Preview
1 RANDY RABIDOUX, SBN: 293166
ALEXANDER T. JONES, SBN 266082
2 SOUND LAW GROUP, LLP
3 201 Spear Street, Suite 1100
San Francisco, California 94105
4 Telephone: (415) 495-4499
Facsimile: (415) 495-3202
5 Email: rrabidoux@soundlawsf.com
6 ajones@soundlawsf.com
7
Attorneys for Defendant
8 PAUL FRANCIS DENINGER
9
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
10 COUNTY OF SAN MATEO
11
12 In re Matter of: Case No. 19-CIV-03974
13 DECLARATION OF RANDY
MARY ELIZABETH LEMASTERS RABIDOUX, ESQ. IN OPPOSITION TO
14
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR
15 Plaintiff, SUMMARY JUDGMENT
v.
16
PAUL FRANCIS DENINGER
17
18 Defendant.
19 Judge: Nancy L. Fineman
20 PAUL FRANCIS DENINGER Department: 4
Date: December 13, 2022
21 Cross-Complainant Time: 2:00 p.m.
22 v.
23 MARY ELIZABETH LEMASTERS
24 Cross-Defendant.
25
26
27
28
______________________________________________________
DECLARATION OF RANDY RABIDOUX, ESQ. IN OPPOSITION OF PLAINTIFF’S EX PARTE
APPLICATION TO SPECIALLY SET MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
I, RANDY RABIDOUX, ESQ., do hereby declare as follows:
1
2 1. I am an attorney at law, duly licensed to practice before all courts of the State of
3 California. I am an attorney with Sound Law Group, LLP, attorneys of record for Defendant,
4
Paul Francis Deninger (“Defendant”) in San Mateo County Case No. 19-CIV-03974.
5
2. The following information is true of my own personal knowledge, and if called as a
6
7 witness in this proceeding, I could and would competently testify thereto.
8 3. To the extent necessary, I hereby certify these pleadings pursuant to the requirements of
9 California Code of Civil Procedure §128.7. Nothing in this Declaration is intended to waive, nor
10
shall it be deemed a waiver of, the attorney-client privilege, attorney work product doctrine,
11
and/or any other applicable privileges or confidential communications.
12
13 4. On Saturday, September 24, 2022 at 11:17 a.m., Plaintiff’s counsel, Ms. Sunena
14 Sabharwal (Ms. Sabharwal) notified me by email of her intent to make an ex parte application to
15 specially set a motion for summary judgment/adjudication for Tuesday, September 27, 2022.
16
5. Per Ms. Sabharwal’s email, she informed me that she would provide me the ex parte
17
papers and her motion on Monday September 26, 2022.
18
19 6. A true and accurate copy of the Saturday email is attached hereto as Exhibit 1.
20 7. During the course of business on Monday September 26, 2022 I did not receive
21
Plaintiff’s Ex Parte application and did not receive any further correspondence from Plaintiff’s
22
counsel.
23
24 8. Having not received Plaintiff's Ex Parte Application, and because I had not heard from
25 her office, I resumed my already scheduled trial preparations on another matter.
26
27
28
1
______________________________________________________
DECLARATION OF RANDY RABIDOUX, ESQ.
9. Well after close of business on Monday, September 26, 2022, specifically at 11:34 p.m.,
1
2 Plaintiff’s counsel emailed my office with her client’s 90-page Ex Parte Application and
3 accompanying Motion.
4
10. A true and accurate copy of the 11:34 pm email is attached hereto as Exhibit 2.
5
11. I note that the declaration of Ms. Sabharwal that accompanied the Ex Parte Application
6
7 states: “I have provided a copy of this ex parte and the moving papers to Mr. Rabidoux on
8 9/26/22” but does omit that it was provided 26 minutes before midnight on 9/26/22. See dec of
9 Sabharwal ¶ 2 attached as Exhibit 3.
10
12. Attached hereto as Exhibit 3 is a true copy of the declaration.
11
13. On the morning of September 27, 2022 my paralegal, Michelle Cox, informed Ms.
12
13 Sabharwal of my unavailability, that we opposed the request, and requested to reschedule the ex-
14 parte request to a date that would work for both of our calendars. Unfortunately, Ms. Sabharwal
15 did not agree to my request to reschedule.
16
14. I am informed and believe that Ms. Sabharwal appeared before the presiding judge on
17
September 27, 2022 and presented the application.
18
19 15. I am informed and believe that on September 27, 2022, after appearing before the
20 presiding judge, Ms. Sabharwal herself personally served on my office a noticed motion for
21
summary judgment to be heard December 13, 2022.
22
16. Among the papers personally served was the proposed order Ms. Sabharwal emailed to
23
24 my office at 11:34 pm the previous day.
25 17. The proposed order (which would have found good cause to calendar the motion less than
26 30 days before trial) was unsigned and had a diagonal strike drawn across its face.
27
18. A true and accurate copy of the rejected proposed order is attached hereto as Exhibit 4.
28
2
______________________________________________________
DECLARATION OF RANDY RABIDOUX, ESQ.
19. On September 30, 2022 I did attempt to meet and confer with Ms. Sabharwal regarding
1
2 whether there was an order authorizing the motion to be heard less than 30 days before trial
3 much less after the commencement of trial.
4
20. A true and accurate copy of the letter is attached hereto as Exhibit 5.
5
21. Ms. Sabharwal responded to my meet and confer letter via email on September 30, 2022.
6
7 22. A true and accurate copy of the letter is attached hereto as Exhibit 6.
8 23. Notably the September 30, 2022 email was not accompanied with an order authorizing
9 the motion to be heard less than 30 days before trial or after the commencement of trial.
10
24. Ms. Sabharwal also refused to remove the motion from calendar.
11
25. At no point has Defendant consented to shorten the 75-day period for a motion for
12
13 summary judgment.
14 26. At no point has Defendant consented to shorten the 30-day period before trial by which a
15 motion for summary judgment must ordinarily be heard.
16
27. At no point has Defendant consented to hear pretrial motions after the commencement of
17
trial.
18
19 28. Attorneys from my firms spent approximately seven (7) billable hours reviewing
20 Plaintiff’s motion for Summary Judgment, researching the points and authorities as well as
21
drafting the opposition.
22
29. I would estimate another hour (1) spent reviewing any reply and/or appearing in court on
23
24 the matter.
