Free Reply to Response to Motion - District Court of California - California

Case 3:07-cv-02226-DMS-AJB

Document 20-2

Filed 01/17/2008

Page 1 of 5

, | 2 , . 4 5 6

Chad Austin. Esq. SBN235457 3 I29 India Streer SanDieso" A 921 C 03-601 4 Telepho"ne: 297-8888 1619) (619)295-1401 Facsimile: Attorney Plaintiff, for JAMESM. KINDER,anindividual

8 9 l0 l1
12

UNITEDSTATESDISTRICTCOuRT S OUTHERN DISTRICT CALIFoRNIA oF

JAMESM. KINDER,
Plaintifl

)

Casc 07 CV 2226 No. DMS(A.rB)
.ludge: IIon. DanaM. Sabraw M a g .J u d g e : I I o n .A n l h o n y . l . a l t a g l i a B P L A I N T I F FJ A M E S M . K I N D B R ' S OBJE,CTIONS O AND MOTION TO T STRIKE PORTIONS OF THE DECLARATION oF MTCHAEL KOSTRINSKYSTJBMTTTED Y Ir

) ) ) r-r ) V. ) 1T IA ) , ) HARRAH'S ENTERTAINMENT,Inc.and ) c r D O E S I t h r o u g h 0 0 ,i n c l u s i v e . 1 t ) 16

Defendants

1
lg l9 1n zt, 21 ..', Lt'

7

i

ilnn'pxoaxr

) ) )

)

Date: January 2008 25. I'imc: l_:30 .m. P Place: Couftroom10

TO THE COURT,ALL PARTIESAND THEIITA]]'ORNITYS OIr RECIORD: Plaintifl' JAMES M. KINDER herebysubmitsthe following objections and motions1ostrikeportions to in to of the Declaration MichaelKostrinksysubmitted Defbndant supporlof its Opposition of by namingnew defendants. Plaintiff s Motion to File First AmendedComplaint,

23
.\A
LA

25
2 6

ilt
t t l
t t l

27 28
D N C A S E O .0 7 C V 2 2 2 6 M S( A J B )

Case 3:07-cv-02226-DMS-AJB

Document 20-2

Filed 01/17/2008

Page 2 of 5

I

1.

DeclarationOf Michael Kostrinsky. In Its EntireW: Defendant filed the Declaration Michael Kostrinsky of on.lanuary14.2008. However,

2
a J

pursuanttoCivil Rule 7.1 (e)(3),Defendant could havefiled this declaration laterthan no January11,2008. Thercfore. Dcclaration the was filcd threeday.s lata. Declaration MichaelKostrinskyshouldbe strickenin its cntirety. of 2. Declaration Of Michael Kostrinsky, Paragraph 2: Paragraph of the Declaration MichaelKostrinskystates: 2 of "Specially AppearingDefendant Harrah'sEntertainment. is a I)elawarc Inc. corporation. headquartered Las Vegas.Nevada. It docsnot haveofficesin in California; doesnot own property (lalifornia; in doesnot haveempkryees in Calilbrnia;and,doesnot conductbusincss Calilbrnia. ,\pet'iully in Appeuring Defendant Ilarrah's Entertainment. doesnot maketelernarkeling other Inc. or telephone callsto individuals Califbrnia in usingan autonratic telephone dialing system. artificialor prerecorded voice.or otherwise.'" Grounds For Obiection: Eachand everyfactualstatement this paragraph in lackslbundationand thcrelbre this 'l'hcrcfbre. the

4 5 6

8 9

r0
11 12 l3 t4 l5 16 t7 l8 t9

2 0 paragraph 1 shouldbe strickenin its entirety. AlthoughMr. Koslrinskyclaimsin Paragraph of 2l 22
of doesnot sayhow this fact alonegiveshim any personulknowledge the inner-workings,
L-) .A /-+

Inc.." he Company. his Declaration be the "Chief LitigationOfflcer fbr Harrah'sOperating to

to propertyholdings,employment records. etc..of cachand everyentity l'laintiff seeks namc.

whalsocvcr,suchas corporatecharter 2 5 Moreover,he cites to no specificfacts or documents

26 documents,Secretary Statefilings, employmenlrecords.phonerecords.contractswith of 27 28
2 D N C A S E O .0 7 C V 2 2 2 6 M S( A J B )

Case 3:07-cv-02226-DMS-AJB

Document 20-2

Filed 01/17/2008

Page 3 of 5

, l
2
a

telemarketing firms,or anytypeof documentary evidence all. from whichhe allegedly at draws
-

any of this knowledge. Therefore,this entire paragraph without foundationand conclusory. is

