Free Response to Order to Show Cause - District Court of California - California

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 1 of 10

EDMUND G. BROWN JR. Attorney General of the State of California DANE R. GILLETTE Chief Assistant Attorney General JULIE L. GARLAND Senior Assistant Attorney General JENNIFER A. NEILL Supervising Deputy Attorney General STEVEN G. WARNER, State Bar No. 239269 Deputy Attorney General 455 Golden Gate Avenue, Suite 11000 6 San Francisco, CA 94102-7004 Telephone: (415) 703-5747 7 Fax: (415) 703-5843 Email: [email protected] 8 9 Attorneys for Respondent Warden Ben Curry SF2008401505 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 As an Answer to the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by inmate Cleve Otis Hulsey, v. BEN CURRY, Warden, Respondent. Judge: The Honorable Jeffrey S. White CLEVE OTIS HULSEY, Petitioner, Case No. C 08-1009 JSW ANSWER TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

22 Respondent admits, alleges, and denies that:' 23' 1. Hulsey is in the lawful custody of the California Department of Corrections and

'24 Rehabilitation following his 1990 conviction of first-degree murder. (Pet. at 3.) Hulsey is 25 26 serving a life sentence with the possibility of parole. (Id.) 2. In 2007, Hulsey filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus in Tulare County Superior

27 Court, alleging that the Board of Parole Hearings' 2006 decision denying him parole violated his 28 due process rights. (Ex. 1, Super. Ct. Pet.; Ex. 2, [Super. Ct.] Ruling Re: Pet. for Writ of Habeas
Answer to Order to Show Cause; Mem. of P. & A.

Hulsey v. Curry
Case No. C 08-1009 JSW-

1

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 2 of 10

Corpus.) The superior court denied the petition, finding that "[i]t is clear from the record that 2 there was more than enough evidence to justify the denial of petitioner's parole." (Ex. 2 at 2.) 3 3. Hulsey then filed petitions in the California Court of Appeal and the California

4 Supreme Court. (Ex. 3, Ct. App. Pet.; Ex. 4, Sup. Ct. Pet.) Both courts summarily denied the 5 petitions. (Ex. 5, Ct. App. Order; Ex. 6, Cal. Appellate Cts. Case Information at 2.) 6 4. Respondent admits that Hulsey exhausted his state court remedies regarding the claim

7 that the Board's 2006 decision was not supported by some evidence and violated due process. 8 Respondent denies that Hulsey has exhausted his claims to the extent they are interpreted more 9 broadly to encompass any systematic issues beyond this claim. 10 11 12 13 5. Respondent admits that the Petition is timely under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1).

Respondent admits that the Petition is not subject to any other procedural bar. 6. Respondent denies that Hulsey is entitled to federal habeas relief under 28 U.S.C. §

2254 because the state court decisions were not contrary to, or an unreasonable application of

14 clearly established federal law as determined by the United States Supreme Court, or based on an 15 unreasonable determination of the facts. 16 7. Respondent denies that Hulsey has a federally protected liberty interest in parole and,

17 therefore, alleges that he has not a stated a federal question invoking this court's jurisdiction. 18 The Supreme Court has not clarified the methodology for determining whether a state has created 19 a federally protected liberty interest in parole. See Greenholtz v. Inmates of Neb. Penal & Corr. 20 21 Complex, 442 U.S. 1, 12 (1979) (liberty interest in conditional parole release date created by unique structure and language of state parole statute); Sandin v. Connor, 515 U.S. 472, 484

22 (1995) (federal liberty interest in 'correctional setting created only when issue creates an "atypical 23 or significant hardship" compared with ordinary prison life); Wilkinson v. Austin, 545 U.S. 209,

24 229 (2005) (Sandin abrogated Greenholtz's methodology for establishing the liberty interest). 25 Continued confinement under an indeterminate life sentence does not impose an "atypical or

26 significant hardship" under Sandin since a parole denial does not alter an inmate's sentence, 27 impose a new condition of confinement, or otherwise restrict his liberty while he serves his 28 sentence. Thus, Respondent asserts that Hulsey does not have a federal liberty interest in parole.
Answer to Order to Show Cause; Mem. of P. & A.

