FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 05/05/ :30 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 185 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/05/2017. Exhibit A

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 05/05/ :30 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 185 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/05/2017. Exhibit A"

Christopher Harmon
6 years ago
Views:

1 Exhibit A

2 From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Kry, Robert Friday, May 05, :45 PM Gabriel Soledad; Daniel Pulecio-Boek; Juan Morillo; Derek Shaffer; Valerie Ramos; 'Aravand, Pouneh Molo, Steven; Ortiz, Jessica; Weinstein, Lauren RE: Rimsa v. Espinosa, No / deposition notice Gabe, We proposed a time for the call Monday. Please let us know if you re available. There is no reason the call cannot go forward then. Beyond that, as I said, we will respond to the substance of your separately. Robert From: Gabriel Soledad [mailto:gabrielsoledad@quinnemanuel.com] Sent: Friday, May 05, :08 PM To: Kry, Robert; Daniel Pulecio-Boek; Juan Morillo; Derek Shaffer; Valerie Ramos; 'tcgreen@sidley.com'; 'mhopson@sidley.com'; 'pzidlicky@sidley.com'; 'mcolon-bosolet@sidley.com'; 'tlosseaton@sidley.com'; 'Aravand, Pouneh (paravand@sidley.com)' Cc: Molo, Steven; Ortiz, Jessica; Weinstein, Lauren Robert, Please let us know if you are going to postpone the deposition. If not, we feel obliged to raise this with the Court today, and ask that you provide a time when one of the many lawyers on your side can join. Please advise asap. Gabe From: Kry, Robert [mailto:rkry@mololamken.com] Sent: Friday, May 05, :02 PM To: Gabriel Soledad <gabrielsoledad@quinnemanuel.com>; Daniel Pulecio-Boek <danielpulecioboek@quinnemanuel.com>; Juan Morillo <juanmorillo@quinnemanuel.com>; Derek Shaffer <derekshaffer@quinnemanuel.com>; Valerie Ramos <valerieramos@quinnemanuel.com>; 'tcgreen@sidley.com' <tcgreen@sidley.com>; 'mhopson@sidley.com' <mhopson@sidley.com>; 'pzidlicky@sidley.com' <pzidlicky@sidley.com>; 'mcolon-bosolet@sidley.com' <mcolon-bosolet@sidley.com>; 'tlosseaton@sidley.com' <tlosseaton@sidley.com>; 'Aravand, Pouneh (paravand@sidley.com)' <paravand@sidley.com> Cc: Molo, Steven <smolo@mololamken.com>; Ortiz, Jessica <JOrtiz@mololamken.com>; Weinstein, Lauren 1

3 Gabe, This afternoon does not work for our side. Please let us know your availability for a call at 1 p.m. on Monday. We will respond separately to the other points in your . Robert Robert K. Kry 600 New Hampshire Ave., NW Washington, DC T: (202) M: (202) F: (202) rkry@mololamken.com From: Gabriel Soledad [mailto:gabrielsoledad@quinnemanuel.com] Sent: Friday, May 05, :07 AM To: Kry, Robert; Daniel Pulecio-Boek; Juan Morillo; Derek Shaffer; Valerie Ramos; 'tcgreen@sidley.com'; 'mhopson@sidley.com'; 'pzidlicky@sidley.com'; 'mcolon-bosolet@sidley.com'; 'tlosseaton@sidley.com'; 'Aravand, Pouneh (paravand@sidley.com)' Cc: Molo, Steven; Ortiz, Jessica; Weinstein, Lauren Counsel, We have not heard back regarding your availability to call the Court. We would like to resolve these issues today. Please let us know when today you are available to call the Court. Gabe From: Gabriel Soledad Sent: Thursday, May 04, :23 PM To: 'Kry, Robert' <rkry@mololamken.com>; Daniel Pulecio-Boek <danielpulecioboek@quinnemanuel.com>; Juan Morillo <juanmorillo@quinnemanuel.com>; Derek Shaffer <derekshaffer@quinnemanuel.com>; Valerie Ramos <valerieramos@quinnemanuel.com>; tcgreen@sidley.com; mhopson@sidley.com; pzidlicky@sidley.com; mcolonbosolet@sidley.com; tlosseaton@sidley.com; Aravand, Pouneh (paravand@sidley.com) <paravand@sidley.com> Cc: Molo, Steven <smolo@mololamken.com>; Ortiz, Jessica <JOrtiz@mololamken.com>; Weinstein, Lauren <lweinstein@mololamken.com> 2

