56-1 ccfc stuart decl iso oppo to sup ct rule 11 w exhibits final
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/13/2019 56-1 Ccfc Stuart Decl Iso Oppo to Sup Ct Rule 11 w Exhibits Final
1/24
-1-STUART DEC. ISO OPPO TO MTN SANCTS
3:13cv1944 CAB (BLM)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Colbern C. Stuart IIIEmail: [email protected] Pacific Highway Ste. 102San Diego, CA 92110Telephone: 858-504-0171Facsimile: 619-231-9143In Pro Se
Dean Browning Webb (pro hac vice pending)Email: [email protected] Offices of Dean Browning Webb515 E 39th St.Vancouver, WA 98663-2240Telephone: 503-629-2176
Attorney for Plaintiffs California Coalition for Families and Children, PBC, andLexevia, PC
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CALIFORNIA COALITION FORFAMILIES AND CHILDREN, et al.
Plaintiffs,
v.
SAN DIEGO COUNTY BARASSOCIATION, et al,
Defendants.
Case No. 13cv1944-CAB-BLMJudge Cathy Ann Bencivengo
DECLARATION OF COLBERN C.STUART IN SUPPORT OFOPPOSITION TO THE SUPERIORCOURTS MOTION FOR SANCTIONS;
F.R.C.P. RULE 11(b)Date: December 19, 2013Time: 3:30 p.m.Courtroom:4C
ORAL ARGUMENT REQUESTEDSUBJECT TO COURT APPROVAL
Com laint Filed: Au ust 20, 2013
I, Colbern Stuart, declare and state:
I am a Plaintiff in this action, President and founder of Plaintiff California
Coalition for Families and Children, PBC, and Lexevia, PC. I have personal
-
8/13/2019 56-1 Ccfc Stuart Decl Iso Oppo to Sup Ct Rule 11 w Exhibits Final
2/24
-2-STUART DEC. ISO OPPO TO MTN SANCTS
3:13cv1944 CAB (BLM)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
knowledge of the facts stated herein and if called to testify would competently testify
as follows:
1. As President and co-founder of Plainitff California Coalition for Families andChildren, PBC, CEO of Lexevia, PC, and as a practicing lawyer since 1995, I have
obtained experience and conducted extensive investigation and research relating to
each of the factual and legal allegations of the Complaint over a period of many
years. I have contributed to the drafting of the Complaint based on that personal and
professional knowledge and experience. See Compl. 102-106 for details.
2. I am not a divorce lawyer. As a lawyer licensed and practicing in Californiastate courts for over a decade I am familiar with California state practice and
procedure generally applicable in all California Superior Courts.
3. I have experienced the State of California Family Court practices through myown dissolution litigation and in assisting dozens of similarly-situated parents
enduring modern family court malfeasance, fraud, and abuse.
4. I founded Plaintiff California Coalition for Families and Children to addressthose common concerns and provide a vehicle for domestic dispute industry reform,
education, and engagement toward those ends. My experience in civil rights
scholarship, activism, commercial and pro bono representation in state and federal
courts nationwide permits him an uncommon perspective to family court practices.
Complaint paragraphs 71-75, 77-99, 100-101, 110, 113-123.
5. I have not brought the claims of the Complaint to harass defendants or for anyimproper purpose. My purpose is to remedy injury caused during the course of my
and my co-Plaintiffs reform efforts, and to cure the systemic affliction which
Defendants have proven incapable or unwilling to cure for themselves.
6. I, my co-Plaintiffs, and the parent community we support have undertakenextensive efforts prefacing the filing of this lawsuit to effect reform by other means
but such efforts have been resisted by Defendants, and even met with violence.
Exhibit A is a true and correct copy of a press release issued shortly after this
-
8/13/2019 56-1 Ccfc Stuart Decl Iso Oppo to Sup Ct Rule 11 w Exhibits Final
3/24
-3-STUART DEC. ISO OPPO TO MTN SANCTS
3:13cv1944 CAB (BLM)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
litigation was filed describing the frustrated efforts many parents and divorce industry
litigants experience while engaging in family court litigation. The injuries leading to
this lawsuit occurred to me and my co-Plaintiffs while we were engaging Defendants
in precisely those reform efforts.
