FILE NAME State of the Art Literature SAL DATE 1934 DOC SAL020 DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION Industrial Bulletin - Asbestos it PPC Peer iskins yey Peer aera INDUSTRIALETIN ENGINEERING DIVISION'S REPORT ..,, Single copies 10 cent ELMER F.

FILE NAME State of the Art Literature SAL DATE 1955 DOC SAL062 DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION Journal Editorials - Silicosis Asbestosis and Cancer of the Lung American Journal of Clinical Pathology OFFICIAL PUBLICATION OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CLINICAL PATHOLOGISTS W.

/ I PLAINTIFF'S 1 i EXHIBIT xHf7t> i 8 rflpfT.

AFFIDAVIT CITY OF PITTSBURGH ss STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA BEFORE ME, a Notary Public in and for the State of Pennsylvania personally appeared -C who stated under due oath of law as follows: , am a librarian for >rary in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

Industrial Hygiene Digest --j Ni INDUSTRIAL HEALTH NEWS LITERATURE ABSTRACTS MEDICAL ENGINEERING CHEMICAL TOXICOLOGICAL LEGAL .<: = 5^3 APRIL, 1960 .'11 7J ,, J INDUSTRIAL HYGIENE FOUNDATION MELLON INSTITUTE 4400 FUTH AVENUE PITTSBURGH 13, PA.

/ / Dear Hr.

Confi^enti ax.

Confidential Mellon Institute of Industrial i University of Pittsburgh Research PROGRESS REPORT for the___ weekended Subjects under which report is to be indexed -------------Industrial Fellowship No. 259-7 3 copies made: 1 - Mellon Institute 2 - Air Hygiene file plaintiff's mron 1HF-398 Spent entire week on supplemental stucfy of atmospheric conditions in vicinity of Calco Chemical plant, Bound Brook, N.

FILE NAME Industrial Hygiene Foundation IHF DATE 1957 Mar DOC IHF049 DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION Foundation Facts re INDUSTRIAL HYGIENE FOUNDATION aeererinee FOUNDATION Volume 19 FOUNDATION FOUNDATION FOUNDATI FOUNDATI FOUNDATION FOUNDATION Foundation Facts is monthly letter issued to industrial concerns holding membership in Industrial Hygiene Foundation The Foundation is a nonprofit association of Industries for the advancement of healthful working conditions March 1957 8 + No. 3 NEW MEMBER Company The Foundation welcomes to membership the Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing BRAUN ON MEDICAL SOCIETY'S PROGRAM COMMITTEE

FILE NAME Newspaper & Magazine Articles NMA DATE 1970 June 7 DOC NMA156 DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION Cincinnati Enquirer Article - Taft Asks Check on Asbestos Hazard THE CINCINNATI CINCINNATI OHIO f=} 700 000 S 294,200 JUN 7 1970 595 Taft Asks Check Hazard On Asbesto- Councilman . om ... mm ION Churies | Churies + thee thee In AuvOeren in irr me inhala He said that the mieles ben of achei can lead to cancer ae Taft filed a motion with e city ey) Commel at the manager and the Board of Health for a report sald the spraying af asbestoon toon construction ha been spoed in New York City following a bearing on the health Tee bearing ed _ -- ~ =z net

FILE NAME Newspaper & Magazine Articles NMA DATE 1972 Oct 1 DOC NMA069 DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION NYT - Cancer - Warning Before It Is Too Late , Health HealthHealth WarningWaWarrninnging Is5 ANGELES preventenvironment discudsisicousnenivoinronmental environmentaly inagvloyidable environmentally expected definincgonsequences thesmoking ihelaAkmrertiAcmaerniscans major Ndoiwscovered environmentalasbestos AcordoicngupaotciuopnatilonaylygEs>zan mesothelioms thought here indirectly in- theleomxa posuexrposeed mesotheliomashipyAalrtdhosugh inhaledSellmeksooftfhelioma Selikof 'sasbestos | Particlesmost exposed ex en isvuebsltyancesubstance cancercosmetics biphenylsm ta paper demiolcognissutmption foodschlthrinignated diethylstilbestro demiolodgemiiosltogist contribeuxptloirng cancer cancer g NYT NYT Oct. 1,1972 1,1972 country Argentina have programa dif erent bowel environmental particularly increasing harmless controllecodntroled investigs concenctornactenetraetnedering | proportionswith | | .

