Free Statement - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

EXHIBIT N
Case 2:03-cv-01997-ROS Document 75-6 Filed 08/22/2005 Page10f3

D6/24/2005 13:36 FAX 5594395654 rom raw FIRM @009
1 Russell K. Ryan #1.39835
2 MOTSCHIEDLER, MICHAELIDES & VVISHON, LLP
. 1690 West Shaw Avenue, Suite 200
3 Fresno, California 93711
Telephone (559) 439-4000 _
4 Facsimile (559) 439-5654
5
Attorneys for Plaintiff QC CONSTRUCTION
6 PRODUCTS, LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability Company t
7 _
8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
I0 QC CONSTRUCTION PRODUCTS, Case No., CV ‘03 1997 PHX ROS
11 LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability
Company, RESPONSE TO
12 DEFENDANTS’/COIJNTER
13 Plaintiff, CLAIMAN"I`S’ THIRD SET OF NON-
UNIFORM INTERROGATORIES
14 v.. PROPOUNDED ON PLAINTIFFI
1 5 COUNTERDEFENDANT
COI—l]LL’S BUILDING SPECIALTIES, f
16 INC., and MICHAEL COHH..L, ,
1 7 Defendants.
13 AND RELATED COUNTERCLAIMS.
19
20 PROPOUNDNG PARTY: Defendant and Counterclaimant COHILIRS
21 BUILDING SPECIALITIES, INC,
RESPONDING PARTY: Plaintiff and Counterdefendant QC CONSTRUCTION
22 PRODUCTS, LLC ` I
23 SET NUMBER: THREE
24 PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
25 'In providing amended responses to these non—uniform interrogatories,
26 Responding Party reserves all objections relating to inadmissible evidence; to any and all y
27 objections based upon privacy, attorney-client privilege and/or attorney work product
’;‘u?_,[f`*';*f|'§;‘éE“· 28 doctrine; the right to introduce at trial evidence which is presently unknown to
5. WIS!-ION. LLP :
Case 2:03-cv-01997-ROS Document 75-6; - Filed 08/22/2005 Page 2 of 3 I
mEpmW_E5B)“Mm 05767:0002//145944 wrn Response to Second Set of Non-Uniform interrogatories H-

06/24/2005 13:37 F/ix sssassssm rnrw L/tw snot 011
1 5.. Without waiving any ofthe foregoing, Responding Party has
2 attempted to provide ample responses to these non-uniform interrogatories where
3 appropriate. However, Responding Party has not intended or attempted to base these
4 responses on global review, or recall ofevery evidentiary fact or item of evidentiary
5 material which somehow may be “involved" or “r·elated” to the matters about which
6 propounding party seeks discovery.
7 This preliminary statement is hereby incorporated into each and every
8 response herein as thought set forth in full.
9 INTERROGATORY NO. 1:
10 Identify any and all dates during the time period commencing December 1,
11 2002 and concluding December 31, 2003 upon which Steve Darke met with
12 representatives of Border Products in Phoenix, Arizona, specifying for each ofthe date(s) ;
13 upon which such meeting(s) occurred and the identity ofthe individual(s) with whom
14 Darke met at each such meeting(s)..
15 RESPONSE T0 INTERROGATORY N0. 1:
16 1.. December 12, 2002.. In attendance were Mr., Darke, Tony Valdez and
17 Ray Valenzuela of`Bor·der Products.,
18 2. July 2'7-31, 2003 .. Derninars at Border Products locations in Tucson,
19 Phoenix and Flagstaff, In attendance were Darke, Tony Valdez and various Border
20 employees. T `
21 3.. October 8-10, 2003.. Deminars at Marvel and Border Products. In
22 attendance were Mr. Darke and Wendy Ho1°’£meyer·, project manager at Marvel and! or
23 Borders for a lunch meeting on October 9.. A number of Marvel and! or Border employees "
24 would have attended the Deminars.
25 / / / `
26 ///
27 /// M
.'l%Li?.§?.'.%°E'5“‘ 28 / / / Y
fiihlifgtkkfwt -
Case 2:03-cv-01997-ROS E>p&1—rpiwt75-Gs - Filed 08/22/2005 Pagi 3 of 3
03767/0003//146944 wrn Response to Second Set ofNon—U11i.t`orrn Interrogatories

Case 2:03-cv-01997-ROS

Document 75-6

Filed 08/22/2005

Page 1 of 3

Case 2:03-cv-01997-ROS

Document 75-6

Filed 08/22/2005

Page 2 of 3

Case 2:03-cv-01997-ROS

Document 75-6

Filed 08/22/2005

Page 3 of 3