 1. Petitioner(s)
Jeroen Antonius Egidius Habraken, Tracie Parkes Carroll have filed a petition for Change of Name with the clerk of this court for a decree changing names as follows: a. Jeroen Antonius Egidius Habraken to Jeroen Antonius Egidius HabrakenParkes b. Tracie Parkes Carroll to Tracie Carroll Habraken-Parkes 2. 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 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:
5/07/2024 at 8:45 am, Probate Dept., located at 191 N. First Street, San Jose, CA 95113. 3. A copy of the Order to Show cause shall be published at least once a week for four successive weeks prior to the date set for hearing on the petition in El Observador, a newspaper of general circulation, printed in the county of Santa Clara. Feb 22, 2024
Le Jacqueline Duong Judge of the Superior Court
March 8, 15, 22 and 29, 2024
ORDER TO SHOW
CAUSE FOR CHANGE OF NAME NO. 24CV431502
Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara-In the matter of the application of: Deanna Jezel GarciaLopez and Jose Juan Cabeza Hernandez
INTERESTED PERSONS:
1. Petitioner(s) Deanna Jezel Garcia-Lopez and Jose Juan Cabeza Hernandez have filed a petition for Change of Name with the clerk of this court for a decree changing names as follows: a. Julian Fernando Garcia-Cabeza to Julian Fernando CabezaGarcia 2. 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 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. NO-
TICE OF HEARING: Date: 5/07/2024 at 8:45 am, Probate Dept., located at 191 N. First Street, San Jose, CA 95113. 3. A copy of the Order to Show cause shall be published at least once a week for four successive weeks prior to the date set for hearing on the petition in El Observador, a newspaper of general
circulation, printed in the county of Santa Clara. Feb 23, 2024
Le Jacqueline Duong Judge of the Superior Court
March 8, 15, 22 and 29, 2024
ORDER TO SHOW
CAUSE FOR CHANGE OF NAME
NO. 24CV421728
Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara-In the matter of the application of: AHMAD
SHEKAIB INTERESTED
PERSONS: 1. Petitioner(s)
AHMAD SHEKAIB has filed a petition for Change of Name with the clerk of this court for a decree changing names as follows: a. AHMAD SHEKAIB to ARSALAN
NIZAMI 2. 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 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. NO-
TICE OF HEARING: Date: 12/12/2023 at 8:45 am, Probate Dept., located at 191 N. First Street, San Jose, CA 95113. 3. A copy of the Order to Show cause shall be published at least once a week for four successive weeks prior to the date set for hearing on the petition in El Observador, a newspaper of general circulation, printed in the county of Santa Clara. Aug 31, 2023
Le Jacqueline Duong Judge of the Superior Court
March 8, 15, 22 and 29, 2024
ORDER TO SHOW
CAUSE FOR CHANGE OF NAME NO. 24CV431922
Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara-In the matter of the application of: Jinghu Luo INTERESTED PERSONS: 1. Petitioner(s) Jinghu Luo & Linlin Yang have filed a petition for Change of Name with the clerk of this court for a decree changing names as follows: a. Shaoqing Luo to Allen Luo 2. 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 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. NO-
TICE OF HEARING: Date:
5/14/2024 at 8:45 am, Probate Dept., located at 191 N. First Street, San Jose, CA 95113. 3. A copy of the Order to Show cause shall be published at least once a week for four successive weeks prior to the date set for hearing on the petition in El Observador, a newspaper of general circulation, printed in the county of Santa Clara. Feb 27, 2024
Le Jacqueline Duong Judge of the Superior Court
March 8, 15, 22 and 29, 2024
ORDER TO SHOW
CAUSE FOR CHANGE OF NAME NO. 23CV428055
Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara-In the matter of the application of: Joanna V. Perez and Adolfo Manzo. INTERESTED
PERSONS: 1. Petitioner(s)
Joanna V. Perez and Adolfo Manzo have filed a petition for Change of Name with the clerk of this court for a decree changing names as follows: a. Lezlie Perez Manzo to Lezlie Manzo, b. Aiden Perez Manzp to Aiden Manzo. 2. 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 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. NO-
TICE OF HEARING: Date: 4/16/2024 at 8:45 am, Probate Dept., located at 191 N. First Street, San Jose, CA 95113. 3. A copy of the Order to Show cause shall be published at least once a week for four successive weeks prior to the date set for hearing on the petition in El Observador, a newspaper of general circulation, printed in the county of Santa Clara.
March 6, 2024
Le Jacqueline Duong Judge of the Superior Court
March 8, 15, 22 and 29, 2024
21 EL OBSERVADOR | www.el-observador.com MAR 29, 2024
04, 2024 CLASSIFIEDS / LEGALS
- APR
ElMario Jiménez Castillo
El Observador
mundo de los sueños suele presentar muchas interrogantes, y al mismo tiempo diversas interpretaciones, según el yoga nuestro ser está dividido en diferentes cuerpos, y ello explica en gran medida un significado más profundo de las experiencias oníricas individuales.
El Maestro yoghi Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh en su discurso sobre la psicología de los sueños contenido en su obra: The Psychology of the Esoteric, dice: “Tene¬mos siete cuerpos: 1) el físico, 2) el etéreo, 3) el astral, 4) el mental, 5) el es¬piritual, 6) el cósmico, y 7) el nirvánico. Cada cuerpo tiene su propia clase de sueño.
El cuerpo físico es conocido en la psicología occidental como el cons¬ciente, el cuerpo etéreo como el inconsciente, y el cuerpo astral como el in¬consciente colectivo”.
De modo que, según Rajneesh, la calidad del sueño cambia con relación al nivel de profundidad en que dormimos. Cuando el individuo está ligeramen¬te dormido, el cuerpo físico crea sus propios sueños. Estos sueños reflejan los estados de alteración física como indigestión o excitación sexual, por ejemplo, o estímulos
Freda Ross Public News Service