7. My co-Plaintiffs and I have not chosen litigation as a firstbut perhaps as alastresort, having exhausted every state-level remedy we are capable of. We have
consistently been met with the explanation that thats just how it is in Family
Court. As any educated citizen or lawyer could conclude, You know how it is is
oftentimes corrupt, unethical, or illegal. So it is here.
8. The inclusion of the home addresses of certain Defendants in the Complaintwas not intended to harass, but to satisfy requirements of pleading venue where a
defendant "resides" or "may be found under 28 U.S.C. 1391(b). In preparation for
filing this lawsuit, I have performed ordinary due diligence in obtaining information
regarding the residence and business whereabouts of each defendant, including
Defendants Schall, Trentacosta, Wohlfeil and others, as they were readily available
from phone books, online records, online skip-trace searches, or other public
resources. Obtaining such information is part of every pre-litigation investigation I
have ever undertaken, numbering in the hundreds. I am unaware that any of the
information I disclosed is private or otherwise confidential.
9. The Superior Courts motion alleges, without reference to any evidence, that Irefused to take any steps to correct their violationreferring to my response to Ms.
Nesthus demands that I remove the original Complaint from the Internet and the
Court files including PACER. This Courts own files, including my Declaration in
support of Plaintiffs Ex Parte Motion for a Temporary Harassment Protective Order,
directly refute this baseless allegation. Redacted Complaint, Dkt#8; Plaintiffs Ex
Parte Motion for Temporary Harassment Restraining Order, Dkt#4.
10. After Ms. Nesthus August 25, 2013 letter to me, I immediately undertookextensive efforts to work with her to redact the Complaint, remove unredacted
-
8/13/2019 56-1 Ccfc Stuart Decl Iso Oppo to Sup Ct Rule 11 w Exhibits Final
4/24
-4-STUART DEC. ISO OPPO TO MTN SANCTS
3:13cv1944 CAB (BLM)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
versions of the Complaint from CCFC-controlled computer servers, alert others who
had posted the unreacted Complaint from their servers, and re-file a redacted copy of
the Complaint with the Court. As I obviously have no control over the Courts
PACER system or Court files, I could not cause the removal from PACER Ms.
Nesthus demanded. The Superior Courts claims that I was anything other than
reasonable are false, outrageous, ungrateful, and insultingbut unfortunately
consistent with a pattern of HARASSMENT AND ABUSE Ms. Nethus employers
have demonstrated habitually toward the litigants they serve.
11.The number of times the Complaint had been viewed on the Internet, that theComplaint also included home addresses of other Defendants which have not
objected and are not represented by The Superior Court or its counsel, and this
Courts courteous, yet not required, sealing of the original and redacted Complaints
to which no plaintiff objectsare not consistent with an intent to harassthey are
the ordinary and expected behavior of civil rights plaintiffs publicizing their efforts to
a nationwide community of similarly-situated domestic dispute industry professionals
and victim-litigants closely watching this case as an augur of the future of reform.
12.Further, even after I undertook efforts to accommodate The Superior Courtsbellicose demands, I was confronted with a half dozen alerts from CCFC members,
partners, and affiliates who were contacted by San Diego Sheriff Department
Deputies and Detectives who issued take-down demands to remove the Complaint-
-coerced threats without warrant or probable cause. These legally-indefensible
threats of state police power have caused significant disruption in our parent network,
and themselves constitute further illegal deprivation of Plaintiffs rights of free
speech, due process, and access to courts. I intend to raise these issues by appropriate
means through this or related channels.
13. One purpose in bringing this action is to enjoin the rampant disobedience tothe rule of law which present defendants and their collaborators have violently and
collusivelyrefused to observe for themselves. This action is directed in part to
-
8/13/2019 56-1 Ccfc Stuart Decl Iso Oppo to Sup Ct Rule 11 w Exhibits Final
5/24
-5-STUART DEC. ISO OPPO TO MTN SANCTS
3:13cv1944 CAB (BLM)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
conforming insubordinated criminalpractices of courts, judges, lawyers, social
workers, and mental health professionals with existing and longstanding principles of
state and federal commercial, health and welfare, and constitutional law.