Hulsey v. Curry
Case No. C 08-1009 JSW

2

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 3 of 10

1 2 3

Respondent acknowledges that in Sass v, Cal. Bd. of Prison Terms, 461 F.3d 1123, 1128 (9th " Cir. 2006) the Ninth Circuit held that California's parole statute creates a federal liberty interest in parole under the mandatory-language analysis of Greenholtz, but preserves the argument,

4 which is pending en bans review in Hayward v. Marshall, 527 F.3d 797 (9th Cir. 2008). 5 8. Even if Hulsey has a federal liberty interest in parole, he received all due process to

.6 which he is entitled under clearly established federal law because he was provided with an 7 opportunity to be heard and a statement of reasons for the Board's decision. Greenholtz, 442 8 U.S. at 16. 9 9. Respondent denies that the some-evidence standard is clearly established federal law in

10 the parole context. Respondent affirmatively alleges that Hulsey's contentions about the proper 11 some-evidence standard rely on regulations and In re Scott, 133 Cal. App. 4th 573 (2005),

12 instead of clearly established federal law, and thus are state law claims not properly before this 13 14 Court.
K

10. Respondent denies that the Board's 2006 decision violated Hulsey's federal due

15 process rights, was arbitrary, or was unsupported by any evidence. 16 11. Respondent affirmatively alleges that Hulsey makes state law claims not properly

17 before this Court when he contends that the Board failed to follow regulations, that he has served 18 beyond his minimum term because credits should apply to his sentence, and that there is no 19 evidence his commitment offense was particularly egregious. Respondent further affirmatively

20 alleges that Hulsey cites no clearly established United State Supreme Court law in support of 21 22 23 these contentions. 12. Respondent affirmatively alleges that the Board may deny parole based on unchanging factors, and denies that such reliance violates due process. Respondent further affirmatively

24 alleges that the commitment offense is some evidence of unsuitability. Respondent also 25 affirmatively alleges that there is no clearly established federal law precluding a denial based on

26 unchanging factors. 27 13. Respondent affirmatively alleges that there is no clearly established federal law

28 requiring the Board to show that Hulsey is a current risk of danger to society. Respondent further
Answer to Order to Show Cause; Mem. of P. & A.

Hulsey v. Curry
Case No. C 08-1009 JSW

3

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 4 of 10

1

affirmatively alleges that the some-evidence standard is a judicial standard of review, not a

2 standard that the Board must apply to Hulsey's hearing. .3 14. Respondent-denies that an evidentiary hearing is necessary. Hulsey's claims

4 can be resolved on the existing state court record. Baja v. Ducharme, 187 F.3d 1075, 1078 (9th 5 Cir. 1999). 6 15. Respondent denies that Hulsey is entitled to an order reversing his 2006 hearing or

7 requiring the Board to follow the letter and spirit of applicable law, regulations, and precedent, or 8 specifically limiting a re-hearing in any way. The remedy is limited to the process that is due, 9 which is a new Board hearing comporting with due process. See, e.g., Benny v. US. Parole 10 Comm 'n, 295 F.3d 977, 984-85 (9th Cir. 2002) (a liberty interest in parole is limited by the 11 Board's exercise of discretion, and a due process error does not entitle an inmate to a favorable

12 parole decision). 13 14 16. Hulsey fails to state or establish any grounds for habeas corpus relief 17. Except as expressly admitted in this Answer, Respondent denies the allegations of the

15 Petition. 16 17 18 MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES INTRODUCTION Hulsey claims that the Board's 2006 decision finding him unsuitable for parole violated his

19 due process rights. But Hulsey merely alleges a disagreement with the Board's decision, and 20 fails to establish that the state court decisions denying his due process claims were contrary to, or 21 an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law as determined by the United States

22 Supreme Court, or were based on an unreasonable determination of the facts. Thus, there are no 23 24 25 26 27 28 Under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA) a federal court
Answer to Order to Show Cause; Mem. of P. & A. Hulsey v. Curry

grounds for federal habeas relief ARGUMENT I. HULSEY HAS NOT SHOWN THAT HE IS ENTITLED TO RELIEF UNDER AEDPA.

