Document 3NV1RoNq3Mj9B5yejmN9gvyoD

1 John M. Drath, State Bar No. 045031 Traci E. Wennerholra, State Bar No. 121152 2 David F. Beach, State Bar No. 094847 PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT 1 1 usx-ioss 1 1 1 | 3 44 Montgomery Street, Suite 1500 San Francisco, California 94104 4 Telephone: (415) 392-3006 TELEFAX: (415) 391-3348 5 OF COUNSEL: 6 R. Patrick Baughman, Esq. 7 Susan S. Henderson, Esq. Robert J. Eppich, Esq. e BAUGHMAN & ASSOCIATES CO., L.P.A 55 Public Square, Suite 2215 9 Cleveland, Ohio 44113 Telephone: (216) 687-1244 10 TELEFAX: (216) 621-4066 11 Attorneys for Defendant USX CORPORATION 12 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 13 IN AND FOR THE CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 14 15 IN RE: COMPLEX ASBESTOS 16 LITIGATION 17 18 ) CASE NO.: 828684 ) ) DEFENDANT USX CORPORATION'S ) FURTHER ANSWERS TO GENERAL ) ORDER 129 INTERROGATORIES ) 19 COMES NOW defendant, USX CORPORATION, by and through its 20 attorneys of record herein, and further responds under oath to 21 General Order 129 Interrogatories. Defendant has not completed 22 its^discovery or investigation into the facts of this case. The 23 responses herein are based upon information presently known to 24 defendant and it reserves the right to introduce at trial evidence 25 of facts subsequently learned through investigation and discovery 26 which conflict with any response herein. 27 INTERROGATORY NO 10: 28 IDENTIFY the person or persons most knowledgeable about: i*0 1 T 1 A. YOUR acquisition of RAW ASBESTOS and/or ASBESTOS 2, CONTAINING PRODUCTS; 3 B. YOUR use of RAW ASBESTOS and/or ASBESTOS-CONTAINING 4 PRODUCTS; 5 C. YOUR contracting with others to do work involving 6 use or handling of RAW ASBESTOS or ASBESTOS-CONTAINING PRODUCTS. 7 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 10: 8 The following is list of depositions of persons which 9 possess the most overall knowledge: 10 George Bradley, Jr. 11 John s.. Easton and Catherine _L.. Easton vs.^. Inland Steel 12 Industries. Inc., et. al., No. 45DO19205-CT606, In the Superior 13 Court of Lake County, Indiana. 14 November 4, 1992 15 Steven H. Wodka, 21 Rosslyn Court, Little Silver, NJ 16 07739 17 Jack L.Thompson 18 Donald Tuck vs. USX Corporation, et. al. Case No. C86- 19 5132, United States District Court, Northern District of Ohio, 20 Eastern Division 21 September 8, 1990 % 22 The Jaques Admiralty Firm, 1370 Penobscot Building, X. 23 Detroit, MI 48226 24 John B. Masaitis 25 In Re: Complex Asbestos Litigation, No. 828 684, In the 26 Superior Court of California in and for the City and County of San 27 Francisco. 28 December 11, 1991 2 T 1 Tooker & Ant2, 131 Steuart Street, Suite 201, San 2 Francisco, CA 94105 3 William L. Anderson vs. USX. Corporation, _et. aL. No. 4 M88-71663, United States District Court, Eastern District of 5 Michigan, Southern Division. 6 April 29, 1991 1 Gary John Giblin, CSR N.P., Wayne County, Michigan 8 Harold James Dennis vs. Abex Corporation, et. al.. No. 9 943238, In the Superior Court of California in and for the City 10 and County of San Francisco. 11 December 3, 1992 12 Tooker & Antz, 131 Steuart Street, Suite 201, San 13 Francisco, CA 94105. 14 James E. Walbert and Juanita Walbero vs. -Fibreboard.Corporation,, 15 et. al.. No. 90-2-02233-5, In the Superior Court-of Washington in 16 and for the County of Kitsup. 17 March27, 1992 18 Janet L. Rice, Schroeter, Goldmark & Bender, 540 Central 19 Building, Third and Columbus, Seattle, WA 98104. 20 In Re: Asbestos Personal... Injury .Cases Abrams Lead, Nos. 21 88-5422 (2), et. al.. In the Circuit Court of Jackson County, ,, 22 Mississippi -C 23 October 29, 1992 24 Ness, Motley, Loadholt, Richardson & Poole, 2202 Jackson 25 Street, Barnwell, SC 29812 26 In Re: Asbestos IV. Civil Action No. 95-8888, In the 27 Circuit Court of Kanawha County, West Virginia 28 June 29, 1995 3 T 1 Jacquelyn Grove, N.P., Morse, Gantverg & Hodge 2 Pittsburgh, PA 3 Mike Norman vs. AC Products Liability Trust, et. al.. 4 No. 94-421061NP, State of Michigan, In the Circuit Court for the 5 County of Wayne 6 December 8, 1995 7 Marsia L. Gasper, Steffan & Stauffer, LTD 8 Joseph Schworba 9 In Re: Asbestos Personal., Injury Case Abrams Lead, Nos. 10 88-5422 (2), et. al.. In the Circuit Court of Jackson County, 11 Missippi 12 January 6, 1993 13 Ness, Motley, Loadholt, Richardson & Poole, 2202 Jackson 14 Street, Barnwell, SC 29812 15 Tan Matosian 16 Richard 5. Sor.ensen and Marv Ella Sorensen v. Abex 17 Corporation, et. al., No. 953470; 18 In the Superior Court of California in and for the city 19 and County of San Francisco. 20 August 8, 1985 21 Brayton Harley Curtis, 222 Rush Landing Rd., Novato,. CA 22 94948 23 Reporting Service Not Available 24 Joseph W, Balesteri vs. United States Steel Corporation... 25 pt. al.. No. 245870; 26 In the Superior Court of California, County of Contra 27 Costa; 28 August 2 and 7, 1985; 4 T 1 George W. Kilbourne, Attorney at Law, 1304 Willow 2 Street, Martinez, CA 94553/ 3 Zandonella Reporting Service, 2827 Concord Blvd., 4 Concord CA, 94519. 