Document Evr45Kg8qna8QMkvDB05aQyGL

FILE NAM E: AM M CO (AM C) DATE: 1999 Oct 18 DOC#: AM C002 DOCUM ENT DESCRIPTION: Legal - Defendant's Objections to Plaintiff's Deposition of Custodian of Records 1 SEDGWICK, DETERT, MORAN & ARNOLD PAUL J. RIEHLE (Bar No. 115199) 2 MARGARET K. SCHULTZ (Bar No. 178313) One Embarcadero Center, 16th Floor 3 San Francisco, California 94111-3628 Telephone: (415) 781-7900 4 Attorneys for Defendant 5 AMMCO TOOLS, INC., sued herein as HENNESSY INDUSTRIES 6 7 8 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 9 IN AND FOR THE CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 10 ) II ) 12 WENDY BOOK, ) ) Plaintiff, ) 13 ) v. ) 14 ) ASBESTOS DEFENDANTS (BHC) As ) 15 Reflected on Exhibits B, C, G, H;and ) DOES 1-800 ) 16 ) Defendants. ) 17 _____________________________________ ) NO. 999220 AMMCO TOOLS, INC.'S OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE OF TAKING DEPOSITION OF HENNESSY'S PERSON M OST KNOWLEDGEABLE AND CUSTODIAN OF RECORDS 18 TO ALL PARTIES AND TO THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD: 19 Defendant Ammco Tools, Inc. sued herein as Hennessy Industries, Inc. 20 ("Defendant") hereby objects to plaintiffs Notice of Taking Deposition and Request for 21 Production of Documents of Hennessy's Custodian o f Records and Person Most 22 Knowledgeable, served by mail on October 18, 1999. 23 Defendant objects to the document requests and subject matter o f testimony 24 which appear in the notice as follows: 25 GENERAL OBJECTIONS AND RESERVATIONS 26 All o f the responses contained herein are based only upon such information and _27 documents which are presently available to and specifically known to this responding party. $8 1 1. The following responses are given without prejudice to responding 2 party's right to produce evidence o f any subsequently discovered documents which this 3- responding party may later locate. Defendant accordingly reserves the right to change any 4 and all responses herein as additional investigation is undertaken, facts are ascertained, 5 analyses are made, legal research is completed and contentions are formulated. The responses 6 contained herein are made in a good faith effort to supply information presently known, but 7 should in no way be to the prejudice of Defendant in relation to further discovery, research or 8 analysis. These responses are made without prejudice to Defendant using or relying on at 9 trial any subsequently discovered documents or information, any evidence or documents not 10 currently existing, or on documents or information omitted from these responses as a result of 11 good faith oversight or error. 12 2. These responses are made solely for purposes o f this action. Each 13 response is subject to all objections as to competence, relevance, materiality, propriety, and 14 admissibility, and to any and all other, objections on any grounds that would require the 15 exclusion from evidence of any statement, if requests were asked of, or any statement 16 contained by, a witness at present testifying in court or at an arbitration hearing, all o f which 17 objections and grounds are expressly reserved so that these may be made at trial or 18 arbitration. 19 3. Defendant objects to the requests for production, and each o f them, to 20 the extent that they purport to require Defendant to conduct an investigation to obtain 21 information beyond its own currently existing records, or from its personnel, as unduly 22 burdensome and oppressive. 23 4. Defendant objects to these requests for production generally to the 24 extent they call for disclosure of information that would invade the privacy o f third persons 25 who are not parties to this litigation. 26 5. Defendant objects to these requests for production, and each of them, to 21 the extent they call for production o f information protected by the trade secrets privilege 8 provided in California Evidence Code section 1060 and in other applicable statutory and ENV-SF/36I74 -2 66JECT16N Y6 bLAftJTU-T'S DEhOStTiCNTtoTICE 1 common law, and to the extent they call for production o f information that contains 2 confidential proprietary information of Defendant. 3 6. Defendant objects to these requests for production to the extent that any 4 requests for information are protected from disclosure by the attorney work product doctrine, 5 the attorney-client privilege and any other applicable doctrines or privileges. 6 7. Defendant expressly incorporates each and every objection and 7 reservation listed above into each and every response herein below. 8. OBJECTION TO LOCATION OF DEPOSITION 9 Hennessy further objects that the geographic location of the notice deposition is 10 outside of the statutory requirements, and thus fails to comply with the provisions of C.C.P. 11 2025(e)(1). 12 13 Category No. 1: OBJECTIONS FOR CUSTODIAN OF RECORDS 14 All WRITINGS PERTAINING TO YOUR document retention policy. 15 Objection to Category No. 1: 16 Defendant objects on the grounds that the request is overbroad, vague and 17 ambiguous. 18 Category No. 2 : 19 All WRITINGS PERTAINING TO YOUR corporate history and structure, 20 including the identities o f any and all of YOUR predecessors-in-interest. 21 Objection to Category No. 2 : 22 Defendant objects on the grounds that the request is overbroad, burdensome, 23 oppressive, and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. 24 Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that the request seeks information regarding 25 the rights o f third persons who are not party to this litigation. Defendant also objects on the 26 grounds that the request is vague, ambiguous, compound and complex. 27 Category No. 3: 8 All contracts, invoices, bills, purchase orders, receipts, packing slips, bills of ENV-SF/36174 -3 OBJECTtW T P L im W BBMteiTlON MOTiC 1 lading, correspondence of other WRITINGS PERTAINING TO any and all sales o f ARCING 2 MACHINES by YOU to the jobsites or companies identified on any of the attached Exhibit 3 "A" between 1965 and 1991, inclusive. 4 Objection to Category No. 3: 5 Defendant objects on the ground that the request is overbroad, burdensome and 6 oppressive. Defendant objects on the grounds that this request is harassing and not reasonably 7 calculated to lead to the discovery o f admissible evidence. Defendant objects to this request 8 on the grounds that the request seeks information regarding the rights of third persons who 9 are not party to this litigation. 10 Category No. 4 : 11 All contracts, invoices, bills, purchase orders, receipts, packing slips, bills of 12 lading, correspondence or other WRITINGS PERTAINING TO or identifying YOUR 13 distributors of any and all ARCING MACHINES MARKETED by YOU to the jobsites, or 14 companies identified on the attached Exhibit "A " between 1965 and 1991, inclusive. 