Case No. C 08-1009 JSW

4

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 5 of 10

1

may not grant a writ of habeas corpus unless the state court's adjudication was either: 1)

2 "contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as 3 determined by the Supreme Court of the United States;" or 2) "based on an unreasonable

4 determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented at the State Court proceeding." 5 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1-2) (2000). Hulsey has not demonstrated that he is entitled to relief under 6 this standard. 7 8 9 As a threshold matter, the Court must decide what, if any, "clearly established Federal law" A. Hulsey Has Not Shown that the State Court Decisions Were Contrary to Clearly Established Federal Law.

10 applies. Lockyer v. Andrade, 538 U.S. 63, 71 (2003). In making this determination, the Court 11 may look only to the holdings of the United States Supreme Court governing at the time of the U.S. , 127 S. Ct. 649, 653 (quoting

12 state court's adjudication. Carey v. Musladin, 13

Williams v. Taylor, 529 U.S. 362 (2000)). The only case in which the Supreme Court has

14 addressed the process due in state parole proceedings is Greenholtz. Greenholtz, 442 U.S. 1. 15 The Supreme Court there held that due process is satisfied when the state provides an inmate an 16 opportunity to be heard and a statement of the reasons for the parole decision. Id. at 16. "The 17 Constitution does not require more." 18 parole hearing. 19 Hulsey does not contest that he received the Greenholtz protections. (See generally Pet.) No other Supreme Court holdings require more at a

20 Because Greenholtz was satisfied and Greenholtz is the only Supreme Court authority regarding 21 an inmate's due process rights during parole proceedings, the state court decisions upholding the

22 Board's denial were not contrary to clearly established federal law. Thus, the Petition should be 23 24 25 1. The Supreme Court has cited Greenholtz approvingly for the proposition that the "level of process due for inmates being considered for release on parole includes an opportunity to be heard 27 and notice of any adverse decision" and noted that, although Sandin abrogated Greenholtz's methodology for establishing the liberty interest, Greenholtz remained "instructive for [its] 28 discussion of the appropriate level of procedural safeguards." Austin, 545 U.S. at 229. 26
Answer to Order to Show Cause; Mem. of P. & A.

denied. Although Hulsey contends that some evidence must support the Board's decision, there is

Hulsey v. Curry
Case No. C 08-1009 JSW

5

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 6 of 10

1 2 3

no clearly established federal law applying the some-evidence standard to parole decisions. The Supreme Court has held that under AEDPA a test announced in one context is not clearly established federal law when applied to another context. Wright v. Van Patten, U.S. 128

4 S. Ct. 743, 746-47 (2008); Schriro v. Landrigan, 5 6

U.S., 127 S. Ct. 1933 (2007); Musladin,

127 S. Ct. at 652-54; see also, Foote v. Del Papa, 492 F.3d 1026, 1029 (9th Cir. 2007); Nguyen
v.

Garcia, 477 F.3d 716, 718, 727 (9th Cir. 2007); Crater v. Galaza, 491 F.3d 1119, 1122 (9th

7 Cir. 2007). The Supreme Court developed,the some-evidence standard in the context of a prison 8 disciplinary hearing, Superintendent v. Hill, 472 U.S. 445, 457 (1985), which is a fundamentally

9 different context than a parole proceeding. Because the tests and standards developed by the 10 Supreme Court in one context cannot be transferred to distinguishable factual circumstances for 11 AEDPA purposes, it is not appropriate to apply the some-evidence standard of judicial review to

12 parole decisions. 13 While the Ninth Circuit has applied the some-evidence standard to parole decisions, this is

14 improper under AEDPA, and the issue is currently pending before an en banc panel of the Ninth 15
16

Circuit. Hayward, 527 F.3d 797. , AEDPA does not permit relief based on circuit case law. Crater, 491 F.3d at 1123, 1126 (§ 2254(d)(1) renders decisions by lower courts non-dispositive