25 //
26 //
27
28
3
______________________________________________________
DECLARATION OF RANDY RABIDOUX, ESQ.
1 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California, that the foregoing
2 is true and correct.
3
4
5 SOUND LAW GROUP, LLP
6
7 November 29, 2022
Dated: ____________________
8 Randy Rabidoux
Attorneys for Defendant
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4
______________________________________________________
DECLARATION OF RANDY RABIDOUX, ESQ.
EXHIBIT 1
From: Sunena Sabharwal
Sent: Saturday, September 24, 2022 11:17 AM
To: Randy Rabidoux ; assistant@soundlaw; info@soundlaw
Subject: LEMASTERS V. DENINGER; NOTICE OF EX PARTE APPLICATION
Importance: High
Dear Mr. Rabidoux,
I intend to make an ex parte application to specially set a motion for summary
judgment/adjudication on Tuesday September 27th at 1:30 p.m. with respect to your client's
cross-complaint. Judge Fineman's calendar has no official openings, as has been the case for
several months. I will be asking her to specially set this matter on either Dec. 6th or 13th,
unless you are willing to have it heard earlier. As you will see, the summary judgment motion
is not lengthy as was yours. I expect the separate statement, for example, to be around 15
pages in length.
I will have the ex parte papers and motion to you on Monday.
Sincerely,
Notice of Unavailability, Tenderloin v. Sparks: Unavailable Aug. 1-5,
Aug. 24-Sept. 16, 2022
Sunena Sabharwal
Attorney at Law
Certified Family Law Specialist, CA Board of Specialization;
personal injury, insurance and employment law
SABHARWAL LAW OFFICES
1816 Fifth Street
Berkeley, CA 94710
Phone: (510) 665-8777
Fax: (510) 665-8778
http://sablawoffice.com
PRIVILEGE & CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
The information in this electronic mail is intended for the named recipients only. It may contain
privileged and confidential matter. If you have received this electronic mail in error, please notify the
sender immediately by replying to this electronic e-mail or by calling (510) 665-8777. Do not disclose the
contents to anyone. Thank you.
NO TAX ADVICE that may be contained in this communication is intended to be written to be used and
cannot be used or relied upon. You must seek the professional advice of a CPA or tax layer.
NO AGREEMENT TO SERVICE BY EMAIL: The Sabharwal Law Offices does not accept service of
any documents by email unless statutorily required or there is a specific agreement to accept service by
email.
EXHIBIT 2
From: Sunena Sabharwal
To: Randy Rabidoux; info@soundlaw; Krista Spinks
Subject: LEMASTERS EX PARTE PAPERS FOR 9-27-22 EX PARTE
Date: Monday, September 26, 2022 11:33:59 PM
Attachments: EX PARTE APPLICATION TO SPECIALLY SET MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT;ADJUDICATION.pdf
EX PARTE PROPOSED ORDER.pdf
NOTICE OF MOTION.pdf
9.26.2022 Sep. Statement re Mtn MSJ (v3) FINAL.pdf
09.26.2022 LEMASTERS DEC.pdf
9.7.2022 Declaration of S. Sabharwal Re Mtn. SJ.pdf
9.26.2022 Request for Judicial Notice ISO MFSJ.pdf
9.26.2022 MPA re MSJ FINAL.pdf
Dear Counsel,
Please find attached Ms. LeMasters' ex parte application.
Notice of Unavailability, Tenderloin v. Sparks: Unavailable Aug. 1-5,
Aug. 24-Sept. 16, 2022
Sunena Sabharwal
Attorney at Law
Certified Family Law Specialist, CA Board of Specialization;
personal injury, insurance and employment law
SABHARWAL LAW OFFICES
1816 Fifth Street
Berkeley, CA 94710
Phone: (510) 665-8777
Fax: (510) 665-8778
http://sablawoffice.com
PRIVILEGE & CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
The information in this electronic mail is intended for the named recipients only. It may contain
privileged and confidential matter. If you have received this electronic mail in error, please notify the
sender immediately by replying to this electronic e-mail or by calling (510) 665-8777. Do not disclose the
contents to anyone. Thank you.
NO TAX ADVICE that may be contained in this communication is intended to be written to be used and
cannot be used or relied upon. You must seek the professional advice of a CPA or tax layer.
NO AGREEMENT TO SERVICE BY EMAIL: The Sabharwal Law Offices does not accept service of
any documents by email unless statutorily required or there is a specific agreement to accept service by
email.
EXHIBIT 3
1 SUNENA SABHARWAL (SBN 148237)
Sabharwal Law Offices
2 1816 Fifth Street
Berkeley, CA 94710
3
Telephone: (510) 665-8777
4 Facsimile: (510) 665-8778
Attorney for ELIZABETH LEMASTERS
5
6
7 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
8 COUNTY OF SAN MATEO—CIVIL DIVISION
9
10
MARY ELIZABETH LEMASTERS, ) Case No. 19-CIV-03974
)
Plaintiff, ) EX PARTE APPLICATION TO
11 ) SPECIALLY SET MOTION FOR
v. ) SUMMARY
12 ) JUDGMENT/ADJUDICATION OF
PAUL FRANCIS DENINGER, ) SECOND AMENDED CROSS-
13 ) COMPLAINT; DECLARATION IN
Defendant, ) SUPPORT OF APPLICATION
14
)
) Date: 9-27-22
) Time: EX PARTE, 1:30 PM
15
AND RELATED CROSS-ACTION.
16
17
EX PARTE APPLICATION
18
Cross-Complainant requests that the Court specially set the motion for summary
19
judgment / adjudication of the Second Amended Cross-Complaint on the court’s law and motion
20
calendar. Cross-Complainant proposes that it be set either on December 6th or 13th, or other date
21
acceptable to the Cross-Defendant.
22
//
23
24
//
25 //
LEMASTERS V. DENNINGER, 19CV03974
1 DECLARATION OF SUNENA SABHARWAL IN SUPPORT OF EX PARTE APPLICATION
2 I, Sunena Sabharwal, hereby make this declaration based upon my own personal knowledge.
3
If called to testify, I would testify to the truth of the facts stated herein.