5 Svcbert Fairchild, et. al. vs. Abex Corporation, et. 6 al., No. 922508; 7 In the Superior Court of San Francisco in and for the 8 City and County of San Francisco; 9 February 19, 1992; 10 Brayton Harley Curtis, 222 Rush Landing Road, Novato, CA 11 94948; 12 Tooker & Antz, Certified Court Reporters, 131 Stueart 13 Street, Suite 201, San Francisco CA 14 Pittman Owen 15 Robert L. Abernathy, et. al. vs. AC&5, Inc., et, al. 16 No. A-920, 967-C 17 Ina Sue Bailey, et. al.. vs. AC&S. Inc., et. al.. No. A18 920-961-C 19 Edsel Dewell Cardwell, et. al. vs. AC&S, Inc., et. al.. 20 Nc. A-930, 553-C 21 Ben Gradv Gilbert, et ux., vs. AC&S, Inc., et. al., J4o. 22 A-9=30, 810-C, In the District Court of Orange County, Texas, 128th 23 Judicial District 24 June 24, 1994 25 Ness, Motley, Loadholt, Richardson & Poole, 2202 Jackson 26 Street, Barnwell, SC 29812 27 111, rej___All Asbestos-Related Personal Injury or Death 28 Filed or to be filed in Dallas. Tarrant or Travis Counties, 5 1 Texas 2 February 17, 1993 3 Baron & Budd, The Centrum, 3102 Oak Lawn Avenue, Suite 4 1100, Dallas, TX 75219-4281 5 Don Vickers 6 In Re: Asbestos Personal Iniurv Cases, Abrams Lead 7 Case, Nos, 88-5422 (2), et. al.. In the Circuit Court for Jackson 8 County, Mississippi 9 January 14, 1993 10 Diane Gaudet, A. William Roberts, Jr. & Associates, 11 Charleston, SC 12 Joseph H. Digby 13 Bernard Sachs vs., Marven Steamship ..Corn,, et. al.. No. 14 HAR-BB-2688, United States District Court, District of Maryland 15 December 13, 1989 16 Pappas Reporting Service, 710 Fifth Avenue, Pittsburgh, 17 PA 15219 18 George E. Hansen, Jr. 19 In Re: Asbestos Personal Iniurv Cases, Abrams Lead Case, 20 No. 88-5422(2), et. al., In the Circuit Court of Jackson County, 21 Mississippi % 22 ^ December 29, 1992 23 A. William Roberts & Associates, 54 ks Broad Street, 24 Charleston, SC 29401 25 Mary Abrams, et. al. vs. GAF Corporation,et. al.. No. 26 88-5422(2), In the Circuit Court of Jackson County, Mississippi 27 January 15, 1993 28 North County Court Reporters, West Lebanon, New 6 T 1 Hampshire 2 Flovd Humphries vs. American Cable Steel, Tnr.. et. 3 al. , No. 90-004169-NP, State of Michigan, Circuit Court for Wayne 4 County 5 December 18, 1991 6 North County Reporters, West Lebanon, New Hampshire 7 Merle Bundy, M.D. 8 John Flvnn, et. al. vs. Armstrong World Industries. 9 Ltd.. et. al.. Case No. 330154; State of Michigan, In the Circuit 10 Court for the County of Wayne 11 March 24, 1995 12 Court Reporter, Kitlas, Dickman & Assoc., 501 W. 13 Broadway, Suite 1300 San Diego, CA 14 Harold James Dennis v. Abex Corporation^ e_t. al.. Case 15 No. 943238, In the Superior Court of the State of California In 16 and For the City and County of San Francisco 17 December 9, 1992 18 Court Reporter Kitlas, Dickman & Assoc., 501 W. 19 Broadway, Suite 1300, San Diego, CA 20 John Easton vs. Inland Steel Industries, et. al,, Cause 21 No. 45D01-9205-CT-60, In the Lake Superior Court, State of Indiana 22 -m 23 March 8, 1993 Court Reporter, Kitlas, Dickman & Assoc., 501 W. 24 Broadway, Suite 1300, San Diego, CA 25 In Re;___Asbestos Personal Injury Cases Abrgm^ Lead Nos- 26 88-5422. et. al.. In the Circuit Court of Jackson County, 27 Mississippi 28 January 26, 1993 7 1 Court Reporter, A. William Roberts & Associates, San 2 Diego, CA 3 In Re: Asbestos Personal In7urv Cases Abrams Lead Nos. 4 88-5422. et. al..In the Circuit Court of Jackson County, 5 Mississippi 6 February 2, 1993 7 Court Reporter, Kitlas, Dickman & Assoc., 501 W. Broadway, Suite 8 1300, San Diego, CA 9 Mike Norman vs. A-C Product Liability Trust, et. al.. 10 Case No.94-42-1062-NP, Wayne County Third Circuit Court in and for 11 the State of Michigan 12 January 19, 1996 13 Court Reporter Peterson & Associations, 7851 Mission 14 Center Court, Suite 120, San Diego, CA 15 Richard Sorensen vs. Abex Corporation,_et. al.. In the 16 Superior Court of the State of California in and for the City and 17 County of San Francisco 18 May 18, 1995 19 Court Reporter, Kitlas, Dickman & Assoc., 501 w. 20 Broadway, Suite 1300, San Diego, CA 21 Ronald Benson, et.'al. vs. U.5,-5... Great Lakes Fleet,. 22 Tng. et. al. In the United States District Court for the District 23 of Minnesota, Fifth Division, Case No. 5-88-04 24 April 12, 1989 25 Court Reporter Lucas, Briandi,& Van Deusen, Suite lioi 26 Chamber Building, Suite 110 West C. Street, San Diego, CA 27 Euoene Sovrina, et. al. vs. USX .Corporation. et. al.. 28 Case Nos. C86-2255, C85-2449 and C86-5132, United States District 8 T 1 Court, Northern District of.Ohio, Eastern Division 2 August 15, 1990 3 Court Reporter Lucas, 3riandi, Van Deusen, Suite 1101 4 Chamber Building, Suite 110 West C. Street, San Diego, CA 5 Robert Perepechko, et. al. vs. Owens-Cornina Fiberglass, 6 et. al, Cause No. 95L 05198, In the Circuit Court of Cook County, 7 Illinois County Department of Law Division 8 September 23, 1996 9 Court Reporter Peterson & Associations, 7851 Mission 10 Center Court, Suite 120, San Diego, CA 11 Wanda Clint, et. al. vs, R.M.I. Company, et.-al.. No. 12 77398, In the Court of Common Pleas, Cuyahoga County, Ohio 13 December 6, 1988 14 Court Reporter Lucas, Briandi, Van Deusen, Suite 1101 15 Chamber Building, Suite 110 West C. Street, San Diego, CA 16 Robert. Perepechko. et. al. vs. Owens-Cornina Fiberglass 17 corn. . et. al. . No. 95 1 05198, In the Circuit Court of Cook 18 County, Illinois 19 September 24, 1996 20 Peterson Associates Court Reporting, Inc., 7851 21 Mission Center Court. 22 INTERROGATORY WO. 13 23 For each of the following, please state whether, at any time 24 within the time frame or until such time as any defendant which 25 had been engaged in MARKETING RAW ASBESTOS or ASBESTOS-CONTAINING 26 PRODUCTS discontinued the MARKETING of such products, THIS 27 DEFENDANT was a member or paid dues for any representative of THIS 28 DEFENDANT (excluding faculty members of educational institutions) 9 -- ^ to be a member of the following: A. American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists; B. American Industrial Hygiene Association; C. American Petroleum Institute; D. American Railroad Association; E. Asbestos Cement Producers Association; F. Asbestos Information Association (AIA)(please answer through date of your answers); G. Asbestos Information Association/North America 1 (AIA/NA) (please answer through date of your answers); 1 H. Asbestos Textile Institute (A*-); 1 I. Industrial Hygiene Foundation and/or Industrial 1 Health Foundation (IHF); 1 J. Industrial Mineral Insulation Manufacturers 1 Institute; 1 K. Magnesia Insulation Manufacturers' Association; i L. Magnesia Silica Insulation Manufacturers 1 Association; 2 M. Mineral Wool Institute; 2 N. National Insulation Manufacturers Association . 