14. I respectfully submit that any sanction award against Plaintiffs in this casewould be unjust. Plaintiffs are a public benefit corporation and their members and
advocates which, in the course of attempts to facilitate the reform of voracious
criminal enterprises, have fallen victims to the illegal tactics of those very enterprises.
15. It would be difficult to exaggerate the devastating impact to date ofDefendants illegal activities on the resources available to Plaintiffs to continue their
reform efforts, including this litigation. CCFC is not a commercial operationit has
no revenue other than donations and the generous goodwill of many dedicated
volunteers. It is a community of victims of these very defendants heinous acts of
fraud and abuse, who have formed to recover their losses, but more importantly to
prevent that same harm from befalling others unaware of the maze of horrors that
awaits them once they step behind Defendants doors.
16.The Complaint details our efforts in seeking attention and assistance to remedyand reform an industry few fail to recognize as a dystopia, yet almost none have the
knowledge, concern, or courage required to attend. To my and my co-Plaintiffs
dozens of overtures, government agencies, politicians, and the commercial and pro
bono legal community have universally respond yes, its a mess, but we dont know
how to fix it.
17. As the intended benefactors of that dystopiaparents and childrenwhoveinstead of benefiting from that system have fallen victim to it, I and my co-Plaintiffs
have valuable input of what is wrong and how to fix it. Yet our wealth of
experience, knowledge, and suggestions is not equaled by a wealth of material
resources to implement them. Like most family court litigants, I and my fellow
CCFC members left family courts with little more than harrowing nightmares and a
very bitter taste in our mouths which, though highly motivating, are accompanied by
-
8/13/2019 56-1 Ccfc Stuart Decl Iso Oppo to Sup Ct Rule 11 w Exhibits Final
6/24
-6-STUART DEC. ISO OPPO TO MTN SANCTS
3:13cv1944 CAB (BLM)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
a debilitating fear of further legal reprisal or financial victimization by the very
defendants present here.
18. Defendants have effectively monopolized or blockaded all venues foreffecting reform through state-level machinerycourts, judges, lawyers, bureaucrats,
and psychologists collaborate to police a poisonous toll-based maze they themselves
built which outrageously extracts wealth from unsuspecting families by artifice, trick,
and deceit.
19.That wealth and power, initially earned by the honest hands and brows ofparents working to provide for their children, has by trick and device been converted
into the hands of some of San Diegos strongest law firms, hired to defend the
schemes that pay their billsand today returns to a new scene to pick those pockets
yet again, by means of new rules in a new courthouse.
20.Anyaward of sanctions against Plaintiffs in this case would be devastating,and only further the perpetration of what will be proven to be a shameful and
fraudulent abuse of knowledge of public processes and institutions, public police
power, and tainted wealth by those operating under a public license, oath, and duty to
protect those in their care. Sanctions would deplete our meager resources, and most
disturbingly be a blow to the courage, dignity, and public spirit of parents and
children nationwide, who have barely the means to defend themselves.
DATED: December 5, 2013 By: /s/
Co ern C. Stuart, III, Pres ent,California Coalition for Families andChildren PBC
in Pro Se
Colbern C. Stuart, III
-
8/13/2019 56-1 Ccfc Stuart Decl Iso Oppo to Sup Ct Rule 11 w Exhibits Final
7/24
-1-STUART DEC. ISO OPPO TO MTN SANCTS
3:13cv1944 CAB (BLM)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
The undersigned hereby certifies that all counsel of record who are deemed to have
consented to electronic service are being served with a copy of this document via the
court's CM-ECF system per Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5(b )(2)(E). Any other
counsel of record will be served by facsimile transmission and/or first class mail this
5th day of December, 2013.