15 Objection to Category No. 4 : 16 Defendant objects on the ground that the request is overbroad, burdensome and 17 oppressive. Defendant objects on the grounds that this request is harassing and not reasonably 18 calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Defendant objects to this request 19 on the grounds that the request seeks information regarding the rights of third persons who 20 are not party to this litigation. 21 Category No. 5: 22 All contracts, invoices, bills, purchase orders, receipts, packing slips, bills of 23 lading, correspondence or other WRITINGS PERTAINING TO or identifying the 24 manufacturer name, brand name, trade name and/or model number o f any and all ARCING 25 MACHINES MARKETED by YOU to the jobsites or companies identified on the attached 26 Exhibit "A" between 1965 and 1991, inclusive. 27 Objection to Category No. 5: $8 Defendant objects on the ground that the request is overbroad, burdensome and EN V-SF/3 174 -4 JCT1M T PLINIFP'S b'PSiTlW NtIC------------------------------ 1 oppressive. Defendant objects on the grounds that this request is harassing and not reasonably 2 calculated to lead to the discovery o f admissible evidence. Defendant objects to this request 3 on the grounds that the request seeks information regarding the rights of third persons who 4 are not party to this litigation. 5 Category No. 6: 6 All photographs, brochures, product catalogs, advertisements, specifications, T product data sheets, product safety sheets, flyers, and any other WRITINGS in YOUR 8 possession, custody or control PERTAINING TO any and all ARCING MACHINES 9 MARKETED by YOU to the jobsites or companies identified on the attached Exhibit "A" 10 between 1965 and 1991, inclusive. 11 Objection to Category No. 6: 12 Defendant objects on the grounds that the request is overbroad, vague and 13 ambiguous. Defendant also objects to this request to the extent that it seeks disclosure of 14 information which is confidential business, proprietary or trade secret matter. Defendant 15 further objects on the grounds that this request is harassing and not reasonably calculated to 16 lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. 17 Category No. 7: 18 All labels, logos, pictures, drawings, and any other WRITINGS in YOUR 19 possession, custody or control, located on any box, carton, or other packaging, or any 20 instructions or other materials included with any and all ARCING MACHINES MARKETED 21 by YOU in the states identified on the attached Exhibit "A" between 1965 and 1991, 22 inclusive. 23 Objection to Category No. 7: 24 Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it is extremely vague, 25 ambiguous, unintelligible and calls for speculation as to what is being sought. Defendant 26 further objects to this request on the grounds that it is impermissibly overbroad in scope, 27 seeking information and documents that are not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery 58 o f admissible evidence. ENV-SFWM . 5. T5EIECTK>N TO bLAWTT'S bt-StlN NM1C 1 Category No. 8: 2 A sample or exemplar of a box, carton, other packaging or any instructions or 3 other materials included with any and all ARCING MACHINES MARKETED by YOU in the 4 states identified on the attached Exhibit "A" between 1965 and 1991, inclusive. 5 Objection to Category No. 8: 6 Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it is extremely vague, 7 ambiguous, unintelligible and calls for speculation as to what is being sought. Defendant 8 further objects to this request on the grounds that it is impermissibly overbroad in scope, and 9 seeks information and documents that are not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of 10 admissible evidence. 11 Category No. 9: 12 All WRITINGS identifying the manufacturers' suggested uses or applications of 13 ARCING MACHINES MARKETED by YOU in the states identified in the attached 14 Exhibit "A" between 1965 and 1991, inclusive. 15 Objection to Category No. 9: 16 Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it is extremely vague, 17 ambiguous, unintelligible and calls for speculation as to what is being sought. Defendant 18 further objects to this request on the grounds that it is impermissibly overbroad in scope, and 19 seeks information and documents that are not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of 20 admissible evidence. 21 Category No. 10: All WRITINGS, correspondence or submissions by YOU to the United States Federal Trade Commission PERTAINING TO ARCING MACHINES manufactured, sold, distributed or MARKETED by YOU between 1965-1991, inclusive; including, but not limited to sales figures or data submitted or received by YOU. Objection to Category No. 10: Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it is extremely vague, ambiguous, unintelligible and calls for speculation as to what is being sought. Defendant ENV-SF/36174 -6 - BJtTlON'TO PLAINTIFF'S DEPOSITION NOTICE 1 further objects to this request on the grounds that it is impermissibly overbroad in scope, and 2 seeks information and documents that are not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of 3 admissible evidence. Defendant further objects to this request to the extent that it seeks 4 disclosure of information which is confidential business, proprietary or trade secret matter. 5. Category No. 11 : 6 All WRITINGS, correspondence or submissions by YOU to the any automotive 7 parts catalog, including but not limited the Sweets Catalog, PERTAINING TO or identifying 8 the manufacture name, brand name, trade name and/or model number of any an all ARCING 9 MACHINES MARKETED by YOU between 1965-1991, inclusive. 10 Objection to Category No. 11 : 11 Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it is extremely vague, 12 ambiguous, unintelligible and calls for speculation as to what is being sought. Defendant 13 further objects to this request on the grounds that it is impermissibly overbroad in scope, 14 seeking information and documents that are not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery 15 of admissible evidence. Defendant further objects to this request to the extent that it seeks 16 disclosure of information which is confidential business, proprietary or trade secret matter. 17 Category No. 12: 18 All WRITINGS PERTAINING TO YOUR membership, association 19 involvement or correspondence with the Brake Linings Manufacturers Association between 20 1949-1950. 21 Objection to Category No. 12: 22 Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it is extremely vague, 23 ambiguous, unintelligible and calls for speculation as to what is being sought. Defendant 24 further objects to this request on the grounds that it is impermissibly overbroad in scope, and 25 seeks information and documents that are not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of 26 admissible evidence. Defendant further objects to this request to the extent that it seeks _27 disclosure o f information which is confidential business, proprietary or trade secret matter. 