2 (NIMA); 2 O. National Safety Council; 2 P. New York Academy of Sciences; 2 Q. Quebec Asbestos Mining Association (QAMA) ; 2 R. Refractories Institute; S. Safe Building Alliance (please answer through date of your answers); 10 T 1 T. Thermal Insulation Manufacturers Association 2 (TIMA); 3 U. U.S. Maritime Commission; 4 V. IDENTIFY any other organizations, associations or 5 groups of manufacturers, miners, distributors, importers, 6 labelers. suppliers , and/or sellers of ASBESTOS-CONTAINING 7 PRODUCTS of which 'THIS DEFENDANT was a member; 8 w. IDENTIFY any such representative of THIS DEFENDANT. 9 RESPONSE_JSLINTBRROSAT.QRY ,HP,.131 10 A. No. 11 B. Yes (1950-1992; 1992-present, only selective 12 individuals in the Industrial Hygiene department) 13 C. Yes (1948-1982) 14 D No. 15 E. No. 16 F. No. 17 G. No. 18 H. No. 19 I. Yes. (1935-1977, 1980-1981, 1984-1986) 20 J. No. 21 K. No. 22 L No. % 23 M. No. 24 N. No. 25 0. Yes. (From 1932 to the present). 26 P. No. 27 Q. No. 28 R. No. 11 T 1 S. No. 2 T. No. 3 U. No. 4 V. USX has never been a member of any association or 5 trade organization of asbestos manufactures, miners, distributors, 6 labelers, suppliers, and/or sellers of asbestos-containing 7 products. 8 W. The following is a list of past employees which had 9 contact with the IHF: 10 G.T. Skinner 10/22/64 11 C.E. Stewart 11/4/47 12 James Alton 10/16/51 - 12/20/54 13 P.X. Masciantonio 11/1/77 - 8/23/82 14 Robert 0'Connor 10/21/64 15 Ferguson 10/2/80- 16 Forrest Fisher 10/7/80 - 1/7/85 17 Joseph Schwerha 8/21/85 - 7/7/86 18 William James 12/15/81 19 William Marshall 2/4/86 20 Dennis Kiehl 2/25/86 21 Joseph Samuels 1985 22 - As to Western Pipe & Steel, USX did not purchase any part of 23 the shipbuilding activities of Western Pipe & Steel. Such 24 activities ceased prior to the time that Consolidated of 25 California (a successor of Western Pipe & Steel) was purchased by 26 Consolidated of Delaware (a predecessor of USX). USX did not 27 obtain any documents related to any such shipbuilding activities 28 ncr any membership records. 12 1 USX has directed its custodian of records to conduct an 2 extensive search of the corporate records located at the Annandale 3 archives. In addition, attorneys for USX have spoken with 4 numerous past and present employees to locate any responsive 5 documents of information. In addition, attorneys for USX have 6 made inquiries to numerous facilities seeking responsive 7 documents. However, due to the sale or destruction of some e facilities, records have been located which are responsive to this 9 interrogatory. These searches were conducted for all potential or 10 alleged alter entities. Records may exist that have not yet been 11 located, despite a diligent search for the same. Any omission of 12 such information is unintentional. 13 14 INTERROGATORY NO. 31: 15 If your answer to any subpart of Interrogatory No. 31 16 regarding ASBESTOS-CONTAINING PRODUCTS is in the affirmative, 17 state: 18 A. The trade, brand name, and/or genetic name of each 19 such ASBESTOS-CONTAINING PRODUCTS MARKETED in any form or quantity 20 between 1930 and 1985; 21 B. The date(S) each such ASBESTOS-CONTAINING PRODUCT 22 was first placed on the market, including the date(s) each such 23 ASBESTOS-CONTAINING PRODUCT was first MARKETED; 24 1. On an experimental basis; 25 2. On a test basis; or 26 3. For sale. 27 C. The date (s) each such ASBESTOS-CONTAINING PRODUCT: 28 1. Ceased to be produced; or 13 T -- 4* 1 2. Was recalled front the market, if ever 2 D. A detailed description of the chemical composition 3 of each such ASBESTOS-CONTAINING PRODUCT, including the type 4 and/or grade of asbestos and/or asbestos fiber contained in each 5 such product and the quantitative percentage of asbestos or 6 asbestos fiber in each such product, and all non-asbestos 7 components of the ASBESTOS-CONTAINING PRODUCT, and if the chemical 8 composition changed over time, the inclusive dates of each 9 formulation; 10 E. A description of the physical appearance and nature 11 of each such ASBESTOS-CONTAINING-PRODUCT, including any color 12 coding, distinctive marking and/or logo, either on the product or 13 or. the packaging; 14 F. A detailed description of the intended use of each 15 such ASBESTOS-CONTAINING PRODUCT, including any temperature limits 16 for each such use; 17 G. Whether any such ASBESTOS-CONTAINING PRODUCT was on 18 the U. S. Government's "Qualified Products List," and if so, the 19 inclusive dates it was on such list; 20 H. The name and address of the supplier of the RAW 21 ASBESTOS used in each such product and the time period of such 22 supply; 23 I. Whether any of THIS DEFENDANTS RAW ASBESTOS OR 24 ASBESTOS-CONTAINING PRODUCTS have, at any time, been sold, 25 shipped, or otherwise distributed to any COMPANY (including power 26 company or utility), governmental agency or entity, shipyard, 27 distributor, refinery, contractor, supplier, manufacturer, PREMISE 28 owner or occupant, ship owner, or other PREMISE or site in the 14 T 1 GEOGRAPHIC AREA If so, state: 2 1. The names of each such COMPANY, governmental 3 agency or entity, shipyard, distributor, supplier, manufacturer, 4 refinery, contractor, PREMISE owner or occupant, ship owner, 5 PREMISE or site; 6 2. The inclusive dates of each such sale, 7 shipment, distribution, use or installation and the amount 8 (volume) and the trade or brand name of each such ASBESTOS9 CONTAINING PRODUCT sold; 10 3. Whether you have any records indicating any 11 such sale, shipment, distribution, use or installation and, if so, 12 the name, address and job classification of each person who 13 currently has possession of such records. 14 J. Either (1) attach all DOCUMENTS evidencing the 15 information sought in this Interrogatory and its subparts to your 16 answers to these Interrogatories, or (2) attach disks containing 17 such data, or (3) describe such DOCUMENTS with sufficient 18 particularity that they may be made the subject of a request for 19 production of documents. 