FILE NAME Newspaper & Magazine Articles NMA DATE 1975 Mar 20 DOC NMA016 DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION The Montreal Star - Asbestos Clinic Let Sick Men Work inc AR, ee A oe oo ye IE ET A Bg ere Seen aD nas a ree ST ENT Ee Speavn BE pining .

FILE NAME Paccar PAC DATE 2025 Jan 3 DOC PAC018 DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION Legal - Paccar's Supplemental Responses to Plaintiffs Interrogatories Morris v Bel Air Auto Ex 0 EXHIBIT O IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR BALTIMORE CITY ESERVICE 75371743 Jan 03 2025 04:17 IN RE BALTIMORE CITY * * ASBESTOS LITIGATION * * * * * * * * * * ROSALIND MORRIS Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of John Alan Morris et al * CASE NO 23-000029 * * April 8 2025 Trial Date * * Plaintiffs * * VS. * * BEL AIR AUTO PARTS INC et al * * Defendants * * * * * * * * * * * * * * DEFENDANT PACCAR INC'S FIRST SUPPLEMENTAL OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES TO PLAINTIFF ROSALIND MORRIS FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO Plaintiff ROSALIND MORRIS AND NOW Comes Defendant PACCAR Inc Defendant or PACCAR by and through its counsel of record DeHay & Elliston LLP and responses to Plaintiff Rosalind Morris First Set of Interrogatories as follows PRELIMINARY STATEMENT These discovery responses are provided only for those products identified by Plaintiff and to which Plaintiff alleges exposure These discovery responses are based on an ongoing review of PACCAR's documents and information obtained from ongoing discussions with various PACCAR personnel Much of the information requested dates back many years and is difficult or impossible to reconstruct or retrieve These discovery responses are made pursuant to a reasonable and diligent investigation and search for the information requested PACCAR reserves the right to amen these discovery responses if new or additional information becomes available to it PACCAR prepared these discovery responses with the assistance of counsel No single employee officer or agent of PACCAR has hand knowledge regarding each and every response The person signing these responses does so to satisfy whatever requirement may exist under the applicable rules regarding verification That person is informed and believes that the information known as of the date of his signature supports the discovery responses below INSTRUCTIONS Plaintiff's definitions and instructions are not repeated herein for the sake of brevity PACCAR objects to Plaintiff's definitions and instructions to the extent they are overbroad unduly burdensome and not reasonable calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence PACCAR further objects to Plaintiff's definitions and instructions to the extent they include meanings and characterizations inconsistent with PACCAR's interpretation of the defined terms and phrases GENERAL OBJECTIONS PACCAR asserts the following objections and incorporates each by reference into each and every Answer to Plaintiff's Interrogatories set forth herein a PACCAR objects to Plaintiff's Interrogatories to the extent that they seek corporate knowledge as it is extremely difficult for PACCAR to set forth the collective knowledge of all of its past or present employees PACCAR reserves the right to revise correct supplement and amend its discovery responses to provide information discovered subsequent to the responses contained herein b PACCAR asserts the right to object on the grounds of competency privilege relevancy materiality or any other proper ground to the use of any said discovery response for any purpose in whole or in part in any subsequent step or proceeding in this litigation c PACCAR asserts the right to object on any other ground to other interrogatories or other discovery procedures involving or relating to the subject matter of the Interrogatories answered herein d PACCAR asserts the right to revise correct supplement or clarify any of its discovery responses set forth herein at any time and PACCAR reserves the right to object to the use of these discovery responses at trial or any other proceeding as deemed necessary and appropriate by PACCAR e PACCAR objects to the extent Plaintiff seeks documents no longer in PACCAR's possession PACCAR's document retention policy is 7 years save for documents that fall under specific categories As such PACCAR may no longer possess documents responsive to certain Interrogatories f PACCAR objects to Plaintiff's Interrogatories to the extent that they involve matters outside of the geographical area at issue in this litigation and limits its discovery responses to said area g Furthermore these Interrogatories ask PACCAR to disclose information of which may no longer exist or may not be readily available is unrelated to the products at issue in this case Such information is also unrelated to the locations at which Decedent may have used any PACCAR product the conditions under which Decedent may have used any PACCAR product the time period during which Decedent may have used any PACCAR product