37 2009 00101537 Cu Oe CTL - Roa 310 - 05 16 17 - 1512525365911

Superior Court of California
County of San Diego
Civil
unique ID-(3302-6
CASE 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL
VOLUME 1
TOTAL 11
VOLUME
C208_C3302/6 Reg_Date: 05/10/2017

1
DO NOT
FILE
SEE
VOLUME
1,
SDSC ADM-171(Rev. 7-03)

.
1 MICHAEL C. SULLIVAN (SBN 131817)

MELISSA LISTUG KLICK (SBN 228470)
2 PAUL, PLEVIN, SULLIVAN & CONNAUGHTON LLP
401 B Street, Tenth Floor IF 1 L.- c
3 San Diego, California 921:01-4232
Telephone: 619-237-5200 u --Clrk ; 4 440Uff C '
4 Facsimile: 619-615-0700
FEB 2 6 2010
By: E. CASTANEDA, Deputy
Wunt*- 3/69
5 Attorneys for Defendant
Qualcomm Incorporated
6
7 C V. C«b
SUPERIOR COURT OF THESTATE OF CALIFORNIA
8
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

9
10 COURTNEY S. ETNYRE, CASE NO. 37-2069-00101537-CU-OE-CTL
11 Plaintiff, DEFENDANT QUALCOMM

INCORPORATED'S EX PARTE
12 V. APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER

SHORTENING TIME ON A MOTION TO
13 SANDIP ("MICKEY") MINHAS, COMPEL DEPOSITION OF PLAINTIFF

individually, QUALCOMM.Incorporated, a COURTNEY ETNYRE; MEMORANDUM
14 Delaware corporation and DOES 1 through OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN
40, inclusive, SUPPORT THEREOF; DECLARATION OF
15 MELISSA LISTUG KLICK AND
Defendants. ACCOMPANYING EXHIBITS IN SUPPORT
16 THEREOF
17
Date: March 1, 20.10
Time: 8:30 a.m.
18
Dept: 70
19 Judge: Hon. Jay Bloom

Complaint Filed: November 2,2009
Trial' Date: None Set
20
21
22
23
, 24
25
BY FAX
it 26 27
28
PAUL, PLEVIN, ORIGINAL