28 Ill ENV-SF/36174 -7- gBJECflOM T PflKniT'g-ETfSITIglTTlTIC 1 Category No. 13: 2 Ali WRITINGS PERTAINING TO YOUR membership, association 3 involvement or correspondence with the Clutch Facing and Brake Linings Standards Institute 4 between 19491950, inclusive. 5 Objection to Category No. 13: 6 Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it is extremely vague, 7 ambiguous, unintelligible and calls for speculation as to what is being sought. Defendant 8 further objects to this request on the grounds that it is impermissibly overbroad in scope, and 9 seeks information and documents that are not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of 10 admissible evidence. Defendant further objects to this request to the extent that it seeks 11 disclosure of information which is confidential business, proprietary or trade secret matter. 12 Category No. 14: 13 All WRITINGS PERTAINING TO YOUR membership, association, 14 involvement or correspondence with the Friction Materials Standards Institute between 15 1950-1991, inclusive. 16 Objection to Category No. 14: 17 Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it is extremely vague, 18 ambiguous, unintelligible and calls for speculation as to what is being sought. Defendant 19 further objects to this request on the grounds that it is impermissibly overbroad in scope, and 20 seeks information and documents that are not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of 21 admissible evidence. Defendant further objects to this request to the extent that it seeks 22 disclosure of information which is confidential business, proprietary or trade secret matter. 23 Category No. 15: 24 All WRITINGS PERTAINING TO YOUR membership, association, 25 involvement or correspondence with the Industrial Hygiene Foundation. 26 Objection to Category No. 15: 27 Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it is extremely vague, ambiguous, unintelligible and calls for speculation as to what is being sought. Defendant E N V -S F /36174 - 8ObJECTlON TO PLAlrttlFF'S DEPOSITION NOTICE 1 further objects to this request on the grounds that it is impermissibly overbroad in scope, and 2 seeks information and documents that are not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of 3 admissible evidence. Defendant further objects to this request to the extent that it seeks 4 disclosure of information which is confidential business, proprietary or trade secret matter. 5 Category No. 16: 6 All WRITINGS in YOUR possession, custody or control PERTAINING TO the 7 date on which YOU first became aware that there were health risks associated with exposure 8 to ACP or ASBESTOS. 9 Objection to Category No. 16: 10 Defendant objects on the grounds that the request is overbroad, vague and 11 ambiguous. Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that the request seeks 12 information regarding the rights of third persons who are not party to this litigation. 13 Defendant also objects to this request as not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of 14 admissible evidence, and improper under Civil Code 3295, as plaintiff is apparently pursuing 15 claims heard on the Consumer Expectation Theory. 16 Category No. 17: 17 All WRITINGS in YOUR possession, custody or control PERTAINING TO the 18 date on which YOU first placed any warnings on ARCING MACHINE boxes, cartons, other 19 packaging, warning or instruction manuals, or any other writings accompanying YOUR 20 ARCING MACHINES, concerning the health hazards associated with the use, work with or 21 handling of ACP or ASBESTOS. 22 Objection to Category No. 17: 23 Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it is extremely vague, 24 ambiguous, unintelligible and calls for speculation as to what is being sought. Defendant 25 further objects to this request on the grounds that it is impermissibly overbroad in scope, and 26 seeks information and documents that are not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of 27 admissible evidence. Defendant further objects to this request to the extent it seeks disclosure 8 of information which is confidential business, proprietary or trade secret matter. ENV-SF/Ji174 9 - OBJECTION TO PLAINTIFF'S DEPOSITION NO1E 1 subsequent to the date YOU first became aware that there were health risks associated with 2 exposure to ACP or ASBESTOS. 3 Objection to Category No. 20: 4 Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it is extremely vague, 5 ambiguous, unintelligible and calls for speculation as to what is being sought. Defendant 6 further objects to this request on the grounds that it is impermissibly overbroad in scope, 7 seeks information and documents that are neither relevant to the subject matter of this action, 8 nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence, and it is 9 burdensome, harassing and oppressive. Defendant also objects to this request to the extent 10 that it seeks disclosure of information which is confidential business, proprietary or trade 11 secret matter. 12 Category No. 21: 13 All photographs, motion pictures, videotape recordings, memoranda or any 14 other WRITINGS in YOUR possession, custody or control PERTAINING TO the results of 15 any and all studies performed by consultants hired by YOU concerning the health hazards 16 associated with exposure to ACP or ASBESTOS. 17 Objection to Category No. 21: 18 Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it is extremely vague, 19 ambiguous, unintelligible and calls for speculation as to what is being sought. Defendant 20 further objects to this request on the grounds that it is impermissibly overbroad in scope, and 21 seeks information and documents that are not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery 22 of admissible evidence. Defendant further objects to this request to the extent it seeks 23 disclosure of information which is confidential business, proprietary or trade secret matter. 24 Category No. 22: 25 All bulletins, memoranda, correspondence, notices and any other WRITINGS 26 in YOUR possession, custody or control PERTAINING TO any communication (written or 27 oral) by YOU to YOUR employees or others regarding the health hazards of exposure to 58 ACP or ASBESTOS. ENV-SF/36174 - 11'QfeJECTlN T PLAINTIFF'S bPOSlTtN NtlCE 1 Objection to Category No. 22: 2 Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it is extremely vague, 3 ambiguous, unintelligible and calls for speculation as to what is being sought. Defendant 4 further objects to this request on the grounds that it is impermissibly overbroad in scope, and 5 seeks information and documents that are not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery 6 of admissible evidence. 7 Category No. 23: 8 All WRITINGS which identify the individuals employed by YOU who were 9 responsible for the purchase or acquisition of component parts used for the manufacture, 10 fabrication, assembly, or other production of YOUR ARCING MACHINES during the years 11 1965 to 1991, inclusive. 