4
1. I gave notice of this ex parte application before 10 a.m. the day before the date of the
5
application, by emailing Mr. Rabidoux that I would make the ex parte application on
6
Tuesday, September 27th at 1:30 p.m. Specifically, I wrote to him: I intend to make an ex
7
parte application to specially set a motion for summary judgment/adjudication on Tuesday
8
September 27th at 1:30 p.m. with respect to your client's cross-complaint. Judge Fineman's
9
10
calendar has no official openings, as has been the case for several months. I will be asking
11 her to specially set this matter on either Dec. 6th or 13th, unless you are willing to have it
12 heard earlier. As you will see, the summary judgment motion is not lengthy as was yours. I
13 expect the separate statement, for example, to be around 15 pages in length.”
14 2. I have provided a copy of this ex parte and the moving papers to Mr. Rabidoux on 9/26/22.
15
3. The Court’s law and motion calendar is full. Trial in this matter is set on January 13, 2023.
16
The 105th day for service of the motion falls on September 30, 2022.
17
4. The motion is anticipated to resolve one or more causes of action, thereby streamlining and
18
promoting judicial economy. A copy of the motion and all supporting papers is submitted
19
herewith.
20
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing
21
is true and correct and that this declaration was executed in Berkeley, CA on September 26,
22
23 2022.
24 _________________________________
25 Sunena Sabharwal
LEMASTERS V. DENNINGER, 19CV03974
EXHIBIT 4
EXHIBIT 5
September 30, 2022
Via Email Only
Ms. Sunena Sabharwal
1816 Fifth Street
Berkeley, CA 94710
sunenas@hotmail.com
Re: Lemasters v. Deninger 19-CIV-03974
Dear Ms. Sabharwal:
I am in receipt of the Motion for Summary Adjudication Ms. Lemasters presented to our
office. Please consider this letter my attempt to meet and confer regarding procedural defects
with the motion.
I notice that the date for the pretrial motion for summary adjudication is December 13,
2022. As you know, on July 5, 2022 the Honorable Nancy Fineman issued Pretrial orders which
state:
“A Pretrial Conference is scheduled for December 12, 2022 at 2:00 p.m. … [t]he Pretrial
Conference is deemed to be the commencement of trial for all purposes, including but not
limited to discovery and motion cutoff …” pg 7 ¶ 38, 39
As I am sure you are aware, California Code of Civil Procedure § 437c provides “… The
motion [for summary adjudication] shall be heard no later than 30 days before the date of trial,
unless the court for good cause orders otherwise.” Since December 13, 2022 is after the
commencement of trial, it is improper for the motion to be heard on that date even if the court
found good cause to accelerate the hearing date to less than thirty (30) days before trial.
On September 26, 2022 you emailed to my office, at 11:34 pm, an ex parte application to
be heard on September 27, 2022 seeking to calendar Ms. Lemaster’s motion for summary
judgment on December 13th. The package emailed to my office included a proposed order
finding good cause to calendar the motion on December 13, 2022.
I was unavailable on September 27, 2022 and communicated such to you, nevertheless
you elected to appear anyway. After you appeared you presented to my office the motion for
summary judgment that same afternoon. I note that the moving papers presented do not include
an approved order purporting to find good cause to schedule the motion for summary judgment
less than thirty (30) before trial, much less purporting to find good cause to schedule the motion
after the commencement of trial. Instead, the proposed order has a diagonal line drawn across
the face of the order. I assume this line to be a strike out placed by the court or court clerk
denying the request. Thus, I am left to believe that the court denied Ms. Lemasters’ request to
Sunena Sabharwal
September 30, 2022
Page 2
find good cause for the motion to be heard less than thirty (30) days before trial much less after
the commencement of trial.
Please provide an order that purports to find good cause for the motion for summary
judgement to be heard less than thirty (30) days before trial and/or after the commencement of
trial by October 3, 2022. If no such order exists, I would request that Ms. Lemasters withdraw
the motion immediately. If Ms. Lemasters does not withdraw the motion my client will seek
sanctions commensurate with the amount of time I am forced to spend to respond to a