SULLIVAN & Ex Parte Application
CONNAUGHTON LLP
.
1 TO PLAINTIFF COURTNEY S. ETNYRE AND HER ATTORNEY OF RECORD:
2 Defendant Qualcomm Incorporated hereby submits this application for an order shortening
3 time on a motion to compel the, deposition offlaintiff Courtney Etnyre to be heard on March 12,
4 2010 with the following proposed briefing schedule: Moving papers to be filed on March 2,
5 2010, 6pposition papers to befiled and fax served on March 8, 2010, and reply papers to be filed
6 and fax served on March 10, 2010.
7 This ex parte application is based on. this application, the points and authorities set forth
8 below; the declaration of Melissa Listug Klick set forth below, and the aecompanyin'g exhibits.
9 Plaintiffs counsel was given noticeof this application on February 17, 201:0 via fax:and mail.
10
Dated: February 26,2010 PAUL; PLEVIN, SULLIVAN &
11 CONNAUG ON LLP
12
13
BY:
14 i ZMJ€8 15 C. SCLLIVAN
A LISTUG KLICK
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PAUL, PLEVIN, 1
SULLIVAN.& Ex Parte Application
CONNAUGHTON.tip
/1
.
1 L
2 INTRODUCTION
3 Plaintiff Courtney Etnyre ("Etnyre?') refuses to appear forher deposition in this lawsuit
4 brought by her against her employer, Qualcomm Incorporated, and her fornier supervisor, Sandip
5 Minhas. Qualeomm has made numerous attempts to secure the deposition, to -no avail. Thus, an
6 order shoitening time on a motion to compel her deposition is necessary because Qualcomm's
7 further'discovery is contingent upon,. and cannot continue, until it obtains Etnyre's testimony.
8 Notably, Qualcomm has made the following attempts to expeditiou-sly obtain Etilyrd's needed
9 testimony:
10 (1) Noticed the.deposition originally on December 3,2009, for January 28, 2010, nearly
11 two months in advance;
12 (2) Qualcomm confirmed the depesition date with Etnyre and her ceunsel;
13 (3), After Etnyre refused to appear as noticed, Qualcomm went exparte to this Court
14 seeking an order compelling her deposition on February 3, 2010;
15 (4) The Court ordered her to appear by March 5,2010;
16 (5) Qualcomm has written Etnyre's counsel three times and had an extensive telephone
17 conference attempting to secure her appearance.by the Court's deadline; and
18 (6) Qualcomm has agreed to re-produce (back to Etnyre) documents she produced to
19 Qualcomm before the deposition.
20 Yet, she refuses still refuses to appear.
21 At the Court's February 3, 2010 hearing, the Court indicated that a motion to compel her
22 attendance would be required to resolve the dispute finally. Unfortunately, the Court's first
23 available date at that time was months away; Qualcomm has a motion to compel hearing date of
24 May 7, 2010. Qualcomm continued to meet and confer, in good faith, with Etnyre to attempt to
25 resolve the issue based on the Coult' s order. It has now become clear that not only is Etnyre
26 unwilling to abide by the Court's order, or to produce herself for deposition, but that she is
27 ipossibly stalling in an effort at obtaining additional discovery before her deposition.
28 After the date originally noticed for Etnyre'sdeposition, January 28, 2010, her counsel has
PAUL, PLEVIN, 2
SULLIVAN & Ex Rarte Application
CONNAUGHTON Lip
1 prop6unded hundreds ofdiscovery requests andserved subpoenason third parties for the
2 production ofrecords - all aimed at the single goal ofreceiving all information and documents
3 from other parties before'producing his client for deposition. Because allowing any further
4 stalling based on the Court's calendar will significantly prejudice Qualcomm and because it must
5 Obtain Etnyra'* teitimony beforefurther discovery canbe conducted in the matter, Qualcomm
6 respectfully requests that this, Courtshorten the time in which to hear its motion to compel
7 Courtney Etnyre's deposition to be heard on#March 12,2010.
8 II.
9 FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
10 On November 2,2009, PlaintiffCourtney Etnyre filed the instarit lawsuit'against
11 Defendants, Qualcommi Incorporated and Sandip Minhas. She alleged sexual harassment, sexual
12 battery; discrimination, and retaliati6n, among other claims.
13 A. Qualcomm Notices and Confirms with Etnyre's Counsel.
14 Qualcomm was served on December 2,2009, and noticed Ms. Etnyre's deposition the
15 next day for January 28,2010. (Listug Klick Decl. 112; Exh. 1 [Deposition Notice].) At that time,
16 Qualcomm also sent Ms. Etnyre's counsel a letter offeringa modification of the date to
17 accommodate any scheduling conflicts. (Exh. 2 [Letter dated December 3, 20091.) In, response to
18 the notice, Etnyre did not serve any objections and actually confirmed with Qualcomm's counsel
19 that she was available and planning·to go forward as noticed. (Listug Klick Decl. 112.)
20 B. Etnyre Serves Extensive Document Demands and Refuses Any Extension.
21 Three weeks later, at-the close ofbusiness on December 23,2009, Einyre personally
22 served an expansive Request for Production on Qualcomm, with 58 separate document categories.
23 (Listug Klick Decl. 11,3.; Exh. 3 [Plaintiffs Request. for Production].) As Emyre knows (she is a
24 current Qualcomm employee), December 24,25, 30 and January 1 were company holidays and all
25 employeeswere encouraged to take December 27-29 as vacation. Thus, Qualcomm could only
26
27
28
PAUL, PLEVIN, 3
CONNAUGHTON LLP
.
1 begin to review and determine appropriate responses on January 4,2010. '