17 for habeas appeals); Earp v. Ornoski, 431 F.3d 1158, 1182 (9th Cir. 2005) ("Circuit court 18 precedent is relevant only to the extent it clarifies what constitutes clearly established law." .. . 19 "Circuit precedent derived from an extension of a Supreme Court decision is not clearly 20 established federal law as determined by the Supreme Court."); Duhaime v. Ducharme, 200 F.3d 21 597, 600-01 (9th Cir. 2000). Therefore, the Ninth Circuit's use of the some-evidence standard is

22 not clearly established federal law and is not binding on this Court. See, e.g., Biggs v. Terhune, 23 334 F.3d 910 (9th Cir. 2003); Sass, 461 F.3d at 1128; Irons v. Carey, 505 F.3d 846, 851 (9th

24 Cir. 2007). 25 Hulsey contends that the state court's decision was arbitrary. (Mem. of Law at 13.) To

26 the extent that this Court interprets this contention as meaning the that Board'd denial was 27 arbitrary, the contention lacks merit. The Board's findings and decision would be arbitrary if 28 made seemingly at random without individualized consideration of Hulsey's case. Here, the
Answer to Order to Show Cause; Mem. of P. & A.

Hulsey v. Curry
Case No. C 08-1009 JSW

6

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 7 of 10

1

Board individually considered Hulsey's pre- and post-conviction factors and therefore did not

2 make arbitrary findings or an arbitrary decision. 3 Similarly, Hulsey's additional claim that the Board's reliance on immutable factors

4 violates due process finds no support in Supreme Court precedent. Although the Ninth Circuit 5 has suggested that this might amount to an additional due process claim, Biggs, 334 F.3d at 917, 6 because there is no clearly established federal law precluding reliance on unchanging factors 7 federal habeas relief is not available. 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d). 8 In sum, the only clearly established federal law setting forth the process due in the parole

9 context is Greenholtz. Hulsey does not allege that he failed to receive these protections. 10 Therefore Hulsey has not shown that the state court decisions denying habeas relief were contrary 11 12 13 14 Habeas relief may only be granted based on AEDPA's unreasonable-application clause to clearly established federal law. B. Hulsey Has Not Shown that the State Courts Unreasonably Applied Clearly Established Federal Law.

15 where the state court identifies the correct governing legal rule from Supreme Court cases but 16 unreasonably applies it to the facts of the particular state case. Williams, 529 U.S. at 406. The 17 petitioner must do more than merely establish that the state court was wrong or erroneous. Id. at 18 410; Lockyer, 538 U.S. at 75. Respondent recognizes that the Ninth Circuit applies the some/ 19 evidence'standard as clearly established federal law, but even accepting that premise, Hulsey is 20 not entitled to federal habeas relief. Indeed, the California Supreme Court has adopted Hill's 21 some-evidence standard as the judicial standard to be used in evaluating parole decisions, In re

22 Rosenkrantz, 29 Cal. 4th 616 (2002), and Hulsey has not shown that the state courts 23 unreasonably applied the standard. 24 25 When, as here, the California Supreme Court denies a petition for review without comment, the federal court will look to the last reasoned decision as the basis for the state court's

26 judgment. Ylst v. Nunnemaker, 501 U.S. 797, 803-04 (1991). In this case, the last reasoned 27 decision is the Tulare County Superior Court's order denying Hulsey's habeas petition. (Ex. 2.) 28 The superior court denied the petition, finding that "Petitioner has failed to state a basis for
Answer to Order to Show Cause; Mem. of P. & A.
Hulsey v. Curry

Case No. C 08-1009 ;SW

7

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 8 of 10

1

relief' and "[i]t is clear from the record that there was more than enough evidence to justify the

2 denial of petitioner's parole." (Ex. 2 at 1, 2.) Hulsey's claim fails: he has not shown that the 3 4 5 6 7 Under . § 2254(d)(2), habeas corpus can not be granted unless the state courts' decisions superior court unreasonably applied Hill, but rather asks this Court to re-weigh his suitability. Such a re-weighing has no basis in United States Supreme Court law. C. Hulsey Has Not Shown that the State Court Decisions Were Based on an Unreasonable Determination of the Facts.