20 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 31: 21 A. Amerbestos electrical wire and cable and certaip 22 types of Tiger Brand wire and cable. Insul-Mastic for mastic 23 coatings; Wilson-Snyder for centrifugal pumps. 24 B-J. As to Insul-Mastic for mastic coatings and Wilson25 Snyder for centrifugal pumps, USX responds as follows: 26 In 1964, USX purchased assets of the Protective Coatings 27 Division of Pittsburgh Chemical Company which became part of a new 28 division of U.S. Steel under the name the Pittsburgh Corning 15 T 1 Company. No later than March, 1966, the division name was changed 2 to USS Chemicals. USS Chemicals manufactured certain grades of 3 mastic coatings, named Insul-Mastic, which may have contained 4 asbestos. The coatings operations, located in Pittsburgh, 5 Pennsylvania, were completely closed by the late 1960's. USS 6 Chemicals Division was sold in 1986. 7 USX purchased the Oil Well Supply Co. in 1930 which 8 operated as a subsidiary. In 1951 it became the Oilwell Division 9 of United States Steel. USS Oilwell Division had a plant in 10 Braddock, Pennsylvania, called the Wilson-Snyder Works, which 11 manufactured centrifugal pumps which may have contained an 12 asbestos-containing gasket. These centrifugal pumps were 13 manufactured in 1952, but beginning and ending dates of 14 manufacture are unknown. The Braddock facility was closed some 15 time in the 1960's and operations were moved to a plant in 16 Garland, Texas. USS Oilwell Division was sold in 1987. 17 USX has directed its custodian of records to conduct an 18 extensive search of the corporate records located in the Annandale 19 archives. In addition, attorneys for USX have spoken with 20 numerous past and present employees to locate any responsive 21 documents or information. In addition, attorneys for USX have, 22 made inquiries to numerous facilities seeking responsive 23 documents. However, due to the sale or destruction of some 24 facilities, records have lost or destroyed as a result. No 25 further information or documents have been located which are 26 responsive to this interrogatory. These searches were conducted 27 for all potential of alleged alter entities. Records may exist 28 that have not yet been located, despite a diligent search for the 16 T - Jt same. Any omission of such information is unintentional. 2 At least one type of asbestos-containing cable was offered in 3 1910. USX has been unable to locate records which would indicate 4 when each of its various types of wire and cable products were 5 placed on the market. Insul-Mastic was on the market when USX 6 purchased the company. Unknown as to centrifugal pumps. 7 C-l. 19'77 at the latest, as to wire and cable. Since 8 1960 as to mastic coatings. Unknown as to centrifugal pumps. 9 C-2. Not applicable. 10 D. USX's asbestos-containing-wire and cable contained 11 annealed, uncoated copper conductors; varnish cambric; saturants; 12 encapsulated chrysotile asbestos tape, lap, fillers or yarn; 13 silicone rubber, PVC, and/or flame-heat-moisture-resistant 14 finishing compounds. Centrifugal pumps were metal and may have 15 contained an asbestos-containing gasket. Composition of the 16 gasket, including fiber type, is unknown. Insul-Mastic contained 17 bitumen combined with various amounts of high-grade asphalt and 18 select inert pigments. Some grades contained combinations of mica 19 flakes, asbestos, granulated cork and other additives and 20 pigments. Types of asbestos fiber is unknown. 21 E. Most USX wire and cable products had an 22 identification surface legend showing the "U.S.S. Corp. Tiger 23 Brand" trade name, as well as the specific wire type, sire, and 24 voltage. As to mastic coatings and centrifugal pumps, unknown. 25 F. The electrical wire and cable products were 26 designed for use as specialty products in high-temperature 27 industrial applications. The individual-wire and cable products 28 were capable of operating in temperature ranges from 194 to 392 17 T 1 degrees Fahrenheit depending upon the application. Insul-Mastic 2 products were intended as industrial protective coatings. 3 Temperature ranges are unknown. Centrifugal pumps were intended 4 for moving liquids. 5 G. The electrical wire and cable products were 6 designed for use as specialty products in high-temperature 7 industrial applications. The individual wire and cable products 8 were capable of operating in temperature ranges from 194 to 392 9 degrees Fahrenheit depending upon the application. Insul-Mastic 10 products were intended as industrial protective coatings. 11 Temperature ranges are unknown. Centrifugal pumps were intended 12 for moving liquids. 13 H. To the best of USX's knowledge, raw asbestos fiber 14 was not purchased for use in its products. 15 I. With respect to its asbestos containing wire and 16 cable, USX identified two invoices which show delivery of 17 asbestos-containing wire to Northern California, but since the 18 electrical cable division was the central purchasing agent for all 19 electrical wire and cable products, it is unknown if the wire was 20 manufactured by USX. USX may have supplied federal shipyards with 21 asbestos-containing electrical cable pursuant to defense contracts 22 with the U.S. Government through the U.S. Navy Bureau of Ships. 23 USX does not presently have in its possession the requested 24 information regarding any such contracts. As to mastic coatings 25 and centrifugal pumps, unknown. 26 J. See attached document nos. USX 00328 and USX 27 000329, attached hereto as Exhibit A. 28 INTERROGATORY NO. 32 18 T -^ 1 Did YOU install, remove, or handle or contract to have others 2 install, remove, or handle RAW ASBESTOS or ASBESTOS-CONTAINING 3 PRODUCTS at any PREMISES in the GEOGRAPHIC AREA which PREMISES is 4 at issue as to YOU in San Francisco Superior Court asbestos 5 litigation as of the date of your answers to these 6 interrogatories? If so: 7 A. IDENTIFY the PREMISES; 8 B. For each of the PREMISES: 9 1. State the nature of your ownership or 10 possessory interest; 11 2. State the inclusive date of that interest; 12 3. IDENTIFY the party from whom that interest was 13 acquired; 14 4. IDENTIFY the party, if any, to whom that 15 interest was transferred. 