2 On January 18, affer determining that Etnyre's document requests would involve
3 performing electronic searches of more than a dozen Qualcemm witnesses and interviewing and
4 gathering files from additional custodians, Qualcomm requested areasonable extension 6f timeih
5 order t6 serve responses and documents. (Listug Klick Decl. 915.) Etnyre denied the request.
6 (Listug Klick Decl. 1 5.) Thus; Qualcomm timely served its responses and objections to Etnyre's
7 Requests for Productien and produced an initial production of documents, including Etnyre's
8 employment files. (Listug Klick Decl. 116; Exh. 4 [Letter dated January 22, 2010].)
9 C. Qualcomm Seeks Etnyre's Cooperation to Make Discovery More Efficient and
10 Etnyre Fails to Respond in Any Manner.
11 To make the document search as efficient as possible, Qualcomm proposed, and requested
12 Etnyre's input on, a list of search terms to be used to search for the electronic documents. (Exh.
13 4; Listug Klick Ded..116.) Etnyre provided'no input to the list. (Listug Klick Decl. 116.)
14 Therefore, on February 4,2010, Qualcomm: sent Etnyre's counsel a letter indicating it would go
15 forward with the search terms as proposed because no input had been received. (Listug Klick
16 Decl 117; Exh. 5 [Letter dated February 3, 2010].) After running 'the searches, Qualcomm
17 discovered that /three. terms were returning hundreds 6fthousands of documents-that were n6t
18 relevant to the·case (i.e.''*application?? "meeting" and "confidential"). (Listug Flick Decl. 117.) In
19 an effort to keep Etnyre Updated on the preduction, Qualcomm sent her a letter informingher of
20 'the same and indicating that Qualcomm would be changing the search term list accordingly unless
21 she provided additional input. (Listug Klick Decl. 117; Exh. 6 [Letter dated February 19, 2010].)
22 Again, Qualcomm waited and received no response. (Listug Klick Decl. 117.) Thus, Qualcomm
23 ran the search term list,.as modified, against the more than dozencustodians and is currently
24 reviewing hundreds 6fthousands of documents to identify,and produce responsive documents.

25 (Listug Ktick Decl. 117.)
26
1 On January 4, 2010 Etnyre requested, and Qualcomm agreed without hesitation. an extension of time to
serve her responses and documents to Qualcomm. (Listug Klick Decl. 114.)
27
28
PAUL, PLEVIN, 4
SULLIVAN'& Ex Parte Application
CONNAUGHTON ap
.
1 D. Etnyre Refuses to Appear for Her Deposition.
2 In the memitime, after*eceiving Qualcomm's responses and initial' pfoduction of