or the time period during which Decedent alleges exposure to any PACCAR product Thus Plaintiff's Interrogatories seek information which is neither material nor relevant to the issues in this litigation are overbroad in time scope and location and are otherwise not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence h Plaintiff's Interrogatories are oppressive burdensome and would require PACCAR to undertake a massive and extraordinary document search the results of which would have little to no demonstrable bearing on this litigation in light of the alleged exposure Moreover many of these Interrogatories are not susceptible to a response because they request information which dates back many years and is now virtually impossible for PACCAR to reconstruct or retrieve in its entirety ( PACCAR objects to Plaintiff's Interrogatories because they were propounded to harass and coerce a settlement despite the lack or complete absence of verifiable product identification and the lack of evidence of injury as a result of alleged exposure to or use of any product which PACCAR may or may not have assembled j PACCAR objects to these Interrogatories because they are propounded for an additional improper purpose namely as a fishing expedition for the purposes of obtaining information that may be taken out of context by Plaintiff's counsel to create allegations against PACCAR where none may legitimately exist k PACCAR objects to Plaintiff's Interrogatories as overbroad in that they seek information from entities other than itself or its predecessors PACCAR over the course of its long history has owned several businesses which are not involved in the instant litigation Therefore all references in Plaintiff's Interrogatories to DEFENDANT YOU or YOUR and the like are assumed to refer only to PACCAR's unincorporated truck divisions Kenworth Truck Company and Peterbilt Motors Company 1 PACCAR objects to each and every Interrogatory that seeks production of any information constituting a trade secret confidential financial data or other confidential research development or commercial information m PACCAR objects to Plaintiff's Interrogatories as argumentative because they assume that a health hazard is created by the PACCAR products that may have incorporated asbestoscontaining component parts which PACCAR denies n PACCAR objects to Plaintiff's Interrogatories on the basis that they are vague and ambiguous Interrogatories relating to certain diseases fail to provide facts relating to the amount of exposure duration of exposure fiber type in exposure and latency period o PACCAR objects to Plaintiff's Interrogatories in that they tend to group together all of Defendants in this litigation and are therefore overbroad unduly burdensome harassing and not calculated to lead to the discovery of relevant and material evidence p PACCAR objects to each and every Interrogatory that calls for either pure speculation or legal conclusions on the part of PACCAR q PACCAR objects to each and every Interrogatory that calls for a medical conclusion beyond the scope of PACCAR's knowledge and capability r PACCAR objects to each and every Interrogatory that purports to impose any obligations on it that are not set forth in the Maryland Rules of Civil Procedure PACCAR objects that Plaintiff has propounded more than 30 interrogatories in violation of Maryland Rule of Civil Procedure 2-421 These responses are made without waiving its objection based on Rule 2-421 a s PACCAR objects to each and every Interrogatory that seeks information protected by the attorney privilege or attorney work product doctrine t PACCAR objects to each and every Interrogatory that seeks disclosure of information generated by persons other than PACCAR that has come into the possession of PACCAR's counsel during the course of discovery and trial preparation in asbestos litigation u PACCAR objects to each and every Interrogatory that seeks information for any time period unrelated to Plaintiff's alleged exposure v PACCAR objects to each and every Interrogatory that seeks information that is not under PACCAR's custody or control or which is within the public domain or otherwise equally available to Plaintiff or their counsel Subject to and without waiving any of the foregoing objections PACCAR states as follows FIRST SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSES TO INTERROGATORIES INTERROGATORY NO RM Identify each person other than a person intended to be called as an expert witness at trial having discoverable information that tends to support a position that you have taken or intend to take in this action including any claim for damages and state the subject matter of the information possessed by that person Standard General Interrogatory No. 1.

FILE NAME Talc TALC DATE 1976 June 21 DOC TALC156 DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION Letter to Dr.

FILE NAME Talc TALC DATE 1976 DOC TALC478 DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION Press Release - M Supplemental Sales & Earnings IM Contact . 4 Manville Corporation Neal T.