procedurally improper motion for summary judgment.
Regards,
Randy Rabidoux
EXHIBIT 6
00121334ÿ00678ÿ9 ÿÿ9ÿÿÿ
678ÿ67ÿ:7;<=>7?=ÿ<@AÿB7@C@D7?
EFGHGIÿEIKLIMNIOÿPQFGHGIQRLSTUIVOWXSUY
ZMVÿ[\]^\_^__ÿ_`][ÿab
cS`dMVQTIÿEeVGfQÿPIgUVGRQSFGgOINQhWXSUY
iX`jOHkÿlSGHQÿPImSGHQRQSFGgOINQhWXSUYnoIGgpÿoIKVgSFkÿPMMIKVgSFkRQSFGgOINQhWXSUYnbVXLHOOHÿiSk
PUXSkRQSFGgOINQhWXSUY
qrsstÿvwxÿyz{|}t~xÿÿÿzrÿwrz}ÿt~wÿsrrwxÿÿÿrÿtÿt~wÿz}ÿtrÿtÿrÿwrrzwÿztwrxÿÿÿz
ts}ÿtÿrÿ|ÿrxÿ ÿz}ÿzÿt~ÿzÿzrÿzrrwÿzw~rÿt~ÿzxÿÿÿzrÿrrÿtÿsrzÿ~
rÿ|~rÿtwÿw|zsÿt xÿÿÿwrzs|rÿrÿw|zsxÿÿrw|rÿrÿr}ÿ~ÿz|ÿsrÿt|tÿ|ÿs||r
z}ÿr}ÿzÿt~srÿtÿ}zÿ}rzs|ÿ|ÿtrÿ|s~}|ÿÿrzw|xÿ
~wrwtwrÿrÿwrw|zsÿtw}rwÿzstÿzrÿzÿrÿtw}rwÿrrsrÿzwrÿ~{rÿtÿt}||z|tÿzÿr
}|wr|tÿtÿrÿt~wxÿÿ
vtwrÿ|twzsÿt~ÿt~s}ÿtÿ{rÿw|ÿ|~rÿzÿzwrÿ{zwwr}ÿ{ÿrÿz~rÿtÿs||z|txÿÿrÿzwr
wr~|wr}ÿtÿrrÿz}ÿtrwÿz}ÿwrtsrÿ|~rxÿÿÿ~rÿzÿrÿ}tÿtxÿÿÿ|ÿ|ÿt~s}ÿ{rÿttwÿtwÿt
zrÿt~ÿ|ÿtr|ÿzrrÿzssrrÿ|ÿz}ÿrÿzrÿrÿzrÿzÿt|tÿtwÿt~|ÿtwÿ}|wrr}
rw}|ÿw|ÿ|ÿwtÿtÿrÿ~wxÿÿt~ÿt ÿzÿÿzw~rÿzwrxÿÿrÿzwrÿtw}rwr}ÿtÿzrÿrrw
rtwÿtÿwz|rÿz}ÿ|ÿt|{srÿwrtsrÿwrw|zsÿz}ÿw|zsÿ|~rÿrzwsxÿÿ
zÿt~ÿ
¡¢£ÿ¥ÿ¦§¨©¨¡ª̈«¡ª¡¬ÿ®£§¯£°ª¡§ÿ©±ÿ²³¨°´µ¶ÿÿ¦§¨©¨¡ª̈«ª£ÿ·¸¹±ÿº»¼ÿ·¸¹±ÿ½¾»²£³±ÿº¿
½À½½
Á~rzÿÁz{zwzs
ÂtwrÿzÿÃz ÿ
Ärw||r}ÿz|sÿÃz ÿÁr|zs|ÿÄÂÿÅtzw}ÿtÿÁr|zs|Æz|tÇ
ÿrwtzsÿ|~wÿ|~wzrÿz}ÿrstrÿsz
ÁÂÅqÂyÂÃÿÃÂÿÄÈÁÿ
ÉÊÿ|ÿÁwrrÿ
ÅrwrsrÿÄÂÿÿËÌÿ
trÍÿÎÏÐÿÊÊÏÉÌÌÌÿ
zÍÿÎÏÐÿÊÊÏÉÌÌÉ
ÍÑÑz{sz t|rxtÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ
ÓÔÕÖÕ×ØÙØÿÚÿÛÜÝÞÕßØÝàÕá×ÕàâÿÝÜàÕÛØÿÿ
àãäÿåæçèéêëìåèæÿåæÿìãåíÿäîäïìéèæåïÿêëåîÿåíÿåæìäæðäðÿçèéÿìãäÿæëêäðÿéäïåñåäæìíÿèæîòóÿÿÕìÿêëòÿïèæìëåæÿñéåôåîäõäðÿëæð
ïèæçåðäæìåëîÿêëììäéóÿÿÕçÿòèöÿãëôäÿéäïäåôäðÿìãåíÿäîäïìéèæåïÿêëåîÿåæÿäééèé÷ÿñîäëíäÿæèìåçòÿìãäÿíäæðäéÿåêêäðåëìäîòÿøòÿéäñîòåæõÿìè
ìãåíÿäîäïìéèæåïÿäùêëåîÿèéÿøòÿïëîîåæõÿúûüýþÿÿÿûù0111óÿÿßèÿæèìÿðåíïîèíäÿìãäÿïèæìäæìíÿìèÿëæòèæäóÿÿàãëæ2ÿòèöó
ÝÜÿàá3ÿáßÖÕÛØÿìãëìÿêëòÿøäÿïèæìëåæäðÿåæÿìãåíÿïèêêöæåïëìåèæÿåíÿåæìäæðäðÿìèÿøäÿ4éåììäæÿìèÿøäÿöíäðÿëæðÿïëææèìÿøäÿöíäð
èéÿéäîåäðÿöñèæóÿâèöÿêöíìÿíää2ÿìãäÿñéèçäííåèæëîÿëðôåïäÿèçÿëÿÛÓáÿèéÿìë5ÿîëòäéóÿ
ÝÜÿáÙÔØØ6ØÝàÿàÜÿ7ØÔÖÕÛØÿ8âÿØ6áÕ×9ÿÿàãäÿ7ëøãëé4ëîÿ×ë4ÿÜççåïäíÿðèäíÿæèìÿëïïäñìÿíäéôåïäÿèçÿëæòÿðèïöêäæìíÿøò
äêëåîÿöæîäííÿíìëìöìèéåîòÿéäöåéäðÿèéÿìãäéäÿåíÿëÿíñäïåçåïÿëõéääêäæìÿìèÿëïïäñìÿíäéôåïäÿøòÿäêëåîó
ÿÿÿ !"#$% &ÿ
'()*ÿ+ ,-ÿ.. /.ÿ01-ÿ2122ÿ3425ÿ67ÿ
8ÿ.ÿ/9"!ÿ. 9 !$% &ÿ
:;ÿ .ÿ? . !"#$% &@ÿA ,ÿA/ =ÿ/ = !"#$% &@ÿ7%9.!!.ÿB =
611 1 1 199 9!"#$!"$ %&'("3) $!* 0$)+,')-#*(-$."0( 9 9!!2/30 1 27.3" - 04(/5! 013
00121334ÿ00678ÿ9 ÿÿ9ÿÿÿ
6789:;<9=>?@AB?ÿTP>U>VPS
ÿ
X99?ÿAYPS>99>Z
ÿ
[\A8]P?ÿ^@PA?ÿ89SSP<^9>?P>8Pÿ9CÿR9?A`a<ÿ?ARPD
ÿ
bU>8PSP@`Z
ÿ
cdefghÿjkelmf
nopqrÿtuuvuwqxw
ÿ
ÿ
yz{ÿ|}oq~ÿ|w~oowÿ|vwoÿ{{zz
|qxÿ~qxvuÿtÿ{z
orÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ{
qÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ{yzy
ÿ
tnÿ
vuÿoqvrÿqÿxwqvxÿxvoxwvqrÿqxÿ}~vvropoÿqwo~vqrÿ~ÿwoÿuroÿuoÿÿwoÿvxwoxoÿ~ov}voxwuÿtxÿ~ovoÿuoÿvuw~vwvxÿ~ÿvuru~oÿÿwo~uÿvuÿuw~vwrÿ}~vvwoÿÿÿq~oÿxwÿwoÿvxwoxoÿ~ov}voxwÿ~ÿqw~vo
wÿ~oovoÿ~ÿwoÿ~ov}voxwÿ}roquoÿxwqwÿwoÿuoxo~ÿÿ~o}rÿoqvrÿ~ÿqwÿ{
ÿqxÿorowoÿqrrÿ}vouÿÿwvuÿouuqpo
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
611 1 1 199 9!"#$!"$ %&'("3) $!* 0$)+,')-#*(-$."0( 9 9!!2/30 1 27.3" - 04(/5! 313
Preview
1 RANDY RABIDOUX, SBN: 293166 ALEXANDER T. JONES, SBN 266082 2 SOUND LAW GROUP, LLP 3 201 Spear Street, Suite 1100 San Francisco, California 94105 4 Telephone: (415) 495-4499 Facsimile: (415) 495-3202 5 Email: rrabidoux@soundlawsf.com 6 ajones@soundlawsf.com 7 Attorneys for Defendant 8 PAUL FRANCIS DENINGER 9 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 10 COUNTY OF SAN MATEO 11 12 In re Matter of: Case No. 19-CIV-03974 13 DECLARATION OF RANDY MARY ELIZABETH LEMASTERS RABIDOUX, ESQ. IN OPPOSITION TO 14 PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR 15 Plaintiff, SUMMARY JUDGMENT v. 16 PAUL FRANCIS DENINGER 17 18 Defendant. 19 Judge: Nancy L. Fineman 20 PAUL FRANCIS DENINGER Department: 4 Date: December 13, 2022 21 Cross-Complainant Time: 2:00 p.m. 22 v. 23 MARY ELIZABETH LEMASTERS 24 Cross-Defendant. 25 26 27 28 ______________________________________________________ DECLARATION OF RANDY RABIDOUX, ESQ. IN OPPOSITION OF PLAINTIFF’S EX PARTE APPLICATION TO SPECIALLY SET MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT I, RANDY RABIDOUX, ESQ., do hereby declare as follows: 1 2 1. I am an attorney at law, duly licensed to practice before all courts of the State of 3 California. I am an attorney with Sound Law Group, LLP, attorneys of record for Defendant, 4 Paul Francis Deninger (“Defendant”) in San Mateo County Case No. 19-CIV-03974. 