4 Counsel, We take allegations of witness tampering extremely seriously, just as we re sure you do. Accordingly, we expect that you will produce information well beyond what you ve identified in support of those allegations, and that you will do so in advance of any call with the Court. Please rest assured that none of us at Quinn Emanuel has had anything to do with any witness tampering to which you allude. Nor have we heard of any such activity prior to your . Nor do we have any interest in preventing Ms. Huerta s deposition. To the contrary, we intend to cross-notice it. Consistent with that, we re trusting that you ll be affording us equal time to pursue our own questions. If not, please let us know so we can take this issue up with the Court alongside the others. To reiterate, all we re asking is that we be permitted to adequately prepare for Ms. Huerta s deposition, and, correspondingly, that we have the necessary documents and opportunity to prepare in advance of it. If anything is delaying her deposition, therefore, it is your continuing delays with production delays that we have been bringing to your attention and urging you to rectify since last year, while noting, e.g., that your delays in producing documents would delay our preparations for depositions. On January 20, as part of your initial search term and custodian proposal, you agreed to search and produce Ms. Huerta s custodial files. Also on that date, you indicated that you intended to search her files exclusively for documents that included the term double paperwork in English and in Spanish, and other references to such alleged documents. More than three months later, and after repeated requests from us, however, you still have failed to complete your production of Ms. Huerta s custodial documents. After all of your delays, we re asking to be afforded just two weeks for our preparation, from the date you complete your production of her custodial documents to when the deposition proceeds. You must recognize that it typically takes roughly two to three days just to upload documents into our review platform such that we can then start reviewing them. Your proposal does not account for that, much less enable us to follow-up on any deficiencies we may identify in your production. You are denying us the time we need to review your latest production of Ms. Huerta s custodial files and develop our lines of inquiry in time for her upcoming deposition, which we recognize may afford us our only chance to question her (consistent with concerns you ve long expressed about witness availability). And you are rejecting our proposal to have Ms. Huerta s deposition proceed in proximity to that of Raul Nava, as noticed for May 26. Finally, it is striking that you are invoking unsubstantiated allegations of witness tampering while refusing to provide basic information about what compensation and benefits Ms. Huerta is being paid by Teva. In our respectful view, Teva cannot avail itself of Ms. Huerta s testimony while blocking discovery into the financial strings Teva is holding over her. We agree that the Court should resolve our differences in these respects and will be available for a call at your convenience. Gabe From: Kry, Robert [mailto:rkry@mololamken.com] Sent: Thursday, May 04, :52 AM To: Daniel Pulecio-Boek <danielpulecioboek@quinnemanuel.com>; Juan Morillo <juanmorillo@quinnemanuel.com>; Derek Shaffer <derekshaffer@quinnemanuel.com>; Gabriel Soledad <gabrielsoledad@quinnemanuel.com>; Valerie Ramos <valerieramos@quinnemanuel.com>; tcgreen@sidley.com; mhopson@sidley.com; pzidlicky@sidley.com; mcolon-bosolet@sidley.com; tlosseaton@sidley.com; Aravand, Pouneh (paravand@sidley.com) <paravand@sidley.com> Cc: Molo, Steven <smolo@mololamken.com>; Ortiz, Jessica <JOrtiz@mololamken.com>; Weinstein, Lauren 3

5 Subject: Rimsa v. Espinosa, No / deposition notice Counsel, We plan to proceed with Ms. Huerta s deposition on the originally scheduled date of May 12th. The urgency of the timing relates to our serious and well-grounded concerns about witness tampering in this case. We received information yesterday evening that a former Rimsa employee contacted a colleague of Ms. Huerta s at the company attempting to obtain Ms. Huerta s home address. This is someone who has no personal relationship with Ms. Huerta, and it is difficult to imagine a legitimate reason for the inquiry. This follows multiple other incidents over the past month in which another former Rimsa employee s lawyer has attempted to contact Ms. Huerta. We expect to produce some of the documents identified by our most recently agreed-upon search terms for Ms. Huerta this Friday, May 5, and the remaining documents identified by those terms next Monday, May 8, or at the latest, Tuesday, May 9. We have already produced the documents we currently plan to use in the deposition. If we decide to add any documents from these forthcoming productions, we will specifically identify those documents for you in advance of the deposition. The other information you have asked for is not relevant to the propriety of proceeding with the deposition at this time. Please let us know when you re available for a call with the court to discuss these matters. Robert Robert K. Kry 600 New Hampshire Ave., NW Washington, DC T: (202) M: (202) F: (202) rkry@mololamken.com This may contain attorney work product, privileged and/or confidential information. It is intended to be subject to the Attorney Client privilege. It is intended only for the original recipients, and no other person is authorized to receive it. Please do not copy or forward this without the consent of the author. If you have received this in error please delete it immediately from your system and contact the author. Molo Lamken LLP is a limited liability partnership formed under the laws of New York and the liability of its partners is limited accordingly. The names Molo Lamken and MoloLamken shall refer to Molo Lamken LLP. This may contain attorney work product, privileged and/or confidential information. It is intended to be subject to the Attorney Client privilege. It is intended only for the original recipients, and no other person is authorized to receive it. Please do not copy or forward this without the consent of the author. If you have received this in error please delete it immediately from your system and contact the author. Molo Lamken LLP is a limited liability partnership 4

6 formed under the laws of New York and the liability of its partners is limited accordingly. The names Molo Lamken and MoloLamken shall refer to Molo Lamken LLP. This may contain attorney work product, privileged and/or confidential information. It is intended to be subject to the Attorney Client privilege. It is intended only for the original recipients, and no other person is authorized to receive it. Please do not copy or forward this without the consent of the author. If you have received this in error please delete it immediately from your system and contact the author. Molo Lamken LLP is a limited liability partnership formed under the laws of New York and the liability of its partners is limited accordingly. The names Molo Lamken and MoloLamken shall refer to Molo Lamken LLP. 5

Case 1:12-mc lk-CFH Document 37 Filed 01/15/13 Page 1 of 6

Case 1:12-mc lk-CFH Document 37 Filed 01/15/13 Page 1 of 6 Case 1:12-mc-00065-lk-CFH Document 37 Filed 01/15/13 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ------------------------------------------------------x : CHEVRON CORPORATION,