3 documents, Etnyre's counsel emailed Qualcomm (and later confirmed in a conference call with
4 :counsel), asserting that Etnyre.would not appear at the noticed date for the deposition because all
5: documents.requested had not been pfoduced. (Listug Klick Decl. 118; Exhs. 7 [January 23, 2010
6 Email with Responsel; 8 [Letter dated January 27, 2010].) Specifically, Etnyre refused to appear
7 until she had the opportunity to "refresh herrecollection" of the events alleged in her complaint
8 by reviewing documents gatheredby Qualcomm related to her claims. (Listug Klick Decl. 11 8.)
9 Thus, on January 27,2010, Qualcomm notified Etnyre that it would seek exparte,reliefto compel
10 1 Plaintiffs attendance at deposition. (Exh. 9 [Letter dated January 27, 2010]; Listug Klick Decl. 1
11 9.) In response, Etnyre filed her own exparte application requesting the Court not coinpel her to
12 appear until Qualcomm's document production was complete. (Listug Klick Decl. 119.)
13 E. The Court Ordered Etnyre to Appear.
14 After the hearings on both parties' respective exparte applications, the'Court ordered
15 Etnyre to appear for deposition by March 5,2010. (Listug Klick Decl. 1110: Exh. 10 {Court's
16 Order].) Through this order, the Court also,directed Qualcomm to provide Etnyre'5 stfitements to
17 her to review for her deposition by February 19, 2010. (Listug Klick Dect. 9110: Exh. 10.) That
18 same day, Qualcomm emailed Etnyre to confirm that she was already in possession of any
19 statements that she provided to Qualcomm on her claims and attempted to secure her agreement
20 to appear for her deposition. (Listug Klick Decl. 11 +0; Exh. 11 [Email dated February 3, 2010,
21 from Michael Sullivan].)
22 Indeed, Qualcomm attempted to secure.any date for Etnyre's deposition before March 5,
23 2010, and received no response. (Listug Klick Decl. 1111.) On February 17, 2016, Qualcomm
24 wrote to Etnyre's counsel once againadvising that it believed it had complied with Judge
25 'Bloom's February 3, 2010 Order (and attached a copy of the minute order) because Etnyre had in
26 her possession the only statements that she had provided to Qualcomm and noticing Etnyre's
27 deposition for March 4,2010. (Listug Klick Decl. 9111; Exh. 12 [Letter dated February 17, 20101;
28 Exh. 13 [Deposition Neticel.) Further, Qualcomm sought additional input before the Court's
PAUL, PLEVIN, 5
CONNAUGHTONLLE
.
1 February 19,2010, deadlinein case Etnyre believed that other statements existed (because she
2' would have provided such statements). (Listug Klick Decl. 1111.) Again, however, Etnyre did
3 not respond. (Listug.Klick Decl. 9111.)
4 F. Etnyre Refuses to Appear for Her Deposition, Again.
5 On.February 25,2010, Qualcomm again contacted Etnyre's:counsel to secure her
6 agreement.to appear on,March 4, 2010. (Listug Klick Dect.,1112.) Whilb acknowledging that he
7 and his client were.available, Etnyre's counsel ihdicated that he would appear and.refuse to allow
8 her to testify until Qualcomm provides responsive documents indicated in hisex parte application
9 to the,Court on February 3, 2010. (Listug Klick.Decl. 1112.) Qualcomm will continue its meet
10 and confer efforts.
III.
11
12 THIS COURT SHOULD SHORTEN THE TIME IN WHICH IT HEARS QUALCOMM'S
13 MOTION TO COMPEL COURTNEY ETNYRE'S DEPOSITION
14 The notice period before thehearing on a motion may be obtained through a court order
15 shortening time. (Witkin, California Procedure (4th Ed.), 6 Proceedings Without Trial §15, citing
16 Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 1005(b) [providing that a court may "prescribe shorter time" for noticel.)
17 Such an order'may be obtained through an ex parte application. Ubid.)
18 This Court Ordered Etnyre to attend her deposition by March 5, 2010. Qualcomm needs to
19 complete the deposition of Etnyre to .serve as. the foundation for its continued discovery and trial
20 preparation, (Listug Klick Decl. 111,3.) Therefore, discovery in the case is essentially at a stand
21 still while Etnyre's refusal persists. Indeed, Ethyre refuses to even schedule her deposition, at any
22 time. Because the first available date for a motion to compel is May 7, 2010, over fivemonths
23 from the date, Qualcomm initially noticed Courtney Etnyre's deposition, Qualcomm seeks to have
24 its motion fully heard on sh6rtened notice.
25 Consequently, Qualcomm requests an order shortening time on its motion to compel Ms.
26 Etnyre's deposition to be heard.on March 12·,,2010.