12 Objection to Category No. 23: 13 Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it is extremely vague, 14 ambiguous, unintelligible and calls for speculation as to what is being sought. Defendant 15 further objects to this request on the grounds that it is impermissibly overbroad in scope, and 16 seeks information and documents that are not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery 17 of admissible evidence. Defendant also objects to the request on the grounds that it is 18 invasive of third-party privacy rights and plaintiffs have failed to properly notice the 19 deposition pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure sections 1985.3, 1985.6 and 2025(f). 20 Category No. 24: 21 All WRITINGS which identify the individuals employed by YOU who were 22 responsible for the manufacture, fabrication, assembly, or other production of ARCING 23 MACHINES by YOU during the years 1965 to 1991, inclusive. 24 Objection to Category No. 24: 25 Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it is extremely vague, 26 ambiguous, unintelligible and calls for speculation as to what is being sought. Defendant 27 GWIC K 8 RT. M O R A ARNOLD Dm M w o u ltn iCarter SUMIkHoor *T~ P-------- r . n t ----.. TcLMUisI.-nSUi.i7*0 further objects to this request on the grounds that it is impermissibly overbroad in scope, and seeks information and documents that are not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery ENV-SF/14174 -12- OBJECTION TO PLAINTIFF'S DEPOSITION NOT1C 1 of admissible evidence. Defendant also objects to the request on the grounds that it is 2 invasive of third-party privacy rights and plaintiffs have failed to properly notice the 3 deposition pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure sections 1985.3, 1985.6 and 2025(f). 4 Category No. .25: 5 All WRITINGS which identified the individuals employed by YOU who were 6 responsible for the sale, supply, MARKETING, or distribution of ARCING MACHINES by 7 YOU in the states identified on the attached Exhibit "A" prior to and during the years 1965 8 to 1991, inclusive. 9 Objection to Category No. .25; 10 Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it is extremely vague, 11 ambiguous, unintelligible and calls for speculation as to what is being sought. Defendant 12 further objects to this request on the grounds that it is impermissibly overbroad in scope, and 13 seeks information and documents that are not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery 14 of admissible evidence. Defendant also objects to the request on the grounds that it is 15 invasive of third-party privacy rights and plaintiffs have failed to properly notice the 16 deposition pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure sections 1985.3, 1985.6 and 2025(f). 17 Category No. 26: 18 All DOCUMENTS regarding the EARLIEST Worker's Compensation claims 19 filed against YOU in which it was alleged that claimant suffered injuries resulting from 20 asbestos exposure. (For purposes of this demand, "EARLIEST" shall refer to the first five 21 years during which such claims were filed against you.) 22 Objection to Category No. 26: 23 Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it is extremely vague, 24 ambiguous, unintelligible and calls for speculation as to what is being sought. Defendant 25 further objects to this request on the grounds that it is impermissibly overbroad in scope, and 26 seeks information and documents that are not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery 27 of admissible evidence. Defendant also objects to the request on the grounds that it is 28 invasive of third-party privacy rights and plaintiffs have failed to properly notice the a ENV-SF/36174 -13- ObjCTION TO PLAlhlTfFF'S DEPOSITION NOTICE l' deposition pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure sections 1985.3, 1985.6 and 2025(f). 2 Category No. 27: 3 All WRITINGS regarding the EARLIEST personal injury claims filed against 4 YOU in which it was alleged that claimant suffered injuries resulting from asbestos exposure. 5 (For purposes of this demand, "EARLIEST" shall refer to the first five years during which 6 such claims were filed against you.) 7 Objection to Category No. 27: 8 Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it is extremely vague, 9 ambiguous, unintelligible and calls for speculation as to what is being sought. Defendant 10 further objects to this request on the grounds that it is impermissibly overbroad in scope, and 11 seeks information and documents that are not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery 12 of admissible evidence. Defendant also objects to the request on the grounds that it is 13 invasive of third-party privacy rights and plaintiffs have failed to properly notice the 14 deposition pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure sections 1985.3, 1985.6 and 2025(f). 15 Category No. 28: 16 All WRITINGS PERTAINING TO or identifying distributors or other entities 17 who MARKETED YOUR ARCING MACHINES in California between and during the years 18 1965 and 1971, inclusive. 19 Objection to Category No. 28: 20 Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it is extremely vague, 21 ambiguous, unintelligible and calls for speculation as to what is being sought. Defendant 22 further objects to this request on the grounds that it is impermissibly overbroad in scope, and 23 seeks information and documents that are not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery 24 of admissible evidence. Defendant further objects to this request to the extent it seeks 25 disclosure of information which is confidential business, proprietary or trade secret matter. 26 Category No. 29: _27 All WRITINGS PERTAINING TO or identifying distributors or other entities 7 k>o who MARKETED YOUR ARCING MACHINES in Texas between and during the years ENV-SF/36174 -1 4 - OBJ^CtlOri TO PLAINTIFF'S befrOSlTiON M0tiC 1 1977 and 1991, inclusive. 2 Objection to Category No. 29: 3 Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it is extremely vague, 4 ambiguous, unintelligible and calls for speculation as to what is being sought. Defendant 5 farther objects to this request on the grounds that it is impermissibly overbroad in scope, and 6 seeks information and documents that are not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery 7 of admissible evidence. Defendant further objects to this request to the extent it seeks 8 disclosure of information which is confidential business, proprietary or trade secret matter. 9 Category No. 30: 10 All WRITINGS PERTAINING TO or identifying distributors or other entities 11 who MARKETED YOUR ARCING MACHINES in Ohio between and during the years 1971 12 and 1977, and 1980 to 1990, inclusive. 13 Objection to Category No. 30; 14 Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it is extremely vague, 15 ambiguous, unintelligible and calls for speculation as to what is being sought. Defendant 16 further objects to this request on the grounds that it is impermissibly overbroad in scope, and 17 seeks information and documents that are not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery 18 of admissible evidence. Defendant further objects to this request to the extent it seeks 19 disclosure of information which is confidential business, proprietary or trade secret matter. 