By: /s/
Colbern C. Stuart, III, President,California Coalition for Families and
Children, PBC
in Pro Se
Colbern C. Stuart, III
-
8/13/2019 56-1 Ccfc Stuart Decl Iso Oppo to Sup Ct Rule 11 w Exhibits Final
8/24
California Coalition for Families and Children, et al v. San
Diego County Bar Association,USDC SDCA Case No.
Case No. 13cv1944-CAB-BLM
Declaration of Colbern C. Stuart in Support of Opposition to Motion for
Sanctions
Exhibit A
-
8/13/2019 56-1 Ccfc Stuart Decl Iso Oppo to Sup Ct Rule 11 w Exhibits Final
9/24
-
8/13/2019 56-1 Ccfc Stuart Decl Iso Oppo to Sup Ct Rule 11 w Exhibits Final
10/24
-
8/13/2019 56-1 Ccfc Stuart Decl Iso Oppo to Sup Ct Rule 11 w Exhibits Final
11/24
-
8/13/2019 56-1 Ccfc Stuart Decl Iso Oppo to Sup Ct Rule 11 w Exhibits Final
12/24
-
8/13/2019 56-1 Ccfc Stuart Decl Iso Oppo to Sup Ct Rule 11 w Exhibits Final
13/24
-
8/13/2019 56-1 Ccfc Stuart Decl Iso Oppo to Sup Ct Rule 11 w Exhibits Final
14/24
-
8/13/2019 56-1 Ccfc Stuart Decl Iso Oppo to Sup Ct Rule 11 w Exhibits Final
15/24
-
8/13/2019 56-1 Ccfc Stuart Decl Iso Oppo to Sup Ct Rule 11 w Exhibits Final
16/24
-
8/13/2019 56-1 Ccfc Stuart Decl Iso Oppo to Sup Ct Rule 11 w Exhibits Final
17/24
-
8/13/2019 56-1 Ccfc Stuart Decl Iso Oppo to Sup Ct Rule 11 w Exhibits Final
18/24
-
8/13/2019 56-1 Ccfc Stuart Decl Iso Oppo to Sup Ct Rule 11 w Exhibits Final
19/24
-
8/13/2019 56-1 Ccfc Stuart Decl Iso Oppo to Sup Ct Rule 11 w Exhibits Final
20/24
California Parents File Federal Racketeering Lawsuit against FamilyCourt Judges; Charge Criminal Extortion, Bribery, Abuse of Office
August 20, 2013 -- San Diego, CA In its continuing campaign to end the harassment, fraud, and
abuse rampant in California State Family Courts, a parents rights group, the California Coalition for
Families and Children, has filed a lawsuit today in federal court charging the San Diego County courts,
social workers, divorce attorneys, and psychologists with federal criminal racketeering.
The abuses of parents and children by Family Courts, social workers, and family law attorneys have
harmed parents and children for far too long. We intend to end that abuse.says CCFC President
Colbern Stuart. Family court is designed by its makers to be probably the most dangerous life event
parents and children can endure. It enables and profits from every inhumane instinct known to man
greed, hate, resentment, fearresulting in abundant cash flow for the divorce industry and a fallout of
parent and childrens misery.
And behind the curtain of this machine of misery weve uncovered its causethe multi-billion dollar
divorce industry, populated by judges, attorneys, and a machinery of tax-dollar fed judicial
administrators,social workers that George Orwell would marvel at.
Wevebeen delivering that message kindly for years now, yet the tide keeps rising on families in
crisis. Weve appealed to the county courts, state and local politicians, statejudicial oversight bodies,
United States Representatives, and just plain old human dignity, but the harassment and abuse of
parents and children has only increased. A resort to federal court intervention in the widespread
criminal collusion in state government was the next logical step.
Its time to recognize Family Court for what it isa corporate crime ring raiding parents and children
of financial and psychological well-being, and devouring our childrens futures. And its not just divorce
lawyersits judges,judicial administrators,psychologists, cops and prosecutorspeople we should
be able to trustin a modern day criminal cabal using county courtrooms and sheriffs deputies as the
machinery of organized crime. Say Stuart. Since state officialshands are too deep into the cookiejar to stop their own abuse, were seeking the assistance of federal oversight.