27 V.
28 CONCLUSION
PAUL. PLEVIN, 6
SULLIVAN &
Ex Parte Application
CONNAUGHTON'LLP
.
1 For the foregoing reasons, Qualcomm Incorporated respectfully requests this Court grant
2 this ex parteapplication for an order. shortening time on itsmotion tocompel Plaintiff Courtney
3 Etriyre's deposition to be heard on March 12, 2010.
- 4'
Dated: February 26, 2010 PAUL, PLEVIN, SULLIVAN &
5 CONNAUGHTON LLP
8 6/MIHAAX. SULLIVAN
MEb;SS# LISTUG KLICK
Qualcomm Incorporatedt
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PAUL, PLEVIN, 7
CONNAUGHTON LLP
.
1 DECLARATION OF MELISSA LISTUG KLICK IN SUPPORT OF EX PARTE
2 APPLICATION
3 I, Melissa Listug Klick, declare as follows:
4' 1. 1 am an associate in the law office of Paul, Ple¥in, Sullivan and Connaughten LLP,
5 counsel ofrecord for defendant. Qualcomm Incorporated. 1 have personal knowledge ofthe
6 following facts, and could competently testify to the following:
7 2. 1 served a notice of deposition on Courtney Etnyre on December 3,2009 for January
8 28,2009. Attached as Exhibit 1 is a true and correctcopy ofthat notice. In,addition, I sent a
9 letter with the deposition nofice, a true and correct copy of which is at:tached as Exhibit 2. I
10 subsequently followed up with Paul Kondrick, Ms. Etnyre's counsel, and he confirmed that he
11 and his client were available for herdeposition as noticed and planned to appear. I received no
12 objection to the deposition·notice. Indeed, Mr. Minhas, a co-defendant, changed his travel plans
13 to accommodate.the date because Ms. Etnyrewanted to proceed as noticed,
14 3. According to the usual and customary practices at my firm, when a document is
15 personally served a notation is made on the document with the time and date of service.
1 16 According to this practice, at 4:57 p.m. on December 23,2009, we were personally served with
17 Plaintiff Courtney S. Etnyre's, Request for Production of Documents to Defendant, Qualcomm
18 Incorporated [Set No. One (1)]on behalfof Qualcomm. A true and correct copy ofthis discovery
19 is attached as Exhibit 3.
20 ' 4. On January 4, 2010, my assistant informed me that Mr. Kondrick'S' office had. called
21 and requested an extension to discovery from Qualcomm that had been served with the deposition
22 notice on December 3,2009. I immediately authorized the requested extension and informed my
23 assistant to cornmunicate to Mr. Kondrick's office that his request was granted.
24 5. On January 18,2010, I asked my assistant.to contact Mr. Kendrick and request a one
25 week extension to respond to Ms. Etnyre?s Request for Production to Qualcomm. I did so,
26 because we determined that Ms. Etnyre's document requests would involve performing electronic
27 searches of at least a dozen Qualcomm witnesses and interviewing and gathering files from
28 additional custodians. I was informed that the request was denied on January 19, 2010.
PAUL,.PLEVW, 8
CONNAUGHTON UP
1 6. On January 22,2010, I served responses and objections to Ms. Etnyre's discovery.
2 Further, we sent Mr. K6ndrick a letter explaining that Qualcomm's production would take
3 additional time to complete and that only a partial production was being provided. A true and
4 correct copy of this letter is attached as Exhibit 4. I personally delivered, at Mr. Kondrick's
5 request, a copy of the CD with responsive document (his requested production format and the one
6 he used for Qualcomm) 70 his office on Saturday, January 23, 2010. Included in the production
7 were Ms. Etnyre's employment files. 'In addition, we provided a proposed 'list of search terms to
8 be used to search electronic documentsand sought Mr. Kondrick's input. We received no
9 ' response regarding the search terms.
10 7. In order to move forward with Qualcomm's production and, because no input had been
11 received by Mr. Kendrick, on February 4, 2010, I sent Mr. Kendrick a letter indicating we would
12 go forward with the search terms as proposed because no input had been received. A true and
13 correct copy of this letter is attached as Exhibit 5. After running the searches, we discovered that
14 three terms were returning hundreds ofthousands of documents'that were not relevant to the case.
15 These terms were "application" *'meeting" and "confidential". Because the events in this case
16 arose out of the patent department, these words had an extraordinarily high return rate. In an
17 effort to keep Ms. Etnyre updated on theproduction, I sent her counsel a letter informing her of
18 the same and indicating that Qualcomm would be changing the search term list accordingly unless
19 she provided additional input. A true and correct copy of my letter is attached as Exhibit 6.
20 Again, I waifed and received no response. Thus, Qualcomm ran the search termlist, as. modified,
21 againstthe more than dozen c.ustodians and is currently reviewing hundreds ofthousands of
22 documents to identify and produce responsive documents.