20 OBJECTIONS TO PERSONfSl MOST KNOWLEDGEABI,E 21 Category No. 1: 22 All information PERTAINING TO YOUR document retention policy. | 23 Objection to Category No. 1: 24 Defendant objects on the ground that the request is overbroad, burdensome and l 25 oppressive. Defendant objects on the grounds that this request is harassing and not I 26 reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. The request is also ! I I 27 vague and ambiguous as to the term "document retention policy." Defendant objects tothis j 8 request on the grounds that the request seeks information regarding the rights of third persons i I -15- i r Z Z Z Z --------------- bJECTIOM ^ a WTIIT'S bf>5ITI>J NYiCe------------------------------ ! 1 who are not party to this litigation. Defendant also objects on the grounds that the request is 2 vague, ambiguous, compound and complex. 3 Category No. 2: 4 All information PERTAINING TO YOUR corporate history and structure, 5 including the identities of any and all of YOUR predecessors in interest. 6 Objection to Category No. 2 : 7 Defendant objects on the ground that the request is overbroad, burdensome and 8 oppressive. Defendant objects on the grounds that this request is harassing and not 9 reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Defendant further 10 objects to this request on the grounds that it seeks information regarding the rights of third II persons who are not party to this litigation. Defendant also objects on the grounds that the 12 request is vague, ambiguous, compound and complex. 13 Category No. 3: 14 All information PERTAINING TO any and all sales of ARCING MACHINES 15 by YOU to the jobsites or companies identified on the attached Exhibit "A" between 1965 16 and 1991, inclusive. 17 Objection to Category No. 3: 18 Defendant objects on the ground that the request is overbroad, burdensome and 19 oppressive. Defendant objects on the grounds that this request is harassing and not 20 reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery o f admissible evidence. Defendant objects to 21 this request on the grounds that the request seeks information regarding the rights of third 22 persons who are not party to this litigation. 23 Category No. 4 : 24 All information PERTAINING TO or identifying YOUR distributors of any 25 and all ARCING MACHINES MARKETED by YOU to the jobsites or companies identified 26 on the attached Exhibit "A" between 1965 and 1991, inclusive. 27 Objection to Category No. 4 : 28 Defendant objects on the ground that the request is overbroad, burdensome and ENV-SF/36174 -16- 75ETJECTON T PCATITFFS DPSlTlhi M tC 1 oppressive. Defendant objects on the grounds that this request is harassing and not 2 reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Defendant objects to 3 this request on the grounds that the request seeks information regarding the rights of third 4 persons who are not party to this litigation. 5 Category No. 5: 6 All information PERTAINING TO or identifying the manufacturer name, 7 brand name, trade name and/or model number of any and all ARCING MACHINES 8 MARKETED by YOU to the jobsites or companies identified on the attached Exhibit "A" 9 between 1965 and 1991, inclusive. 10 Objection to Category No. 5 : 11 Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it is extremely vague, 12 ambiguous, unintelligible and calls for speculation as to what is being sought. Defendant 13 further objects to this request on the grounds that it is impermissibly overbroad in scope, and 14 seeks information and documents that are not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery 15 of admissible evidence. 16 Category No. 6 : 17 All information PERTAINING TO any photographs, brochures, product 18 catalogs, advertisements, product data sheets, product safety sheets, flyers, and any other 19 WRITINGS in YOUR possession, custody or control PERTAINING TO any and all 20 ARCING MACHINES MARKETED by YOU to the jobsites or companies identified on the 21 attached Exhibit "A" between 1965 and 1991, inclusive. 22 Objection to Category No. 6 : 23 Defendant objects on the grounds that the request is overbroad, vague and 24 ambiguous. Defendant also objects to this request to the extent that it seeks disclosure of 25 information which is confidential business, proprietary or trade secret matter. Defendant 26 further objects on the grounds that this request is harassing and not reasonably calculated to 27 lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. 8. Ill ENV-SF/36174 -n B"ffiCTIri t o hLAWWP'S bEPSlTiFTNOtlC 1 Category No. 7: 2 All information PERTAINING TO any labels, logos, pictures, drawings, and 3 any other WRITINGS in YOUR possession, custody or control, located on any box, carton 4 or other packaging, or any instructions or other materials included with any and all ARCING 5 MACHINES MARKETED by YOU in the states identified on the attached Exhibit "A " 6 between 1965 and 1991, inclusive. 7 Objection to Category No. 7: 8 Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it is extremely vague, 9 ambiguous, unintelligible and calls for speculation as to what is being sought. Defendant 10 further objects to this request on the grounds that it is impermissibly overbroad in scope, and 11 seeks information and documents that are not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery 12 of admissible evidence. 13 Category No. 8: 14 All information PERTAINING TO any samples or exemplars of boxes, cartons 15 or other packaging or any instructions or other materials included with any and all ARCING 16 MACHINES MARKETED by YOU in the states identified on the attached Exhibit "A" 17 between 1965 and 1991, inclusive. 18 Objection to Category No. 8: 19 Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it is extremely vague, 20 ambiguous, unintelligible and calls for speculation as to what is being sought. Defendant 21 further objects to this request on the grounds that it is impermissibly overbroad in scope, and 22 seeks information and documents that are not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery 23 of admissible evidence. 24 Category No. 9 : 25 All information identifying the manufacturers' suggested uses or applications 26 of ARCING MACHINES MARKETED by YOU to the jobsites or companies identified on 27 the attached Exhibit "A" between 1965 and 1991, inclusive. Ill ENV-SF/36174 .1 8 . OBJECTION TO PLAINTIFF'S DEPOSITION NOTICE 1 Objection to Category No. 9 : 2 Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it is extremely vague, 3 ambiguous, unintelligible and calls for speculation as to what is being sought. Defendant 4 further objects to this request on the grounds that it is impermissibly overbroad in scope, and 5 seeks information and documents that are not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery 6 of admissible evidence. 