Motion to Set Aside Order of May 26, 2020 is denied. There has been no showing of actual fraud as required by Fam. Code §3691(a). The remaining issues of vehicle title, return of mail, mortgage expenses, and telephone calls for the minor children are matters to be heard on a Request for Order (“RFO”) calendar. As such, those remaining issues are continued to the RFO calendar of February 24, 2021 at 1:30 p.m. in Department 22 with appearances to be made by the parties via Zoom.

          Motion for Change of Venue denied. Respondent has failed to show that there is either crucial witness(es) and/or crucial evidence in Los Angeles County that would warrant the Court exercising its discretion and ordering this action transferred to Los Angeles County. See: Code of Civil Procedure §397(c).

          Motion to Quash Summons is denied as untimely. Respondent had 30 days from the date of personal service of the summons (October 28, 2020) to file her motion to quash, specifically by November 27, 2020. Having not filed the motion until November 30, 2020, the motion is untimely. See CRC 5.63(b). The Court also notes that although the record is not entirely clear, it appears that Respondent is attempting to utilize her action under the Domestic Violence Prevention Act (“DVPA”) in Santa Clara County as the basis for quashing the Sonoma County summons. It should be noted the CRC 5.63(b)(2) applies only when there is “…another action pending between the parties for the same cause.” An action under the DVPA is not the same cause as Petitioner’s parentage action that is pending in Sonoma County.