16 C. IDENTIFY every contract to which YOU were a party 17 or of which you have knowledge wherein the performance of such 18 contract involved the installation, removal, disturbing or 19 handling of any RAW ASBESTOS or ASBESTOS-CONTAINING PRODUCTS at 20 YOUR PREMISES. For each such contract: 21 1. IDENTIFY the parties to the contract; 22 , 2. Provide a general description and specific 23 location of the work to be performed by each party to the 24 contract; 25 3. IDENTIFY and describe the NATURE of the RAW 26 ASBESTOS or ASBESTOS-CONTAINING PRODUCTS installed, removed, 27 disturbed or handled in the performance of the contract; 28 4. State the dates of the contract and the dates 19 r 1 of performance; 2 D. Except as provided, in response to subpart (c), has 3 any work other than routine maintenance been done on or to the 4 PREMISES that involved the installation, removal, disturbing or 5 handling of RAW ASBESTOS or ASBESTOS-CONTAINING PRODUCTS? If so, 6 for each such instance: 7 1. State the inclusive dates of the work; 8 2. Provide a general description and specific 9 location of the work; 10 3. State whether the work was done by YOU and/or 11 YOUR employees, 12 4. IDENTIFY and describe the NATURE of the RAW 13 ASBESTOS or ASBESTOS-CONTAINING PRODUCTS installed, removed, 14 handled or disturbed; 15 5. IDENTIFY from whom the RAW ASBESTOS OR 16 ASBESTOS-CONTAINING PRODUCTS were acquired. 17 E. Has any asbestos abatement effort been made at the 18 PREMISES? If so, for each such effort: 19 1. IDENTIFY who did the work; 20 2. State the inclusive dates thereof; 21 3. State whether samples were taken and if the 22 samples still exist IDENTIFY the custodian of the samples; 23 4. State whether any material was tested, and, if 24 so, what were the results of each test; 25 5. IDENTIFY each test result with sufficient 26 particularity for purposes of a request for production of 27 documents, or, in the alternative, attach a copy to YOUR answers 28 to these interrogatories. 20 T 1 F. Except for insurance coverage litigation, have you 2 filed suit against, or otherwise sought to recover from, any 3 person or entity for some or all of the cost of asbestos abatement 4 or for the property damage allegedly caused by the presence of RAW 5 ASBESTOS or ASBESTOS-CONTAINING PRODUCTS on the PREMISES 6 identified in response to subpart (A) above? If so: 7 1. IDENTIFY the person or entity against whom YOU 8 have filed suit or otherwise sought to recover; 9 2. If YOU have filed suit, state the court in 10 which the action was filed, the date on which it was filed, 11 IDENTIFY all Plaintiffs and Defendants and their counsel of 12 record; 13 3. State whether or not the case has been 14 resolved, and, if so, what was the status or disposition. 15 G. Either (1) attach all DOCUMENTS evidencing the 16 information sought in this Interrogatory and its' subparts to your 17 answers to these Interrogatories, or (2) attach disks containing 18 such data, or (3) describe such DOCUMENTS with sufficient 19 particularity that they may be made the subject of a request for 20 production of documents. 21 H. IDENTIFY the person(s) presently most knowledgeable 22 aboyt the information sought in this interrogatory or its 23 subparts. 24 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 32: 25 C. & E. USX has directed its custodian of records to 26 conduct an extensive search of the corporate records located at 27 the Annandale archives. In addition, attorneys for USX have 28 spoken with numerous past and present employees to locate any 21 a responsive documents or information. In addition, attorneys for 2 USX have made inquiries to numerous facilities seeking responsive 3 documents. However, due to the sale or destruction of some 4 facilities, records have been lost or destroyed as a result. No 5 further information or documents have been located which are 6 responsive to this interrogatory. These searches were conducted 7 for all potential"or alleged alter entities. Records may exist e that have not yet been located, despite a diligent search for the 9 same. 10 E.l To the best of USX's knowledge, USX employees 11 performed the abatement work. 12 F. USX Corporation's investigation and discovery into 13 this matter is still continuing and USX believes it will be able 14 to provide further information in the near future. 15 H. John Grossman, USX Corporation. 16 INTERROGATORY NO. 41 17 IDENTIFY all brochures, pamphlets, catalogs or other 13 advertising relating to ASBESTOS CONTAINING PRODUCTS and/or RAW 19 AS3EST0S which THIS DEFENDANT manufactured, sold, distributed or 20 supplied from the year 1930 to 1985. For each such document, 21 state: 22 -C 23 A. A description of the document; B. The year it was printed; 24 C. The period of time in which it was used; 25 D. The purpose of such document; 26 E. Whether the documents or copies of said documents 27 presently exist; 28 F. If said documents or copies still exist, where they T - 1 are located; and 2 G. The IDENTITY of the custodian of such documents. 3 FURTHER RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. .41 4 A. USS Tiger Brand Electric Wire & Cable stock list; a 5 brochure entitled USS Tiger Brand Electrical cable, full line for 6 all industries"; document entitled "this is your personal copy of 7 the new specifications manual for USS Tiger Bran Electric Cables" 6 B. The stock list was printed in July 1967. USX 9 Corporation does not have dates of printing for the other 10 documents listed in subpart A. 11 C. Unknown at this time. 12 D. The documents were used as sales catalogs. 