7 Category No. 10: 8 All information submitted, received or exchanged by YOU with the United 9 States Federal Trade Commission PERTAINING TO ARCING MACHINES manufactured, 10 sold, distributed or MARKETED by YOU between 1965-1991, inclusive; including, but not 11 limited to, all sales figures or data submitted or received by YOU. 12 Objection to Category No. 10: 13 Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it is extremely vague, 14 ambiguous, unintelligible and calls for speculation as to what is being sought. Defendant 15 further objects to this request on the grounds that it is impermissibly overbroad in scope, and 16 seeks information and documents that are not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery 17 of admissible evidence. Defendant further objects to this request to the extent that it seeks 18 disclosure of information which is confidential business, proprietary or trade secret matter. 19 Category No. 11: 20 All information submitted, received or exchanged by YOU to any automotive 21 parts catalog, including, but not limited to, the Sweets Catalog, PERTAINING TO or 22 identifying the manufacture name, brand name, trade name and/or model number of any an 23 all ARCING MACHINES MARKETED by YOU between 1965-1991, inclusive. 24 Objection to Category No. 11: 25 Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it is extremely vague, 26 ambiguous, unintelligible and calls for speculation as to what is being sought. Defendant 27 further objects to this request on the grounds that it is impermissibly overbroad in scope, and 28 seeks information and documents that are not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery ENV-SF/36174 19 * & JitlON TO PLAINTIFF'S DEPOSITIW NOTICE 1 of admissible evidence. Defendant further objects to this request to the extent that it seeks 2 disclosure of information which is confidential business, proprietary or trade secret matter. 3 Category No. 12: 4 All information PERTAINING TO YOUR membership, association, 5 involvement correspondence or exchange of information with the Brake Linings 6 Manufacturers Association between 1949-1950, inclusive. 7 Objection to Category No. 12: g Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it is extremely vague, 9 ambiguous, unintelligible and calls for speculation as to what is being sought. Defendant 10 further objects to this request on the grounds that it is impermissibly overbroad in scope, and 11 seeks information and documents that are not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery 12 of admissible evidence. Defendant further objects to this request to the extent that it seeks 13 disclosure of information which is confidential business, proprietary or trade secret matter. 14 Category No. 13: 15 All information PERTAINING TO YOUR membership, association, 16 involvement, correspondence or exchange of information with the Clutch Facing and Brake 17 Linings Standards Institute between 1949-1950, inclusive. 18 Objection to Category No. 13: 19 Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it is extremely vague, 20 ambiguous, unintelligible and calls fqr speculation as to what is being sought. Defendant 21 further objects to this request on the grounds that it is impermissibly overbroad in scope, and 22 seeks information and documents that are not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery 23 of admissible evidence. Defendant further objects to this request to the extent that it seeks 24 disclosure of information which is confidential business, proprietary or trade secret matter. 25 Category No. 14: 26 All information PERTAINING TO YOUR membership, association, _27 involvement, correspondence or exchange of information with the Friction Materials 428 Standards Institute between 1950-1991, inclusive. ENV-SF/36174 - 20- bJECTIN T p l W Tf f 'S bStfrlrt N IC 1 Objection to Category No. 14: 2 Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it is extremely vague, 3 ambiguous, unintelligible and calls for speculation as to what is being sought. Defendant 4 further objects to this request on the grounds that it is impermissibly overbroad in scope, and 5 seeks information and documents that are not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery 6 of admissible evidence. Defendant further objects to this request to the extent that it seeks 7 disclosure of information which is confidential business, proprietary or trade secret matter. 8 Category No. 15: 9 All information PERTAINING TO YOUR membership, association, 10 involvement correspondence or exchange of information with the Industrial Hygiene 11 Foundation. 12 Objection to Category No. IS: 13 Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it is extremely vague, t * 14 ambiguous, unintelligible and calls for speculation as to what is being sought. Defendant 15 further objects to this request on the grounds that it is impermissibly overbroad in scope, and 16 seeks information and documents that are not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery 17 of admissible evidence. Defendant further objects to this request to the extent that it seeks 18 disclosure of information which is confidential business, proprietary or trade secret matter. 19 Category No. 16: 20 All information PERTAINING TO the date on which YOU first became aware 21 that there were health risks associated with exposure to ACP or ASBESTOS. 22 Objection to Category No. 16: 23 Defendant objects on the grounds that the request is overbroad, vague and 24 ambiguous. Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that the request seeks 25 information regarding the rights of third persons who are not party to this litigation. 26 Defendant also objects to this request as not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of 27 admissible evidence, and improper under Civil Code 3295, as plaintiff is apparently OETERT. M0KAW>Q t ARNOLD "' pursuing claims heard on the Consumer Expectation Theory. 8FnM94i11M14iC4alfonk TL415.711.7900 ENV-SF/36174 -21 - (5BJECT1N t PLWT1WS M f S lT l N NOTICE 1 Category No, 17: 2 All information PERTAINING TO the date on which YOU first placed any 3 warnings on ARCING MACHINES boxes, cartons, other packaging, warning or instruction 4 manuals, or any other writings accompanying YOUR ARCING MACHINES, concerning the 5 health hazards associated with the use, work with or handling of ACP or ASBESTOS. 6 Objection to Category No. 17: 7 Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it is extremely vague, 8 ambiguous, unintelligible and calls for speculation as to what is being sought. Defendant 9 further objects to this request on the grounds that it is impermissibly overbroad in scope, and 10 seeks information and documents that are not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery 11 of admissible evidence. Defendant further objects to this request to the extent it seeks 12 disclosure of information which is confidential business, proprietary or trade secret matter. 