4 5 , 6 t 3 9 10 lt 12 13 l4 l5

Moreover,Mr. Kostrinsky'sstatement "Harrah'sEntertainment" docsnot make that Inc. telemarketing othertelephone or callsto individualsin Calilbrniausingan automatic lclephonc dialing system, artificialor prerecorded voice.or otherwise" fbold added]is a legalconclusion and shouldalsobe stricken.F'inally, given that Mr. Kostrinskysaysthat no one from any of the Harrah'sentitieshaseverso much as pickedup a handsetand calleda Californiatelephone number, which is entirely ridiculous, credibility highlyquestionable. addition thc lact his is In to that this statemcnt so obviouslynot true. it makesno practical is sense.Ilow could one person possibly know the dayto dayjob duties person o1'every workinglbr the sundryIlarrah'sentities, which employthousands people?Even if Mr. Kostrinskydoespossess of suchomniscience, he hasnot told the couft how he acquired any of this knowledgc.All that Plaintiff and the court haveto go by is that Mr. Kostrinskyis a luv,yer.fitr l)a./bndunl.whose.job necessarily lhc depends on gettingDefendant of legal.iams. out suchasthe instant action. 3. DeclarationOf Michael Kostrinsky. Paragrarrh3: Paragraph of the Declaration Michael Kostrinskystates: 2 of "Harrah'sOperating Inc. is a Delaware Company. corporation and is not headquartered California. It doesnot haveofficesin California:doesnot own in propertyin California;doesnot havccnrployees (lalilbrnia; and.doesno1 in is Corporation a conductbusiness Califbrnia;Harrah'sMarketingServices in

t6
l7 I8 lg 20 21 22 ^a 24 25

26

not in and foreigncorporation; not headquarlered Califbrnia; does ownproperty is 3 D ( CASE 07CV 22 26 M S AJ ts ) NO.

27 28

Case 3:07-cv-02226-DMS-AJB

Document 20-2

Filed 01/17/2008

Page 4 of 5

1 Z 3 4

in Califomia; Harrah'sLicenseCompany. LLC is a fbreigncompanyand is not headquartered California; It doesnot haveoffices in Califbrnia; doesnot own in propertyin California;doesnot haveemployees California;and.doesnot in conductbusiness California. Harrah'st-aughlin. in Inc. is a lbreign corporation undis not headquartered California. It doesnot havcolllces in Clalifornia; in does not own propertyin California;doesnot haveemployees Calilbrnia;and,does in not conductbusiness Califbrnia. And. HBR RealtyCompany,Inc. is a foreign in corporation is not headquartered California. It doesnot haveofficesin and in California;doesnot own propcrtyin Califbrnia:docsnot havc cmployccs in California; and.doesnot conduct business Calilbrnia." in G r o u n d sF o r O b i e c t i o n : Each and every factual statement this paragraph in lacks fbundationand therefbrethis paragraph shouldbe stricken its entirety. AlthoughMr. Kostrinskyclaimsin Paragraph of in I his Declaration be the "Chief LitigationOfficer lbr Ilarrah'sOperating to Inc.," he Company, doesnot sayhow this fact alonegiveshim anyper.sonulknowledge the inner-workings, of propertyholdings, employment records, etc..of eachand cverycntity Plaintill'seeks name. to Moreover,he citesto no specificfactsor documents whalsoever, chartcr suchas corporatc phonerecords. records, contracts with documents, Secretary Statefilings, employment of draws firms, or any type of documentary at telemarketing evidence all. from which he allegedly

6 j 8 9 l0 1t lZ I J? I 14
1 <

LJ l6
T /

18 lg 20
11

22 -n"^
,4

is and conclusory. any of this knowledge.Therefore, entireparagraph without foundation this

25 26
.,| L I

that 2 giventhatMr. Kostrinsky in Paragraphof his Declaration says As discussed above,
4

2g

D C A S E O .0 7 C V 2 2 2 6 M S( A J B ) N

Case 3:07-cv-02226-DMS-AJB

Document 20-2

Filed 01/17/2008

Page 5 of 5

1 2 3
A r

no one from any of the Harrah'sentitieshasever so much as picked up a hand set and called a Californiatelephone number,which is entirelyridiculous. credibilityis highly questionable. his In additionto the fact that this statement so obviouslynot true.it rnakes oracticalsense. is no IIow could one personpossiblyknow the day to day.jobdutiesof everypcrsonwclrkingfor thc sundryHanah's entities, which employthousands o1-people? Even i1'Mr. Kostrinskydoes suchomniscience, hasnot told the court how he acquired he any of this knowledge.All Possess that Plaintiff and the court haveto go by is that Mr. Kostrinsky is v luy,yerfttr tha Defbnclant. whosejob necessarily depends gettingDefendant of legaljams. suchas thc instantaction. on out

5 6 7 8 9 10 1l

t2
l3 14 l5

Moreover, is discussed the Replylllcd herewith. as in Ilarrah'sMarkctingScrvices Corporation and Ilarrah'sOperating Company, Inc. havedesignated agcntslbr serviceo1'process on file with the CalilbrniaSecretary State. of 'l'hey haveconsented ,guit the Stateof to in

Californiaand aretherefore subject jurisdictionhere. to

l6 t7 18 19 20 21 22
LJ

DATED:January 17,2008
Bv: /s/ ChadAustin CHAD AUSl'lN. Esq..Attorney for Plaintill.JAMES M. KINDER I :rnai : chadausti I n(a)cox. nct

24 25 26 27 28
N D C A S E O .0 7 C V 2 2 2 6 M S( A J B )