13 E. Yes. 14 F. USX National Asbestos Counsel; Baughman & 15 Associates Co., LPA, 55 Public Square, Suite 2250, Cleveland, Ohio 16 44113 17 INTERROGATORY NO..49: 18 Did THIS DEFENDANT provide any Independent Contractor or 19 Subcontractor within the GEOGRAPHIC AREA with a written warning 20 that exposure to asbestos could be hazardous to human health. 21 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 49: 22 Please refer to attached Exhibit B. 23 INTERROGATORY NO. 52; 24 If DEFENDANT has ever owned or operated a shipyard, state: 25 A. The IDENTITY of each such shipyard, including the 26 name(s) of such shipyard during the Lime period of YOUR ownership 27 and/or operation, the place of business of such shipyard and the 28 dates of YOUR ownership and/or operation; 23 T - 1 B. The name{s) of such shipyard prior to YOUR 2 ownership and/or operation; 3 C. The IDENTITY of the person or entity to whom YOU 4 sold your ownership or operating interest, and the date of such 5 sale; 6 D. Whether copies of DOCUMENTS evidencing your 7 ownership/operation and/or sale exist; 8 E. Whether any representative of THIS DEFENDANT 9 attended the Maritime Commission Conference in December 1942 in 10 Chicago, Illinois? If so, IDENTIFY any such representative of THIS 11 DEFENDANT; 12 F. The IDENTITY of the Custodian of such DOCUMENTS; 13 G. To the extent that information has not been given 14 in answers to Interrogatory No. 32, the information requested in 15 Interrogatory No. 32, for each shipyard owned or operated by YOU. 16 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 52: 17 A. Federal Shipbuilding & Drydock Company located at 18 Kearney, New Jersey and Chickasaw, Alabama was a wholly owned 19 subsidiary of U.S. Steel from 1936 to 1948. 20 B. USX Corporation's investigation and discovery are 21 still continuing, and USX believes it will be able to provide ,, 22 further information in the near future. 23 C. On December 31, 1948, it was sold and transferred 24 to the US Navy. 25 D. See response to subpart F. 26 E. USX Corporation's investigation and discovery are 27 still continuing, and USX believes it will be able to provide 28 further information in the near future. 24 T 1 F. To the extent that any documents still exist, the 2 custodian would be John Grossman. 3 G. .Not applicable. 4 Dated: May 11, 1998 DRATH, CLIFFORD, MURPHY, 5 WENNERHOLM & HAGEN 6 7 Dated: 8 May 11, 1998 9 DRATH, CLIFFORD, MURPHY, WENNERHOLM & HAGEN 10 DAVID F. BEACH Attorneys for Defendant 11 USX CORPORATION 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 \ciint3\9*\000\BSG07DF.cgh 25 T 1 John M. Drath, State Bar No. 045031 Traci E. Wennerholm, State Bar No. 121152 2 David F. Beach, State Bar No. 094847 DRATH, CLIFFORD, MURPHY, WENNERHOLM & HAGEN 3 44 Montgomery Street, Suite 1500 San Francisco, California 94104 4 Telephone: (415) 392-3006 TELEFAX: (415) 391-3348 5 OF COUNSEL: 6 R. Patrick Baughman, Esq. 7 Susan S. Henderson, Esq. Robert J. Eppich,- Esq. 8 BAUGHMAN & ASSOCIATES CO., L.P.A 55 Public Square, Suite 2215 9 Cleveland, Ohio 44113 Telephone: (216) 687-1244 10 TELEFAX: (216) 621-4066 11 Attorneys for Defendant USX CORPORATION 12 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 13 IN AND FOR THE CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 14 15 IN RE: COMPLEX ASBESTOS 16 LITIGATION 17 18 ) CASE NO.: 828684 ) ) DEFENDANT USX CORPORATION'S ) FURTHER ANSWERS TO GENERAL ) ORDER 129 INTERROGATORIES ) 19 COMES NOW defendant, USX CORPORATION, by and through its 20 attorneys of record herein, and further responds under oath to 21 General Order 129 Interrogatories. Defendant has not completed 22 its discovery or investigation into the facts of this case. The 23 responses herein are based upon information presently known to 24 defendant and it reserves the right to introduce at trial evidence 25 of facts subsequently learned through investigation and discovery 26 which conflict with any response herein. 27 28 1 T - -I* 1 INTERROGATORY--32 2 Did YOU install, remove, or handle or contract to have others 3 install, remove, or handle RAW ASBESTOS or ASBESTOS-CONTAINING 4 PRODUCTS at any PREMISES in the GEOGRAPHIC AREA which PREMISES is 5 at issue as to YOU in San Francisco Superior Court asbestos 6 litigation as of the date of your answers to these 7 interrogatories? If so: 8 A. IDENTIFY the PREMISES; 9 B. For each of the PREMISES: 10 1. State the nature of your ownership or 11 possessory interest; 12 2. State the inclusive date of that interest; 13 3. IDENTIFY the party from whom that interest was 14 acquired; 15 4. IDENTIFY the party, if any, to whom that 16 interest was transferred. 17 C. IDENTIFY every contract to which YOU were a party 18 or of which you have knowledge wherein the performance of such 19 contract involved the installation, removal, disturbing or 20 handling of any RAW ASBESTOS or ASBESTOS-CONTAINING PRODUCTS at 21 YOUR PREMISES. For each such contract: 22 s 23 1. IDENTIFY the parties to the contract; 2. Provide a general description and specific 24 location of the work to be performed by each party to the 25 contract; 26 3. IDENTIFY and describe the NATURE of the RAW 27 ASBESTOS or ASBESTOS-CONTAINING PRODUCTS installed, removed, 28 disturbed or handled in the performance of the contract; 2 T 1 4. State the dates of the contract and the dates 2 of performance; 3 D. Except as provided in response to subpart (c), has 4 any work other than routine maintenance been done on or to the 5 PREMISES that involved the installation, removal, disturbing or 6 handling of RAW ASBESTOS or ASBESTOS-CONTAINING PRODUCTS? If so, 7 for each such instance: 8 1. State the inclusive dates of the work; 9 2. Provide a general' description and specific 10 location of the work; 11 3. State whether the work was done by YOU and/or 12 YOUR employees, 13 4. IDENTIFY and describe the NATURE of the RAW 14 ASBESTOS or ASBESTOS-CONTAINING PRODUCTS installed, removed, 15 handled or disturbed; 16 5. IDENTIFY from whom the RAW ASBESTOS OR 17 ASBESTOS-CONTAINING PRODUCTS were acquired. 