CCFC has been active in past years uncovering fraud and abuse of families and children in state
courts, including the consumer fraud case of Dr. Stephen Doyne, the most notable child custody
evaluator in San Diego. They not only let Doyne run wild for years, they actively protected his abuse
of parents and children. In my mind, the industry is a godless abomination says Stuart. One of our
parents who challenged Doyne and lost was orderedby the same court that employs Doyneto pay
Doynes attorneys feesover $380,000for calling out his undisputed fraud. Its outrageous, and its
going to stop.
CCFCs Complaint details both civil and criminal charges. Weve alleged over 34 specific federal
crimes in the complaint, and were turning our evidence over to the F.B.I. and U.S. Attorney forfurther investigation. Says Stuart.
The Complaint is available online through CCFCs Facebook page atwww.facebook.com/ccfconline.
Quotes:
The present-day suffering of so many parents and children has and is being wrought within a larger
system characterized by a widespread institutional failure ofindeed contempt forthe rule of law.
http://www.facebook.com/ccfconlinehttp://www.facebook.com/ccfconlinehttp://www.facebook.com/ccfconlinehttp://www.facebook.com/ccfconline -
8/13/2019 56-1 Ccfc Stuart Decl Iso Oppo to Sup Ct Rule 11 w Exhibits Final
21/24
California legal institutions such as family courts and the legal community, professional institutions
such as the state bar and psychology boards, and criminal justice institutions have in the recent
decade gradually combined to cultivate a joint enterprise forum in which widespread family practice
exceptions to the rule of law are not only tolerated, but increasingly encouraged. Professional
behavior that would only a few years ago be recognized as unethical, illegal, or otherwise intolerable
by American legal, psychological, law enforcement, or social work professionals has increasinglyachieved acceptanceindeed applausefrom institutional interests which benefit from a joint
enterprise enforcing the unwritten law of who you know is more important than what you know.
In this lawless behaviors most crass infestation, California Superior Court Family Division judges are
regularly heard to announce, in open court, I amthe law and proceed to act accordingly with
impunity, indifference, andwithout shame.
The effect on parents and children seeking social support within this coalescing family law forum
has not been as advertised by courts and professionalsa new healingbut instead a new affliction:
animposed disabilityof de rigueur deprivation of fundamental rights in the name oftherapeutic
jurisprudencefunded by converting college funds into a bloated ministry of the bar leaving families
and their children with mere crumbs of their own success.
The case centers on the April 15, 2010 assault of CCFCs President, Cole Stuart, at the San Diego
County Bar Association meeting of family court judges and attorneys. Stuart was attending the
meeting of family court judges and attorneys on behalf of CCFC. SDCBA recognized Stuart as the
President of the Parents Rights group and ordered fifteen armed bar association security to tackle
him, handcuff him, and throw him out.
According to Stuart, around ten CCFC parents and children attended the seminar to advance their
reform efforts and send a message of doctor, heal thyself. The San Diego County Bar Association
meeting of judges and attorneys chose a theme critical of their own clients: calling them Litigants
Behaving Badly. CCFC chose a counter-theme: CCFC parents and children carried signs statingJUDGES BEHAVING BADLY; if YOU dont follow the law, why would WE?
Judge Judy may be entertaining daytime televisionfor some, but that indignity has no place in our
justice systemeven in what they consider to below-brow family court. Yet many family court
judges regularly administer such obnoxiousrenegadejustice every day, in open defiance of the rule
of law. Sober as a judge these days has a whole new meaning. Says StuartIve been a
successful lawyer for 18 years and seen both excellence and failure, but Ive never been ashamed of
my profession until the days I walked out of family court. I decided then that this lawless rolling
train wreck of shame to my profession and harm to my community must stop. And for that
inspiration, they sent me to jail.
CCFC and Stuart are suing SDCBA and the dozen judges and lawyers who organized the seminar.