13 Category No. 18: 14 All information PERTAINING TO any samples or exemplars, of any and all 15 warnings of ASBESTOS-related health hazards placed on any and all boxes, cartons, other 16 packaging, warning or instruction manuals, or any other writings accompanying any and all 17 ARCING MACHINES MARKETED by YOU between 1965-1991, inclusive. 18 Objection to Category No. 18: 19 Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it is extremely vague, 20 ambiguous, unintelligible and calls for speculation as to what is being sought. Defendant 21 further objects to this request on the grounds that it is impermissibly overbroad in scope, and 22 seeks information and documents that are not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery 23 of admissible evidence. 24 Category No. 19: 25 All information PERTAINING TO any warnings of ASBESTOS-related health 26 hazards published, issued, distributed or otherwise communicated by YOU to users and 27 consumers of ARCING MACHINES MARKETED by YOU. 58 Ill ENV.SF/6I7 -22- 05ICTN T bLAlNlP' bhSItlfTNOTIC 1 Objection to Category No. 19: 2 Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it is extremely vague, 3 ambiguous, unintelligible and calls for speculation as to what is being sought. Defendant 4 further objects to this request on the grounds that it is impermissibly overbroad in scope, and 5 seeks information and documents that are not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery 6 of admissible evidence. Defendant further objects to this request to the extent it seeks 7 disclosure of information which is confidential business, proprietary or trade secret matter. 8 Category No. 20: 9 All information PERTAINING TO or describing what actions YOU took, if 10 any, regarding YOUR existing inventories of ARCING MACHINES subsequent to the date 11 YOU first became aware that there were health risks associated with exposure to ACP or 12 ASBESTOS. 13 Objection to Category No. 20: 14 Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it is extremely vague, 15 ambiguous, unintelligible and calls for speculation as to what is being sought. Defendant 16 further objects to this request on the grounds that it is impermissibly overbroad in scope, 17 seeks information and documents that are neither relevant to the subject matter of this action, 1 18 nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence, and it is 19 burdensome, harassing and oppressive. Defendant also objects to this request to the extent I I 20 that it seeks disclosure of information which is confidential business, proprietary or trade 21 secret matter. I II 22 Category No. 21: i1 ! 23 All information PERTAINING TO the results of any and all studies performed l 24 by consultants hired by YOU concerning the health hazards associated with exposure to ACP 25 or ASBESTOS. 26 Objection to Category No. 21 : ______ 27 CW1CK DEic RT. MORAffeQ fc. ARNOLD O w SUtMai E d w w J i w C enter FIo m - San FrvpdMo,California TU9441151.I7-M11S.7900 Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it is extremely vague, ambiguous, unintelligible and calls for speculation as to what is being sought. Defendant -23- -- ------------------ EJCH6N T hLAlNTIFVr8 DEPOSITION HOTICE----------------------------- 1 further objects to this request on the grounds that it is impermissibly overbroad in scope, and 2 seeks information and documents that are not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery 3 of admissible evidence. Defendant further objects to this request to the extent it seeks 4 disclosure of information which is confidential business, proprietary or trade secret matter. 5 Category No. 22: 6 All information PERTAINING TO any communication (written or oral) by 7 YOU to YOUR employees or others regarding the health hazards of exposure to ACP or 8 ASBESTOS. 9 Objection to Category No. 22: 10 Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it is extremely vague, 11 ambiguous, unintelligible and calls for speculation as to what is being sought. Defendant 12 further objects to this request on the grounds that it is impermissibly overbroad in scope, and 13 seeks information and documents that are not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery 14 of admissible evidence. 15 Category No. 23: 16 All information which identifies the individuals employed by YOU who were 17 responsible for the purchase or acquisition of components parts used for the manufacture, 18 fabrication, assembly, or other production of YOUR ARCING MACHINES during the years 19 1965 to 19.91, inclusive. 20 Objection to Category No. 23: 21 Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it is extremely vague, 22 ambiguous, unintelligible and calls for speculation as to what is being sought. Defendant 23 further objects to this request on the grounds that it is impermissibly overbroad in scope, and seeks information and documents that are not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Defendant also objects to the request on the grounds that it is invasive of third-party privacy rights and plaintiffs have failed to properly notice the deposition pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure sections 1985.3, 1985.6 and 2025(f). Ill ENV-SF/36174 -24- OBJECTION TO PLAII^tlFF'S DEPOSITION NOTICE 1 Category No. 24: 2 All information which identifies the individuals employed by YOU who were 3 responsible for the manufacture, fabrication, assembly, or other production of ARCING 4 MACHINES by YOU during the years 1965 to 1991, inclusive. 5 Objection to Category No. 24: 6 Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it is extremely vague, 7 ambiguous, unintelligible and calls for speculation as to what is being sought. Defendant 8 further objects to this request on the grounds that it is impermissibly overbroad in scope, and 9 seeks information and documents that are not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery 10 of admissible evidence. Defendant also objects to the request on the grounds that it is 11 invasive of third-party privacy rights and plaintiffs have failed to properly notice the 12 deposition pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure sections 1985.3, 1985.6 and 2025(f). 13 Category No. 25: 14 All information which identifies the individuals employed by YOU who were 15 responsible for the sale, supply, MARKETING, or distribution or ARCING MACHINES by 16 YOU during the years 1965 to 1991, inclusive. 17 Objection to Category No. 25: 18 Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it is extremely vague, 19 ambiguous, unintelligible and calls for speculation as to what is being sought. Defendant 20 further objects to this request on the grounds that it is impermissibly overbroad in scope, and 21 seeks information and documents that are not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery 22 of admissible evidence. Defendant also objects to the request on the grounds that it is 23 invasive of third-party privacy rights and plaintiffs have failed to properly notice the 24 deposition pursuant to Code o f Civil Procedure sections 1985.3, 1985,6 and 2025(f). 