5 2. The following information is true of my own personal knowledge, and if called as a 6 7 witness in this proceeding, I could and would competently testify thereto. 8 3. To the extent necessary, I hereby certify these pleadings pursuant to the requirements of 9 California Code of Civil Procedure §128.7. Nothing in this Declaration is intended to waive, nor 10 shall it be deemed a waiver of, the attorney-client privilege, attorney work product doctrine, 11 and/or any other applicable privileges or confidential communications. 12 13 4. On Saturday, September 24, 2022 at 11:17 a.m., Plaintiff’s counsel, Ms. Sunena 14 Sabharwal (Ms. Sabharwal) notified me by email of her intent to make an ex parte application to 15 specially set a motion for summary judgment/adjudication for Tuesday, September 27, 2022. 16 5. Per Ms. Sabharwal’s email, she informed me that she would provide me the ex parte 17 papers and her motion on Monday September 26, 2022. 18 19 6. A true and accurate copy of the Saturday email is attached hereto as Exhibit 1. 20 7. During the course of business on Monday September 26, 2022 I did not receive 21 Plaintiff’s Ex Parte application and did not receive any further correspondence from Plaintiff’s 22 counsel. 23 24 8. Having not received Plaintiff's Ex Parte Application, and because I had not heard from 25 her office, I resumed my already scheduled trial preparations on another matter. 26 27 28 1 ______________________________________________________ DECLARATION OF RANDY RABIDOUX, ESQ. 9. Well after close of business on Monday, September 26, 2022, specifically at 11:34 p.m., 1 2 Plaintiff’s counsel emailed my office with her client’s 90-page Ex Parte Application and 3 accompanying Motion. 4 10. A true and accurate copy of the 11:34 pm email is attached hereto as Exhibit 2. 5 11. I note that the declaration of Ms. Sabharwal that accompanied the Ex Parte Application 6 7 states: “I have provided a copy of this ex parte and the moving papers to Mr. Rabidoux on 8 9/26/22” but does omit that it was provided 26 minutes before midnight on 9/26/22. See dec of 9 Sabharwal ¶ 2 attached as Exhibit 3. 10 12. Attached hereto as Exhibit 3 is a true copy of the declaration. 11 13. On the morning of September 27, 2022 my paralegal, Michelle Cox, informed Ms. 12 13 Sabharwal of my unavailability, that we opposed the request, and requested to reschedule the ex- 14 parte request to a date that would work for both of our calendars. Unfortunately, Ms. Sabharwal 15 did not agree to my request to reschedule. 16 14. I am informed and believe that Ms. Sabharwal appeared before the presiding judge on 17 September 27, 2022 and presented the application. 18 19 15. I am informed and believe that on September 27, 2022, after appearing before the 20 presiding judge, Ms. Sabharwal herself personally served on my office a noticed motion for 21 summary judgment to be heard December 13, 2022. 22 16. Among the papers personally served was the proposed order Ms. Sabharwal emailed to 23 24 my office at 11:34 pm the previous day. 25 17. The proposed order (which would have found good cause to calendar the motion less than 26 30 days before trial) was unsigned and had a diagonal strike drawn across its face. 27 18. A true and accurate copy of the rejected proposed order is attached hereto as Exhibit 4. 28 2 ______________________________________________________ DECLARATION OF RANDY RABIDOUX, ESQ. 19. On September 30, 2022 I did attempt to meet and confer with Ms. Sabharwal regarding 1 2 whether there was an order authorizing the motion to be heard less than 30 days before trial 3 much less after the commencement of trial. 4 20. A true and accurate copy of the letter is attached hereto as Exhibit 5. 5 21. Ms. Sabharwal responded to my meet and confer letter via email on September 30, 2022. 6 7 22. A true and accurate copy of the letter is attached hereto as Exhibit 6. 8 23. Notably the September 30, 2022 email was not accompanied with an order authorizing 9 the motion to be heard less than 30 days before trial or after the commencement of trial. 10 24. Ms. Sabharwal also refused to remove the motion from calendar. 11 25. At no point has Defendant consented to shorten the 75-day period for a motion for 12 13 summary judgment. 14 26. At no point has Defendant consented to shorten the 30-day period before trial by which a 15 motion for summary judgment must ordinarily be heard. 16 27. At no point has Defendant consented to hear pretrial motions after the commencement of 17 trial. 