They were well aware of our intent to be present at the Seminar--and had fifteen Sheriffs Deputies
and a paddy wagon waiting to welcome us when we arrived. We had been in court to seek sanctions
against them in the morning, then they assault me that very evening.
According to the CCFC Complaint: Family Courts, including judges, blame Litigants Behaving Badly
for harms enabledindeed largely manufacturedby the Domestic Dispute Industrys own
longstanding predatory commercial practices. CCFC saw the Litigants Behaving Badly theme as part
of the self-delusional propaganda engaged in by so many [divorce industry] members who, rather
-
8/13/2019 56-1 Ccfc Stuart Decl Iso Oppo to Sup Ct Rule 11 w Exhibits Final
22/24
than recognizing the harm their industry enables and healing themselves, instead blame their own
clients, who, quite true, do regularly abuse process, their loved ones, and even themselvesin perfect
compliance with [divorce industry] instructions.
The lawsuit alleges that divorce lawyers illegally conspire with judges to steal from parents as part of
a racketeering criminal enterpriseand brings over 30 claims of federally-indictable crime. Civil
rights violations, fraud, and obstruction of justice are federal crimeseven for judges.
The lawsuit seeks to hold judges and courts personally responsible for overseeing the crime
committed by the attorneys and social workers in their courtroom. Judges have a legal and ethical
duty to ensure rights under the judicial canons of conduct. Its just not possible that intelligent
lawyers like judges dont understand exactly what goes on in their courtrooms, yet they allow it to
continue. In CCFCs opinion, this judicial collusion is far more serious crime than even the fraud of
divorce attorneys themselves says Stuart.
CCFC has filed a motion for a protective order preventing the San Diego Defendants from harassing
them Since theyve known about CCFC and its reform toward the more humane family dispute
resolution solutions we offer, theyve treated us as enemies of the state. When we thought wed be
welcomed, or at least heard, weve instead become targetsof prosecution and terrorist threats--Theyassaulted me, harassed our members including threatening gun cock and death threat late night
phone calls, attacked our businesses, professional licenses, and threatened to jail and extort us with
further crime. Its outrageous that our own government allows this to happen, and were asking the
federal court to protect our members as we pursue the civil and criminal charges against the courts.
A complete set of filings and exhibits is available from CCFCs Facebook page at
www.Facebook.com/ccfconline
About: CCFC is a nonprofit organization of parents-both men and women-who have experienced
marital dissolution proceeding in San Diego, Orange, or Los Angeles Counties, Our members are
professionals or others who are highly motivated to improving governmental and justice system
process addressing domestic relations, parentage, custody, and abuse.
CCFC seeks to promote the health and success of all families--parents and children equally and alike.
We perceive that parents and children presently lack effective and independent advocates within
government and the civil and criminal justice system, and as such their rights and interests are
regularly compromised in favor of the institutionalized interests of others, including government,
private attorneys and professional service providers, and the enormous domestic dispute industry.
CCFC organizers, officers, and affiliates are professionals dedicated to improving social, governmental,
and justice system processes concerning domestic relations, child rearing, parenting, constitutional
law, child custody, and domestic violence. Many of CCFCs members are mothers, fathers, and
children who have withstood abundant hardship resulting from the current practices of what is
generally described as the Family Law Community. These injuries and insults include fraudulent,
inefficient, harmful, and even dangerous services; an institutionalized culture of indifference to
clearly-established liberties; insults to the autonomy and dignity of parents and children; extortion,
robbery, abuse, and more, delivered at the hands of eager operators within the divorce industry.
http://www.facebook.com/ccfconlinehttp://www.facebook.com/ccfconlinehttp://www.facebook.com/ccfconline -
8/13/2019 56-1 Ccfc Stuart Decl Iso Oppo to Sup Ct Rule 11 w Exhibits Final
23/24
California Coalition for Families and Children, et al v. San
Diego County Bar Association,USDC SDCA Case No.