8 were based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in the 9 state court. The state courts' factual determinations are presumed to be correct, and the petitioner

10 has the burden of rebutting that presumption by clear and convincing evidence. 28 U.S.C. § 11. 2254(e)(1). 12 13 Although Hulsey alleges that the Board's decision is not supported by the evidence, he does not show that the state court made factual errors. Here the Tulare County Superior Court

14 found that "[t]he record shows that there were relevant facts upon which the Board . . . could and 15 16 did base their decision[]," and then listed facts relied on by the Board, including Hulsey's commitment offense, history of alcohol abuse, and disciplinary history. (Ex. 2 at 2.) Hulsey has

17 not alleged by clear and convincing evidence that the factual determinations are incorrect. He 18 disagrees with the weight the Board assigned to the evidence. This disagreement does not entitle

19 Hulsey to federal habeas relief. 20 /// 21 ///

22 /// 23 /// 24 /// ,25 /// 26 /// 27 /// 28 ///
Answer to Order to Show Cause; Mem. of P. & A. Hulsey v. Curry Case No. C 08-1009 JSW

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 9 of 10

1 2 3

CONCLUSION Hulsey has not demonstrated that the state court decisions denying habeas relief were contrary to, or an unreasonable application of, United States Supreme Court authority, or based

4 on an unreasonable determination of the facts. Thus, the Petition should be denied. 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
20133986.wpd

Dated: September 2, 2008 Respectfully submitted, EDMUND G. BROWN JR. Attorney General of the State of California DANE R. GILLETTE Chief Assistant Attorney General JULIE L. GARLAND Senior Assistant Attorney General JENNIFER A. NEILL Supervising Deputy Attorney General

STEVEN G. WARNER Deputy Attorney General Attorneys for Respondent

Answer to Order to Show Cause; Mem. of P. & A.

Hulsey v. Curry
Case No. C 08-1009 JSW

9

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 10 of 10

DECLARATION OF SERVICE BY U.S.MAIL Case Name: Case No.: I declare: I am employed in the Office of the Attorney General, which is the office of a member of the California State Bar, at which member's direction this service is made. I am 18 years of age or older and not a party to this matter. I am familiar with the business practice at the Office of the Attorney General for collection and processing of correspondence for mailing with the United States Postal Service. In accordance with that practice, correspondence placed in the internal mail collection system at the Office of the Attorney General is deposited with the United States Postal Service that same day in the ordinary course of business. On September 2, 2008, I served the attached ANSWER TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES WITH EXHIBITS 1 - 6 by placing a true copy thereof enclosed in a sealed envelope with postage thereon fully prepaid, in the internal mail collection system at the Office of the Attorney General at 455 Golden Gate Avenue, Suite 11000, San Francisco, CA 94102-7004, addressed as follows: Cleve Otis Hulsey, E-53226 Correctional Training Facility FW-235 P.O. Box 689 Soledad, CA 93960-0686
In Pro Per

Cleve Otis Hulsey v. Ben Curry, Warden U. S. D. C., N. D., San Francisco Div., C 08-1009 JSW

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California the foregoing is true and correct and that this declaration was executed on September 2, 2008; at San Francisco, California.

J. Baker Declarant
20138407.wpd

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 1 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 2 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 3 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 4 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 5 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 6 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 7 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 8 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 9 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 10 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 11 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 12 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 13 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 14 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 15 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 16 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 17 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 18 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 19 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 20 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 21 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 22 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 23 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 24 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 25 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 26 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 27 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 28 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 29 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 30 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 31 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 32 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 33 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 34 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 35 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 36 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 37 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 38 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 39 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 40 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 41 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 42 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 43 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 44 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 45 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 46 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 47 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 48 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 49 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 50 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 51 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 52 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 53 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 54 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 55 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 56 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 57 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 58 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 59 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 60 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 61 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 62 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 63 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 64 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-2