18 E. Has any asbestos abatement effort been made at the 19 PREMISES? If so, for each such effort: 20 1. IDENTIFY who did the work; 21 2. State the inclusive dates thereof; 22 3. State whether samples were taken and if the 23 samples still exist IDENTIFY the custodian of the samples; 24 4. State whether any material was tested, and, if 25 so, what were the results of each test; 26 5. IDENTIFY each test result with sufficient 27 particularity for purposes of a request for production of 28 documents, or, in the alternative, attach a copy to YOUR answers 3 T 1 to these interrogatories. 2 F. Except for insurance coverage litigation, have you 3 filed suit against, or otherwise sought to recover from, any 4 person or entity for some or all of the cost of asbestos abatement 5 or for the property damage allegedly caused by the presence of RAW 6 ASBESTOS or ASBESTOS-CONTAINING PRODUCTS on the PREMISES 7 identified in response to subpart (A) above? If so: 8 1. IDENTIFY the person or entity against whom YOU 9 have filed suit or otherwise sought to recover; 10 2. If YOU have filed suit, state the court in 11 which the action was filed, the date on which it was filed, 12 IDENTIFY all Plaintiffs and Defendants and their counsel of 13 record; 14 3. State whether or not the case has been 15 resolved, and, if so, what was the status or disposition. 16 G. Either (1) attach all DOCUMENTS evidencing the 17 information sought in this Interrogatory and its subparts to your 18 answers to these Interrogatories, or (2) attach disks containing 19 such data, or (3) describe such DOCUMENTS with sufficient 20 particularity that they may be made the subject of a request for 21 production of documents. 22 H. IDENTIFY the person(s) presently most knowledgeable 23 about the information sought in this interrogatory or its 24 subparts. 25 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 32 (F): 26 USX has directed its custodian of records to conduct an 27 extensive search of corporate records located at the Annandale 28 Archives. In addition, attorneys have spoken with members of the 4 T 1 USX Law Department to try and locate any responsive documents. z".> However, no records have been located which may indicate USX has-' 3 sought such a.recovery as referred to in this interrogatory. 4 These searches were conducted for all potential or alleged alter 5 entities. Records may exist that have not yet been located, 6 despite a diligent search for the same. Any omission of such 7 information is unintentional. 8 INTERROGATORY NO. 52: 9 If DEFENDANT has ever owned or operated a shipyard, state: 10 A. The IDENTITY of each such shipyard, including the 11 name(s) of such shipyard during the Lime period of YOUR ownership 12 and/or operation, the place of business of such shipyard and the 13 dates of YOUR ownership and/or operation; 14 B. The name(s) of such shipyard prior to YOUR 15 ownership and/or operation; 16 C. The IDENTITY of the person or entity to whom YOU 17 sold your ownership or operating interest, and the date of such 18 sale; 19 D. Whether copies of DOCUMENTS evidencing your 20 ownership/operation and/or sale exist; 21 E. Whether any representative of THIS DEFENDANT 22 attended the Maritime Commission Conference in December 1942 in 23 Chicago, Illinois? If so, IDENTIFY any such representative of THIS 24 DEFENDANT; 25 F. The IDENTITY of the Custodian of such DOCUMENTS; 26 G. To the extent that information has not been given 27 in answers to Interrogatory No. 32, the information requested in 28 Interrogatory No. 32, for each shipyard owned or operated by YOU. 5 T 1 RESPONSE. TO INTERROGATORY NO. 52 (B)_L 2 Federal Shipbuilding Company. 3 RESPONSE TO -INTERROGATORY NO. 52: (E) : 4 USX has directed its custodian of records to conduct an extensive search of the corporate records located in the Annandale 6 Archives. In addition, attorneys for USX have spoken with 7 numerous past and present employees to locate any responsive 8 documents or information. In addition, attorneys for USX have 9 made inquiries to numerous facilities seeking responsive 10 documents. However, due to the sale or destruction of some 11 facilities, records have been lost or destroyed as a result. No 12 records have been located to indicate any representative of this 13 defendant from Federal Shipbuilding & Drydock Co. or Federal 14 Shipbuilding Company attended the Maritime Commission Conference 15 in December, 1942 in Chicago, Illinois. Records may exist that 16 have not yet been located, despite a diligent search for the same. 17 Any omission of such information is unintentional. 18 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO.. 52 (G) 19 Not applicable. Federal Shipbuilding did not operate any 20 shipyards in the geographical area as defined in interrogatory no. 21 32. 22 Dated: 23 x July 2, 1998 DRATH, CLIFFORD, MURPHY, WENNERHOLM & HAGEN 24 25 Bvi DAVID F. BEACH ^ 26 Attorneys for Defendant USX CORPORATION 27 28 6 T - 4i PROOF Q SERVICE I, the undersigned, declare as follows: 3 I am over the age of 18 years and not a party to the within action. 4 My business address is 44 Montgomery Street, Suite 1500, 5 San Francisco, California 94104. 6 On July 2, 1998 I served a copy of the attached 7 USX CORPORATION* S FURTHER ANSWERS TO GENERAL ORDER 129 INTERROGATORIES 8 on the parties listed below by placing a true and correct copy 9 thereof in a sealed envelope, with postage thereon fully prepaid, in the United States at San Francisco, California, addressed as 10 follows: 11 SEE ATTACHED SERVICE LIST 12 I am readily familiar with the firm's practice .of collection and processing correspondence/documents for mailing. It is 13 deposited with the United States Postal Service on that same day in the ordinary course of business. I am aware that on motion of 14 the party or parties served that service is presumed invalid in the postal cancellation date or postage meter date is more than 15 one (1) day after the date of depositing for mailing. 