18 19 28. Attorneys from my firms spent approximately seven (7) billable hours reviewing 20 Plaintiff’s motion for Summary Judgment, researching the points and authorities as well as 21 drafting the opposition. 22 29. I would estimate another hour (1) spent reviewing any reply and/or appearing in court on 23 24 the matter. 25 // 26 // 27 28 3 ______________________________________________________ DECLARATION OF RANDY RABIDOUX, ESQ. 1 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California, that the foregoing 2 is true and correct. 3 4 5 SOUND LAW GROUP, LLP 6 7 November 29, 2022 Dated: ____________________ 8 Randy Rabidoux Attorneys for Defendant 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 4 ______________________________________________________ DECLARATION OF RANDY RABIDOUX, ESQ. EXHIBIT 1 From: Sunena Sabharwal Sent: Saturday, September 24, 2022 11:17 AM To: Randy Rabidoux ; assistant@soundlaw; info@soundlaw Subject: LEMASTERS V. DENINGER; NOTICE OF EX PARTE APPLICATION Importance: High Dear Mr. Rabidoux, I intend to make an ex parte application to specially set a motion for summary judgment/adjudication on Tuesday September 27th at 1:30 p.m. with respect to your client's cross-complaint. Judge Fineman's calendar has no official openings, as has been the case for several months. I will be asking her to specially set this matter on either Dec. 6th or 13th, unless you are willing to have it heard earlier. As you will see, the summary judgment motion is not lengthy as was yours. I expect the separate statement, for example, to be around 15 pages in length. I will have the ex parte papers and motion to you on Monday. Sincerely, Notice of Unavailability, Tenderloin v. Sparks: Unavailable Aug. 1-5, Aug. 24-Sept. 16, 2022 Sunena Sabharwal Attorney at Law Certified Family Law Specialist, CA Board of Specialization; personal injury, insurance and employment law SABHARWAL LAW OFFICES 1816 Fifth Street Berkeley, CA 94710 Phone: (510) 665-8777 Fax: (510) 665-8778 http://sablawoffice.com PRIVILEGE & CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE The information in this electronic mail is intended for the named recipients only. It may contain privileged and confidential matter. If you have received this electronic mail in error, please notify the sender immediately by replying to this electronic e-mail or by calling (510) 665-8777. Do not disclose the contents to anyone. Thank you. NO TAX ADVICE that may be contained in this communication is intended to be written to be used and cannot be used or relied upon. You must seek the professional advice of a CPA or tax layer. NO AGREEMENT TO SERVICE BY EMAIL: The Sabharwal Law Offices does not accept service of any documents by email unless statutorily required or there is a specific agreement to accept service by email. EXHIBIT 2 From: Sunena Sabharwal To: Randy Rabidoux; info@soundlaw; Krista Spinks Subject: LEMASTERS EX PARTE PAPERS FOR 9-27-22 EX PARTE Date: Monday, September 26, 2022 11:33:59 PM Attachments: EX PARTE APPLICATION TO SPECIALLY SET MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT;ADJUDICATION.pdf EX PARTE PROPOSED ORDER.pdf NOTICE OF MOTION.pdf 9.26.2022 Sep. Statement re Mtn MSJ (v3) FINAL.pdf 09.26.2022 LEMASTERS DEC.pdf 9.7.2022 Declaration of S. Sabharwal Re Mtn. SJ.pdf 9.26.2022 Request for Judicial Notice ISO MFSJ.pdf 9.26.2022 MPA re MSJ FINAL.pdf Dear Counsel, Please find attached Ms. LeMasters' ex parte application. Notice of Unavailability, Tenderloin v. Sparks: Unavailable Aug. 1-5, Aug. 24-Sept. 16, 2022 Sunena Sabharwal Attorney at Law Certified Family Law Specialist, CA Board of Specialization; personal injury, insurance and employment law SABHARWAL LAW OFFICES 1816 Fifth Street Berkeley, CA 94710 Phone: (510) 665-8777 Fax: (510) 665-8778 http://sablawoffice.com PRIVILEGE & CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE The information in this electronic mail is intended for the named recipients only. It may contain privileged and confidential matter. If you have received this electronic mail in error, please notify the sender immediately by replying to this electronic e-mail or by calling (510) 665-8777. Do not disclose the contents to anyone. Thank you. NO TAX ADVICE that may be contained in this communication is intended to be written to be used and cannot be used or relied upon. You must seek the professional advice of a CPA or tax layer. NO AGREEMENT TO SERVICE