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 65 of 65

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 1 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 2 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 3 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 4 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 5 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 6 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 7 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 8 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 9 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 10 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 11 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 12 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 13 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 14 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 15 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 16 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 17 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 18 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 19 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 20 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 21 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 22 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 23 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 24 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 25 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 26 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 27 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 28 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 29 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 30 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 31 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 32 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 33 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 34 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 35 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 36 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 37 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 38 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 39 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 40 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 41 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 42 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 43 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 44 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 45 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 46 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 47 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 48 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 49 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 50 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 51 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 52 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 53 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 54 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 55 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 56 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 57 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 58 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 59 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 60 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 61 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 62 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 63 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 64 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 65 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 66 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 67 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 68 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 69 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 70 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 71 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 72 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 73 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 74 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 75 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 76 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 77 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 78 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 79 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-3

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 80 of 80

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-4

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 1 of 5

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-4

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 2 of 5

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-4

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 3 of 5

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-4

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 4 of 5

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-4

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 5 of 5

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 1 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 2 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 3 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 4 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 5 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 6 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 7 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 8 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 9 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 10 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 11 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 12 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 13 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 14 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 15 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 16 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 17 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 18 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 19 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 20 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 21 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 22 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 23 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 24 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 25 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 26 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 27 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 28 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 29 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 30 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 31 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 32 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 33 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 34 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 35 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 36 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 37 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 38 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 39 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 40 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 41 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 42 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 43 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 44 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 45 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 46 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 47 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 48 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 49 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 50 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 51 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 52 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 53 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 54 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 55 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-5

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 56 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 1 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 2 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 3 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 4 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 5 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 6 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 7 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 8 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 9 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 10 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 11 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 12 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 13 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 14 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 15 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 16 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 17 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 18 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 19 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 20 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 21 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 22 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 23 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 24 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 25 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 26 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 27 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 28 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 29 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 30 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 31 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 32 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 33 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 34 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 35 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 36 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 37 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 38 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 39 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 40 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 41 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 42 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 43 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 44 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 45 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 46 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 47 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 48 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 49 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 50 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 51 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 52 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 53 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 54 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 55 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 56 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 57 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 58 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 59 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 60 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 61 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-6

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 62 of 62

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-7

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 1 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-7

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 2 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-7

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 3 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-7

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 4 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-7

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 5 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-7

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 6 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-7

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 7 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-7

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 8 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-7

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 9 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-7

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 10 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-7

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 11 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-7

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 12 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-7

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 13 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-7

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 14 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-7

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 15 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-7

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 16 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-7

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 17 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-7

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 18 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-7

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 19 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-7

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 20 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-7

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 21 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-7

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 22 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-7

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 23 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-7

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 24 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-7

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 25 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-7

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 26 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-7

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 27 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-7

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 28 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-7

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 29 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-7

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 30 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-7

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 31 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-7

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 32 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-7

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 33 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-7

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 34 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-7

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 35 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-7

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 36 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-7

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 37 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-7

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 38 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-7

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 39 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-7

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 40 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-7

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 41 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-7

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 42 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-7

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 43 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-7

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 44 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-7

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 45 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-7

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 46 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-7

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 47 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-7

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 48 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-7

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 49 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-7

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 50 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-7

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 51 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-7

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 52 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-7

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 53 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-7

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 54 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-7

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 55 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-7

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 56 of 56

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-8

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 1 of 16

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-8

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 2 of 16

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-8

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 3 of 16

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-8

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 4 of 16

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-8

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 5 of 16

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-8

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 6 of 16

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-8

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 7 of 16

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-8

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 8 of 16

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-8

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 9 of 16

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-8

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 10 of 16

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-8

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 11 of 16

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-8

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 12 of 16

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-8

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 13 of 16

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-8

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 14 of 16

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-8

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 15 of 16

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-8

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 16 of 16

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-9

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 1 of 2

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-9

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 2 of 2

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-10

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 1 of 2

Case 3:08-cv-01009-JSW

Document 5-10

Filed 09/02/2008

Page 2 of 2