Generally, judges are reluctant to grant a restraining order without the Respondent's appearance because the consequences of a restraining order in one's background carries with it very serious ramifications. Judges therefore try and give Respondent's every chance to make their appearance. However, since it was the Petitioner who failed to appear, the matter should have been dismissed immediately (unless the Petitioner could show a compelling reason for the failure to appear). Make the necessary objection to any further continuances. The judge should rule in your favor. Good luck.
The Petitioner of a DVRO must be ready to go at the first hearing, or the request must be dismissed. See Fam. C §243. You should have objected to the continuance (reissuance) at the first hearing, and requested that the DVRO be dismissed.
If the Petitioner does not appear again, or requests a continuance, cite the foregoing Code section and demand that the TRO be dismissed.
If the Petitioner asks for yet another continuance, object immediately, A person bringing a DV restraining order has a duty to have their case ready for the judge to evaluate immediately. They have all the facts they need and have no need to prepare anything further.
As the respondent, having this proceeding "hanging over your head" while the Petitioner tries to line up his case is unacceptable and unduly prejudicial. Mr. Miranda cites the correct code section. DON'T let the petitioner keep you in limbo!
Attorney James R. Fox If you found this answer helpful, let me know by clicking the "Mark as Helpful" button at the bottom of this answer or select it as Best Answer. It’s easy and appreciated. This response is intended to be a general statement of law, should not be relied upon as legal advice, does not create an attorney/client relationship and does not create a right to continuing email exchanges.