25 Category No. 26: 26 All information regarding the EARLIEST Worker's Compensation claims filed 27 against YOU in which it was alleged that claimant suffered injuries resulting from asbestos 8 exposure. (For purposes of this demand, "EARLIEST" shall refer to the first five years ENV-SF/36174 -25- 0BJCT10N TO PLAINTIFF'S DEPOSITION SlOTICE 1 during which such claims were filed against you.) 2 Objection to Category No. 26: 3 Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it is extremely vague, 4 ambiguous, unintelligible and calls for speculation as to what is being sought. Defendant 5 further objects to this request on the grounds that it is impermissibly overbroad in scope, and 6 seeks information and documents that are not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery 7 of admissible evidence. Defendant also objects to the request on the grounds that it is 8 invasive of third-party privacy rights and plaintiffs have failed to properly notice the 9 deposition pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure sections 1985.3, 1985.6 and 2025(f). 10 Category No. 27: 11 AH information regarding the EARLIEST personal injury claims filed against 12 YOU in which it was alleged that claimant suffered injuries resulting from asbestos exposure. 13 (For purposes of this demand, "EARLIEST" shall refer to the first five years during which 14 such claims were filed against you.) 15 Objection to Category No. 27: 16 Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it is extremely vague, 17 ambiguous, unintelligible and calls for speculation as to what is being sought. Defendant 18 further objects to this request on the grounds that it is impermissibly overbroad in scope, and 19 seeks information and documents that are not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery 20 of admissible evidence. Defendant also objects to the request on the grounds that it is 21 invasive of third-party privacy rights and plaintiffs have failed to properly notice the 22 deposition pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure sections 1985.3, 1985.6 and 2025(f). 23 Category No. 28: 24 All information PERTAINING TO or identifying distributors or other entities 25 who MARKETED YOUR ARCING MACHINES in California between and during the years 26 1965 and 1971, inclusive. 21 /// 8 III ENV-SF/36174 -26CBJECTION fO Ka WTIFF'S DEPOSITION NOTICE 1 Objection to Category No. 28: 2 Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it is extremely vague, 3 ambiguous, unintelligible and calls for speculation as to what is being sought. Defendant 4 further objects to this request on the grounds that it is impermissibly overbroad in scope, and 5 seeks information and documents that are not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery 6 of admissible evidence. Defendant further objects to this request to the extent it seeks 7 disclosure of information which is confidential business, proprietary or trade secret matter. 8 Category No. 29: 9 All information PERTAINING TO or identifying distributors or other entities 10 who MARKETED YOUR ARCING MACHINES in Texas between and during the years 11 1977 and 1991, inclusive. 12 Objection to Category No. 29: 13 Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it is extremely vague, 14. ambiguous, unintelligible and calls for speculation as to what is being sought. Defendant 15 further objects to this request on the grounds that it is impermissibly overbroad in scope, and 16 seeks information and documents that are not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery 17 of admissible evidence. Defendant further objects to this request to the extent it seeks 18 disclosure of information which is confidential business, proprietary or trade secret matter. 19 Category No. 30: 20 All information PERTAINING TO or identifying distributors or other entities 21 who MARKETED YOUR ARCING MACHINES in Ohio between and during the years 1971 22 and 1977, and 1980 to 1990, inclusive. 23 Objection to Category No. 30: 24 Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it is extremely vague, 25 ambiguous, unintelligible and calls for speculation as to what is being sought. Defendant 26 further objects to this request on the grounds that it is impermissibly overbroad in scope, and _27 seeks information and documents that are not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery 28 of admissible evidence. Defendant further objects to this request to the extent it seeks ENV-SF/36174 -27- BJECT1W 1 0 fL tW fF f'S IMPOSITION NOTICE 1 disclosure of information which is confidential business, proprietary or trade secret matter. 2 Dated: October 25, 1999 SEDGWICK, DETERT, MORAN & ARNOLD 3 4 5 INC., sued herein as HENNESSY 6 INDUSTRIES 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 II 21 iI 22 23 24 I 25 26 I 21 38 ENV-SF/36174 - 28 - felCtlN f'LAW l'lf'F' bPSlTION NOTICE 1 PROOF OF SERVICE 2 I am a resident of the State of California, over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to the within action. My business address is Sedgwick, Detert, Moran & Arnold, One 3 Embarcadero Center, 16th Floor, San Francisco, California 94111-3628. On October 25,1999, I served the within documents: AMMCO TOOLS, INC.'S OBJECTIONS TO 4 PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE OF TAKING DEPOSITION OF HENNESSY'S PERSON MOST KNOWLEDGEABLE AND CUSTODIAN OF RECORDS 5 6 by transmitting via facsimile the documents) listed above to the fax number(s) 7 set forth below on this date before 5:00 p.m. 8 bfuyllpylapcrienpgaitdh,eidnothceumUennittesd) lSistatetedsamboaivleaitnSaanseFarlaendceisncvoe,loCpaeliwfoirtnhiapoasdtdargeessthederaeson 9 set forth below. 10 by causing personal delivery by____________ of the documents) listed above to the person(s) at the addressees) set forth below. 11 by personally delivering the document(s) listed above to the person(s) at the 12 address(es) set forth below. 13 by overnight courier of die documents) listed above to the person(s) at the 14 address(es) set forth below. 15 BRAYTON, PURCELL, CURTIS & GEAGAN 222 Rush Landin 16 NP.oOva. tBoo, xCa219049945-3229 17 18 I am readily familiar with the firm's practice of collection and processing 19 correspondence for mailing. Under that practice it would be deposited with the U.S. Postal Service on that same day with postage thereon fully prepaid in die ordinary course of business. I 20 am aware that on motion of the party served, service is presumed invalid if postal cancellation date or postage meter date is more than one day after date of deposit for mailing in affidavit. 21 I declare under penalty o f perjury under the laws of the State o f California that the 22 above is true and correct. 23 24 25 26 ENV-SF/36189