BY EMAIL: The Sabharwal Law Offices does not accept service of any documents by email unless statutorily required or there is a specific agreement to accept service by email. EXHIBIT 3 1 SUNENA SABHARWAL (SBN 148237) Sabharwal Law Offices 2 1816 Fifth Street Berkeley, CA 94710 3 Telephone: (510) 665-8777 4 Facsimile: (510) 665-8778 Attorney for ELIZABETH LEMASTERS 5 6 7 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA 8 COUNTY OF SAN MATEO—CIVIL DIVISION 9 10 MARY ELIZABETH LEMASTERS, ) Case No. 19-CIV-03974 ) Plaintiff, ) EX PARTE APPLICATION TO 11 ) SPECIALLY SET MOTION FOR v. ) SUMMARY 12 ) JUDGMENT/ADJUDICATION OF PAUL FRANCIS DENINGER, ) SECOND AMENDED CROSS- 13 ) COMPLAINT; DECLARATION IN Defendant, ) SUPPORT OF APPLICATION 14 ) ) Date: 9-27-22 ) Time: EX PARTE, 1:30 PM 15 AND RELATED CROSS-ACTION. 16 17 EX PARTE APPLICATION 18 Cross-Complainant requests that the Court specially set the motion for summary 19 judgment / adjudication of the Second Amended Cross-Complaint on the court’s law and motion 20 calendar. Cross-Complainant proposes that it be set either on December 6th or 13th, or other date 21 acceptable to the Cross-Defendant. 22 // 23 24 // 25 // LEMASTERS V. DENNINGER, 19CV03974 1 DECLARATION OF SUNENA SABHARWAL IN SUPPORT OF EX PARTE APPLICATION 2 I, Sunena Sabharwal, hereby make this declaration based upon my own personal knowledge. 3 If called to testify, I would testify to the truth of the facts stated herein. 4 1. I gave notice of this ex parte application before 10 a.m. the day before the date of the 5 application, by emailing Mr. Rabidoux that I would make the ex parte application on 6 Tuesday, September 27th at 1:30 p.m. Specifically, I wrote to him: I intend to make an ex 7 parte application to specially set a motion for summary judgment/adjudication on Tuesday 8 September 27th at 1:30 p.m. with respect to your client's cross-complaint. Judge Fineman's 9 10 calendar has no official openings, as has been the case for several months. I will be asking 11 her to specially set this matter on either Dec. 6th or 13th, unless you are willing to have it 12 heard earlier. As you will see, the summary judgment motion is not lengthy as was yours. I 13 expect the separate statement, for example, to be around 15 pages in length.” 14 2. I have provided a copy of this ex parte and the moving papers to Mr. Rabidoux on 9/26/22. 15 3. The Court’s law and motion calendar is full. Trial in this matter is set on January 13, 2023. 16 The 105th day for service of the motion falls on September 30, 2022. 17 4. The motion is anticipated to resolve one or more causes of action, thereby streamlining and 18 promoting judicial economy. A copy of the motion and all supporting papers is submitted 19 herewith. 20 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing 21 is true and correct and that this declaration was executed in Berkeley, CA on September 26, 22 23 2022. 24 _________________________________ 25 Sunena Sabharwal LEMASTERS V. DENNINGER, 19CV03974 EXHIBIT 4 EXHIBIT 5 September 30, 2022 Via Email Only Ms. Sunena Sabharwal 1816 Fifth Street Berkeley, CA 94710 sunenas@hotmail.com Re: Lemasters v. Deninger 19-CIV-03974 Dear Ms. Sabharwal: I am in receipt of the Motion for Summary Adjudication Ms. Lemasters presented to our office. Please consider this letter my attempt to meet and confer regarding procedural defects with the motion. I notice that the date for the pretrial motion for summary adjudication is December 13, 2022. As you know, on July 5, 2022 the Honorable Nancy Fineman issued Pretrial orders which state: “A Pretrial Conference is scheduled for December 12, 2022 at 2:00 p.m. … [t]he Pretrial Conference is deemed to be the commencement of trial for all purposes, including but not limited to discovery and motion cutoff …” pg 7 ¶ 38, 39 As I am sure you are aware, California Code of Civil Procedure § 437c provides “… The motion [for summary adjudication] shall be heard no later than 30 days before the date of trial, unless the court for good cause orders otherwise.” Since December 13, 2022 is after the commencement of trial, it is improper for the motion to be heard on that date even if the court found good cause to accelerate the hearing date to less than thirty (30) days before trial. On September 26, 2022 you emailed to my office, at 11:34 pm, an ex parte application to be heard on September 27, 2022 seeking to calendar Ms. Lemaster’s motion for summary judgment on December 