16 I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. 17 Executed at San Francisco, California on July 2, 1998 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 T Carolyn Collins, Esq. Berry & Berry Station D \0. Box 70250 Oakland CA 94612-0250 Telephone: 510-835-8330 Facsimile:510-835-5117 Attorneys for. Plaintiffs David McClain, Esq. Kazan. McClain, et al. 171 -12th Street, Suite 300 Oakland CA 94607 Telephone: 510-465-7728 Facsimile:510-835-4913 Attorneys for Plaintiffs Jack K. Clapper, Esq. Law Offices of Jack K. Clapper 2330 Marinership Way, Suite 140 Sausalito CA 94965 Telephone: 415-332-4262 Facsimiled 5-331-5387 Attorneys for: Plaintiffs ATTACHMENT"A" Francine S. Curtis, Esq. Brayton Harley Curtis 222 Rush Landing Road P.O. Box 2109 Novato CA 94948 Telephone: 415-898-1555 Facsimiled 5-898-1247 Attorneys for: Plaintiffs Law Offices of Christopher H. Grell 685 Market Street, Suite 540 San Francisco CA 94105 Telephone: 415-541-9866 Facsimiled 15-541-9869 Attorneys for Plaintiffs -* Harry F. VVartnick, Esq. Wartnick, Chaber, Harowitz, Smith & Tigerman 101 California Street, Suite 2200 San Francisco CA 94111 Telephone: 415-986-5566 Facsimiled 5-986-5896 Attorneys for Plaintiffs Pape 1 of 1 T T `^ ' Jt tl\' 1 John M. Drath, State Bar No. 045031 Traci E. Wennerholm, State Bar No. 121152 2 David F. Beach, State Bar No. 094847 DRATH, CLIFFORD, MURPHY, WENNERHOLM & HAGEN 3 44 Montgomery Street, Suite 1500 San Francisco, California 94104 4 Telephone: (415) 392-3006 TELEFAX: 5 (415) 391-3348 OF COUNSEL: 6 R. Patrick Baughman, Esq. 7 Susan S. Henderson, Esq. Robert J. Eppich,'Esq. 8 BAUGHMAN & ASSOCIATES CO., L.P.A 55 Public Square, Suite 2215 9 Cleveland, Ohio 44113 Telephone: (216) 687-1244 10 TELEFAX: (216) 621-4066 11 Attorneys for Defendant USX CORPORATION 12 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 13 IN AND FOR THE CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 14 5 15 IN RE: COMPLEX ASBESTOS 16 LITIGATION . 17 18 19 ) CASE NO.: 828684 ) ) DEFENDANT USX CORPORATION'S AMENDED RESPONSE TO GENERAL ORDER NO. 129 STANDARD INTERROGATORIES TO DEFENDANTS INTERROGATORY NUMBER TEN 20 PROPOUNDING PARTY: PLAINTIFFS 21 RESPONDING PARTY: 22 SET NO.: DEFENDANT USX CORPORATION STANDARD INTERROGATORIES TO DEFENDANTS 23 INTERROGATORY NO. 10: 24 IDENTIFY the person or persons most knowledgeable about: 25 A. YOUR acquisition of RAW ASBESTOS and/or ASBESTOS 26 CONTAINING PRODUCTS; 27 B. YOUR use of RAW ASBESTOS and/or ASBESTOS-CONTAINING 28 PRODUCTS; V3 1 T 1 C. YOUR contracting with others to do work involving 2 use or handling of RAW ASBESTOS or ASBESTOS-CONTAINING PRODUCTS. 3 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 10: 4 As to RAW ASBESTOS, USX responds as follows: not applicable. 5 As to ASBESTOS-CONTAINING PRODUCTS, USX maintained hundreds 6 of different facilities over the years and no one person could 7 have knowledge as to the acquisition, use or contract work 8 involving ASBESTOS-CONTAINING PRODUCTS at all of the various 9 facilities. Plaintiffs have conducted depositions in the past in 10 reference to company representatives with the greatest overall 11 knowledge. USX is presently unaware of any other persons with 12 more knowledge. 13 Dated: November 6, 1997 14 BY: DRATH, CLIFFORD, MURPHY, WENNERHOLM & HAGEN 15 DAVID F. BEACH 16 Attorneys for Defendant USX CORPORATION 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 R VMVDOO'.DtOOMfb amended fcip lo CO 129 flO.clj 2 PROOF OF SERVICE 2 I, the undersigned, declare that I am over the age of eighteen (18) years and not a party to the within action. 3 My business address is 44 Montgomery Street, Suite 1500, San Francisco, California. 4 On November 7,19971 served the within DEFENDANT USX CORPORATION'S 5 AMENDED RESPONSE TO GENERAL ORDER NO. 129 STANDARD INTERROGATORIES TO DEFENDANTS INTERROGATORY NUMBER TEN by placing 6 a true copy thereof in a sealed envelope with postage thereon fully prepaid in the United States Post Office in San Francisco, California, addressed as follows: 7 LAW OFFICES OF BRYCE ANDERSON BRAYTON HARLEY CURTIS 8 1985 Bonifacio Street, Suite 102 Concord, California 94520 Post Office Box 2109 Novato, California 94948 9 JACK K. CLAPPER LAW OFFICES CHRISTOPHER E. GRELL, ESQ. 10 2330 Marinship Way, Suite 140 685 Market Street, Suite 540 Sausalito, California 94965 San Francisco, California 94105 11 HARRISON & DEGARMO VIVIAN R. JOHNSTON 12 One Daniel Burnham Court, Suite 220C 35451 Avenue 12Vi San Francisco, California 94109-5460 Madera, California 93638 13 KAZAN & McLAIN McCarthy, Johnson & miller 14 171 Twelfth Street, Suite 300 595 Market Street, Suite 2200 Oakland, California 94607 San Francisco, California 94105 15 JOHN C. ROBINSON, ESQ. ROBLES & GONZALES 16 365 Notre Dame Drive 1 Bayfront Plaza Vallejo, California 94589-1834 17 100 South Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 900 Miami, Florida 33131 18 JOHN C. SMITH, JR. WARTNICK, CHABER, HAROWITZ, 1390 Market Street, Suite 702 19 San Francisco, California 94102 SMITH & TIGERMAN 101 California Street, Suite 2200 San Francisco, California 94111-5802 20 Carolyn Collins, Esq. 21 Berry & Berry Station D 22 P.O. Box 70250 Oakland CA 94612-0250 23 I am readily familiar with the firm's practice of collection and processing 24 correspondence/documents for mailing. It is deposited with the United States Postal Service on that same day in the ordinary course of business. I am aware that on motion of the party or parties served 25 that service is presumed invalid if the postal cancellation date or postage meter date is more than one (1) day after the date of depositing for mailing. 26 I declare under penalty of perjury, in accordance with th 27 that the foregoing is true and correct. of the State of California, 28 Executed on November 7,1997. T