WPCl ,JzUj}5R \ZlC:_E`B\u6ϹP>E{>AS:0@>YObo#.#eT|mL dfQ>[&('ѓ YýŸ9D (%ڿEOʸ.? tZO zN$mTZ %KiiB>wD6^YH2cgDT69!'Yܾ|ԋoGl7Y [o5b,Ni ('(bkX+vʭNpfog6Sגg1+Fϴrb&\f6W%p1͑S8h6wAR/]٪-|9kL8=0s\~c|a"Nj-DOj_ ތ)c>Ia sq$|QJC(  #UNq % 0YN^ w,40DS mUHP LaserJet 1200 Series PCL,,,,0(9 Z6Times New Roman RegularX(1$OXXUSUS.,jR5 ||/5:i+003|xU !XXUSUS.,  _ I.0  THEFACTTHATANOTHERMANWASJ.SBIOLOGICALFATHER  WASIRRELEVANTFORTHEPURPOSESOFPRESUMEDFATHER  STATUSUNDERSECTION7611. (#(#   Thesignificanceofpresumedfatherstatusinadependencycaseisthatonly  presumedfathersareeligibleforreunificationservices.(_Welf_.&Inst.Code361.5_subd_.   (a);InreA.A.(2003)114_Cal.App_.4th771,779780.)Thepurposeofreunification   servicesistomaintainthechildsexistingfamilyrelationships,nottocreatenewones.(In   reSarahC.(1992)8_Cal.App_.4th964,975.)Itisexistingfamiliesthatthedependency   statutesseektokeeptogether.(InreA.A.,supra,114_Cal.App_.4thatp.788.)Asthe   CourtofAppealandtheSupremeCourthavemadeclear,itistheexistenceofanexisting  parentchildrelationshipbetweenthechildandthepersonclaimingpresumedfather  statusthatiscontrollingindependencycases.Wherethemanclaimingpresumedfather  statushasaparentchildrelationshipwiththechild,themereidentificationofanother  manasthebiologicalfatherisinsufficienttorebutthepresumptioninfavoroftheman  whohastheparentchildrelationshipwiththechild.Suchacaseisnotan appropriate  caseinwhichtorelyonbiologytorebutthepresumptionundersection7612,   subdivision(a).(Seee.g.,InreNicholasH.(2002)28Cal.4th56,63[factthatpresumed " fatherwasnotbiologicalfatherdidnotrebutpresumptionwhere_nonbiological_Ԁfatherhad $  parentchildrelationshipwiththechild];InreElijahV.(2005)127_Cal.App_.4th576,583 &!" 584[presumptionofpaternitynotrebuttedwherebiologicalfatherfailedtotakeany (#$ actiontoassumeparentalresponsibilities];InreA.A.,supra,114_Cal.App_.4th771,788 *%& 789[asamatteroflaw,presumptioninfavorofmanwithexistingparentchild ,'( relationshipnotrebuttedbyevidencethatanothermanwhodidnotmaintaina  relationshipwiththechildwasthebiologicalfatherofthechild];Inre_Kiana_ԀA.(2001)  93_Cal.App_.4th1109,11181119[presumptionnotrebuttedwherebiologicalfatherhad  norelationshipwiththechild].)Here,T.,notW.,thebiologicalfather,hadtheexisting   parentchildrelationshipwiththechild.Consequently,thiswasnotanappropriatecasein   whichthejuvenilecourtcouldfindundersection7612,subdivision(a),thatthe   presumptioninT.sfavorwasrebuttedbyW.sbiologicalcontributiontoJ.sexistence,   andtherefore,thetrialcourtwasnotpermittedtoengageintheweighingprocess  mandatedbysection7612,subdivision(b).(InreA.A.,supra,114_Cal.App_.4that788.  Compare,Inre_Jesusa_ԀV.(2004)32Cal.4th588,608[wherethebiologicalfatherhas  obtainedpresumedfatherstatus,biologyismerelyonefactorthatthecourtmustconsider  alongwithmanyothersinengagingintheweighingprocessrequiredbysection7612,  subdivision(b)].)