13th. The package emailed to my office included a proposed order finding good cause to calendar the motion on December 13, 2022. I was unavailable on September 27, 2022 and communicated such to you, nevertheless you elected to appear anyway. After you appeared you presented to my office the motion for summary judgment that same afternoon. I note that the moving papers presented do not include an approved order purporting to find good cause to schedule the motion for summary judgment less than thirty (30) before trial, much less purporting to find good cause to schedule the motion after the commencement of trial. Instead, the proposed order has a diagonal line drawn across the face of the order. I assume this line to be a strike out placed by the court or court clerk denying the request. Thus, I am left to believe that the court denied Ms. Lemasters’ request to Sunena Sabharwal September 30, 2022 Page 2 find good cause for the motion to be heard less than thirty (30) days before trial much less after the commencement of trial. Please provide an order that purports to find good cause for the motion for summary judgement to be heard less than thirty (30) days before trial and/or after the commencement of trial by October 3, 2022. If no such order exists, I would request that Ms. Lemasters withdraw the motion immediately. If Ms. Lemasters does not withdraw the motion my client will seek sanctions commensurate with the amount of time I am forced to spend to respond to a procedurally improper motion for summary judgment. Regards, Randy Rabidoux EXHIBIT 6 00121334ÿ00678ÿ9 ÿÿ9ÿÿÿ 678ÿ67ÿ:7;<=>7?=ÿ<@AÿB7@C@D7? EFGHGIÿEIKLIMNIOÿPQFGHGIQRLSTUIVOWXSUY ZMVÿ[\]^\_^__ÿ_`][ÿab cS`dMVQTIÿEeVGfQÿPIgUVGRQSFGgOINQhWXSUY iX`jOHkÿlSGHQÿPImSGHQRQSFGgOINQhWXSUYnoIGgpÿoIKVgSFkÿPMMIKVgSFkRQSFGgOINQhWXSUYnbVXLHOOHÿiSk PUXSkRQSFGgOINQhWXSUY qrsstÿvwxÿyz{|}t~xÿÿÿzrÿwrz}ÿt~wÿsrrwxÿÿÿrÿtÿt~wÿz}ÿtrÿtÿrÿwrrzwÿztwrxÿÿÿz ts}ÿtÿrÿ|ÿrxÿ ÿz}ÿzÿt~ÿzÿzrÿzrrwÿzw~rÿt~ÿzxÿÿÿzrÿrrÿtÿsrzÿ~ rÿ|~rÿtwÿw|zsÿt xÿÿÿwrzs|rÿrÿw|zsxÿÿrw|rÿrÿr}ÿ~ÿz|ÿsrÿt|tÿ|ÿs||r z}ÿr}ÿzÿt~srÿtÿ}zÿ}rzs|ÿ|ÿtrÿ|s~}|ÿÿrzw|xÿ ~wrwtwrÿrÿwrw|zsÿtw}rwÿzstÿzrÿzÿrÿtw}rwÿrrsrÿzwrÿ~{rÿtÿt}||z|tÿzÿr }|wr|tÿtÿrÿt~wxÿÿ vtwrÿ|twzsÿt~ÿt~s}ÿtÿ{rÿw|ÿ|~rÿzÿzwrÿ{zwwr}ÿ{ÿrÿz~rÿtÿs||z|txÿÿrÿzwr wr~|wr}ÿtÿrrÿz}ÿtrwÿz}ÿwrtsrÿ|~rxÿÿÿ~rÿzÿrÿ}tÿtxÿÿÿ|ÿ|ÿt~s}ÿ{rÿttwÿtwÿt zrÿt~ÿ|ÿtr|ÿzrrÿzssrrÿ|ÿz}ÿrÿzrÿrÿzrÿzÿt|tÿtwÿt~|ÿtwÿ}|wrr} rw}|ÿw|ÿ|ÿwtÿtÿrÿ~wxÿÿt~ÿt ÿzÿÿzw~rÿzwrxÿÿrÿzwrÿtw}rwr}ÿtÿzrÿrrw rtwÿtÿwz|rÿz}ÿ|ÿt|{srÿwrtsrÿwrw|zsÿz}ÿw|zsÿ|~rÿrzwsxÿÿ zÿt~ÿ ¡¢£ÿ¥ÿ¦§¨©¨¡ª̈«¡ª¡¬ÿ®£§¯£°ª¡§ÿ©±ÿ²³¨°´µ¶ÿÿ¦§¨©¨¡ª̈«ª£ÿ·¸¹±ÿº»¼ÿ·¸¹±ÿ½¾»²£³±ÿº¿ ½À½½ Á~rzÿÁz{zwzs ÂtwrÿzÿÃz ÿ Ärw||r}ÿz|sÿÃz ÿÁr|zs|ÿÄÂÿÅtzw}ÿtÿÁr|zs|Æz|tÇ ÿrwtzsÿ|~wÿ|~wzrÿz}ÿrstrÿsz ÁÂÅqÂyÂÃÿÃÂÿÄÈÁÿ ÉÊÿ|ÿÁwrrÿ ÅrwrsrÿÄÂÿÿËÌÿ trÍÿÎÏÐÿÊÊÏÉÌÌÌÿ zÍÿÎÏÐÿÊÊÏÉÌÌÉ ÍÑÑz{sz t|rxtÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ ÓÔÕÖÕ×ØÙØÿÚÿÛÜÝÞÕßØÝàÕá×ÕàâÿÝÜàÕÛØÿÿ àãäÿåæçèéêëìåèæÿåæÿìãåíÿäîäïìéèæåïÿêëåîÿåíÿåæìäæðäðÿçèéÿìãäÿæëêäðÿéäïåñåäæìíÿèæîòóÿÿÕìÿêëòÿïèæìëåæÿñéåôåîäõäðÿëæð ïèæçåðäæìåëîÿêëììäéóÿÿÕçÿòèöÿãëôäÿéäïäåôäðÿìãåíÿäîäïìéèæåïÿêëåîÿåæÿäééèé÷ÿñîäëíäÿæèìåçòÿìãäÿíäæðäéÿåêêäðåëìäîòÿøòÿéäñîòåæõÿìè ìãåíÿäîäïìéèæåïÿäùêëåîÿèéÿøòÿïëîîåæõÿúûüýþÿÿÿûù0111óÿÿßèÿæèìÿðåíïîèíäÿìãäÿïèæìäæìíÿìèÿëæòèæäóÿÿàãëæ2ÿòèöó ÝÜÿàá3ÿáßÖÕÛØÿìãëìÿêëòÿøäÿïèæìëåæäðÿåæÿìãåíÿïèêêöæåïëìåèæÿåíÿåæìäæðäðÿìèÿøäÿ4éåììäæÿìèÿøäÿöíäðÿëæðÿïëææèìÿøäÿöíäð èéÿéäîåäðÿöñèæóÿâèöÿêöíìÿíää2ÿìãäÿñéèçäííåèæëîÿëðôåïäÿèçÿëÿÛÓáÿèéÿìë5ÿîëòäéóÿ ÝÜÿáÙÔØØ6ØÝàÿàÜÿ7ØÔÖÕÛØÿ8âÿØ6áÕ×9ÿÿàãäÿ7ëøãëé4ëîÿ×ë4ÿÜççåïäíÿðèäíÿæèìÿëïïäñìÿíäéôåïäÿèçÿëæòÿðèïöêäæìíÿøò äêëåîÿöæîäííÿíìëìöìèéåîòÿéäöåéäðÿèéÿìãäéäÿåíÿëÿíñäïåçåïÿëõéääêäæìÿìèÿëïïäñìÿíäéôåïäÿøòÿäêëåîó ÿÿÿ !"#$% &ÿ '()*ÿ+ ,-ÿ.. /.ÿ01-ÿ2122ÿ3425ÿ67ÿ 8ÿ.ÿ/9"!ÿ. 9 !$% &ÿ :;ÿ .ÿ? . !"#$% &@ÿA ,ÿA/ =ÿ/ = !"#$% &@ÿ7%9.!!.ÿB = 611 1 1 199 9!"#$!"$ %&'("3) $!* 0$)+,')-#*(-$."0( 9 9!!2/30 1 27.3" - 04(/5! 013 00121334ÿ00678ÿ9 ÿÿ9ÿÿÿ 6789:;<9=>?@AB?ÿTP>U>VPS ÿ X99?ÿAYPS>99>Z ÿ [\A8]P?ÿ^@PA?ÿ89SSP<^9>?P>8Pÿ9CÿR9?A`a<ÿ?ARPD ÿ bU>8PSP@`Z ÿ cdefghÿjkelmf nopqrÿtuuvuwqxw ÿ ÿ yz{ÿ|}oq~ÿ|w~oowÿ|vwoÿ{{zz |qxÿ~qxvuÿtÿ{z orÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ{ qÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ{yzy ÿ tnÿ vuÿoqvrÿqÿxwqvxÿxvoxwvqrÿqxÿ}~vvropoÿqwo~vqrÿ~ÿwoÿuroÿuoÿÿwoÿvxwoxoÿ~ov}voxwuÿtxÿ~ovoÿuoÿvuw~vwvxÿ~ÿvuru~oÿÿwo~uÿvuÿuw~vwrÿ}~vvwoÿÿÿq~oÿxwÿwoÿvxwoxoÿ~ov}voxwÿ~ÿqw~vo wÿ~oovoÿ~ÿwoÿ~ov}voxwÿ}roquoÿxwqwÿwoÿuoxo~ÿÿ~o}rÿoqvrÿ~ÿqwÿ{ ÿqxÿorowoÿqrrÿ}vouÿÿwvuÿouuqpo ÿ ÿ ÿ 611 1 1 199 9!"#$!"$ %&'("3) $!* 0$)+,')-#*(-$."0( 9 9!!2/30 1 27.3" - 04(/5! 313