Document 7O8gZ68za48Er4zN6xZ44dDvB

Abex further objects to this interrogatory to the extent to which it seeks information regarding time periods and products that are not at issue in this case on the ground that such information lacks relevance, and is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Abex further objects to this interrogatory on the ground that the information it seeks otherwise lacks relevance to the issues arising in this case, and is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Abex further objects to this interrogatory on the ground that it assumes the truth of matters not established or matters not in evidence. Abex further objects to this interrogatory to the extent to which it purports to seek information that has been gathered, received or prepared in the course of the asbestos litigation, or which is otherwise subject to the attorney-client privilege, the attorney work-product doctrine, the rule protecting materials prepared in anticipation of and/or in connection with litigation, or any other applicable privilege. Subject to and without waiving these objections, and insofar as Abex understands this interrogatory, see objections and response to Interrogatory No. 27, above. INTERROGATORY NO. 29: Please state if any medical officer or industrial hygienist or medical consultant ever made at any time any recommendations and/or suggestions to Defendant pertaining to the risks or hazards to persons involved in the manufacture or use of asbestos products and, if so, please state when, by whom or to whom such recommendations and/or suggestions were made and the substance of each recommendation. RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 29: See General Objections. Abex further objects to this interrogatory on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, vague, ambiguous and speculative. -57-