Case No. 13cv1944-CAB-BLM
Declaration of Colbern C. Stuart in Support of Opposition to Motion for
Sanctions
Exhibit B
-
8/13/2019 56-1 Ccfc Stuart Decl Iso Oppo to Sup Ct Rule 11 w Exhibits Final
24/24
SState of California
Secretary of State
Statement of Information(Domestic Stock and Agricul tural Cooperative Corporations)
FEES (Filing and Disclosure): $25.00.If this is an amendment, see instructions.
IMPORTANT READ INSTRUCTIONS BEFORE COMPLETING THIS FORM
1. CORPORATE NAME
2. CALIFORNIA CORPORATE NUMBERThis Space for Filing Use Only
No Change Statement (Not applicable if agent address of record is a P.O. Box address. See instructions.)
3. If there have been any changes to the information contained in the last Statement of Information fil ed with the California Secretaryof State, or no statement of information has been previously filed, this form must be completed in its entirety.
If there has been no change in any of the information contained in the last Statement of Information filed with the California Secretary
of State, check the box and proceed to Item 17.
Complete Addresses for the Following (Do not abbreviate the name of the city. Items 4 and 5 cannot be P.O. Boxes.)
4. STREET ADDRESS OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICE CITY STATE ZIP CODE
5. STREET ADDRESS OF PRINCIPAL BUSINESS OFFICE IN CALIFORNIA, IF ANY CITY
STATE ZIP CODE
6. MAILING ADDRESS OF CORPORATION, IF DIFFERENT THAN ITEM 4 CITY STATE ZIP CODE
7. EMAIL ADDRESS FOR RECEIVING STATUTORY NOTIFICATIONS
Names and Complete Addresses of the Following Officers (The corporation must list these three officers. A comparable title for the specifofficer may be added; however, the preprinted titles on this form must not be altered.)
7. CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER/ ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP CODE
8. SECRETARY ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP CODE
9. CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER/ ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP CODE
Names and Complete Addresses of All Directors, Including Directors Who are Also Officers (The corporation must have at least ondirector. Attach additional pages, if necessary.)
10. NAME ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP CODE
11. NAME ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP CODE
12. NAME ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP CODE
13. NUMBER OF VACANCIES ON THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS, IF ANY:
Agent fo r Service of Process If the agent is an individual, the agent must reside in California and Item 15 must be completed with a California streaddress, a P.O. Box address is not acceptable. If the agent is another corporation, the agent must have on file with the California Secretary of State certificate pursuant to California Corporations Code section 1505 and Item 15 must be left blank.
14. NAME OF AGENT FOR SERVICE OF PROCESS
15. STREET ADDRESS OF AGENT FOR SERVICE OF PROCESS IN CALIFORNIA,IF AN INDIVIDUAL CITY STATE ZIP CODE
Type of Business
16. DESCRIBE THE TYPE OF BUSINESS OF THE CORPORATION
17. BY SUBMITTING THIS STATEMENT OF INFORMATION TO THE CALIFORNIA SECRETARY OF STATE, THE CORPORATION CERTIFIES THE INFORMATICONTAINED HEREIN INCLUDING ANY ATTACHMENTS IS TRUE AND CORRECT
EV34288
FILEDIn the office of the Secretary of State
of the State of CaliforniaLEXEVIA, PC
NOV-28 2013
C3195397
4891 PACIFIC HWY STE 102, SAN DIEGO, CA 92110
4891 PACIFIC HWY STE 102, SAN DIEGO, CA 92110
COLBERN C STUART 4891 PACIFIC HWY STE 102, SAN DIEGO, CA 92110
COLBERN C STUART 4891 PACIFIC HWY STE 102, SAN DIEGO, CA 92110
COLBERN STUART 4891 PACIFIC HWY STE 102, SAN DIEGO, CA 92110
COLBERN C STUART 4891 PACIFIC HWY STE 102, SAN DIEGO, CA 92110
[Note: The person designated as the corporation's agent MUST have agreed to act in that capacity prior to the designa
COLBERN C STUART
4891 PACIFIC HWY STE 102, SAN DIEGO, CA 92110
CALIFORNIA COALITION FOR FAMIL