23 8. At the same time, in response to Qualcdmm'-5 document production, 0n January 23,
24 2010, Mr. Kendrick sent an acerbic email to me and Michael Sullivan threatening to refuse to
25 produce Ms. Etnyre for her deposition because Qualcomm's production was not complete. On
26 January 25,2010, Michael Sullivaninformed Mr. Kondrick that the production was incomplete,
27 Qualcomm was diligently working on producing additional documents, and that the process
28 wouldtake some time. A true and correct copy of Mr. Kondrick's January 23 email and Mr.
PAUL, PLEV]N, 9
CONNAUGliTON LLP
.
1 Sullivah' s response areattached as Exhibits 7'and 8. In Mr. Kondrick's.communicatihn, he stated
2 Etnyre refused to appear Until,she,had the opportunity to *'refresh her recollection" of the events
3 alleged in her complaint by reyiewing documents gathered by Qualcomm related to her claims.
4 9. On January 27, 2010, onlyone day prior to the January 28,2010 scheduled deposition,
5 counsel iii the matter had a conference call. Inthe call, Mr. Kondrick confirmed to defense
6 counsel that Plaintiff would not appearather deposition. Accordingly, on that same day,
7 Qualcomm notified Etnyre that it would seek expartereliefto compel Etnyre's attendance at
8 idaposition both telephonically and in a letter. A true and correct copy of this letter is attached as
9 Exhibit 9. In response, Ms. Etnyre filed her own exparte application.
10 1[0. At the hearings on both parties' respectiveexparte applications, the Court ordered
11 Etnyre to appear for deposition by March 5.,.2010. A-true and correct copy·of,this Court's order is
12 attached as Exhibit 10. Through this order the Court also, directed Qualcomm to provide any»of
13 Etnyre's statements inits possession to her by February 19,2010. That same date, Qualcomm
14 emailed Mr. Kondrick to confirm that she was already in possession of any "statements" that she
15 provided to Qualcomm because she had previously produced them and sought her appearance. A
16 true and correct copy of Michael Sullivan's February 3, 2010 email is attached as Exhibit 11.
17 11. I had my assistant contact Ms. Etnyre's counsel after the February 3, 2010, hearing to
18 determine any dates that she was available for her deposition before March 5, 2010 and we were
19 never provided with any dates. Oh February 17, 2010, Michael Sullivan in my office wrote to
20 Mr. Kondrick once again adv.ising that it believed it had complied with Judge Bloom's February
21 3, 2010 Order (and attached a copy of the minute order) because Etnyre had in her possession Xhe
22 only statements that she had· provided to Qualcomm and noticing Etnyre's deposition for March 4,
23 2010. A true and correct copy of that letter is attached as Exhibit 12. Further, we sought
24 additional inputbefore the Court's February 19, 2010, deadline in case Ms. Etnyre believed that
25 other statements existed (because she Would have provided such ·statements). Again, however,·we
26 received no response. Thus, -we noticed Ms. Etnyre's depositionfor March 4, 2010. A true ·and
27 correct copy ofthe deposition notice is attached as Exhibit 13.
28 12, On February 25,2010, I had a conference call with Mr. Kendrick and Mr. Sullivan in
PAUL, PLEVIN, 10
CONNAUGHTON UP
.
1 an attemptsecure Ms. Etnyre's agreementto appear on March 4, 2010. While acknowledging
2 that he and his client were available, Mr, Kondrick indicated that he would appear and refuse to
3 allow her to testify until Qualcomm provides responsive documents indicated in his ex parte
4 application to the Court on February 3,201'0. We will continue these meet and confer efforts.
5 13. As Qualcomm'S motion to compel will.not be, heard-until May 7,2010, over five
6 months from the date Qualcomm initially, noticed Courtney Etnyre's deposition, Qualcomm.
7 recognized the necessity of bringing the current ex parte application for an order shortening time
8 on that m6tion. Without such a Court ordered allowance, Qualcomm will be severely prejudiced.
9 Etnyre'.s testimony is most certainl¥ critical to this litigation, and Qualcomm. hasa right to
10 discovery the facts which Etnyre believes substantiate her claims before it can engage in further
11 discovery of those claims. Thus, Qualcomm has goodcause to bring this ex parte application and
12 to compel Etnyre's attendance at deposition. Qualcomm gave notice of its application for an ex
13 parte order shortenidg time to Etnyre.and.her counsel on February 17,2010, by letter via fax and
14 mail.
15 I declare Under penalty of pedury that the foregoing is true,and correct. Executed at San
16 Diego, California on February 26,2010.
17
18 \-MELIAAAJEAYSKLICK
19
20
21
22.
23
24
25
26
27
28
PAUL. PLEVIN, 11
CONNAUGHTON LO
EXHIBIT 1
..
.

401 B Street, Tenth Floor
3 San Diego, California 92101-4232
Telephone: 619-237-5200
4 Facsimile: 619-615-0700

6
8 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
9 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

11 Plaintiff, NOTICE OF TAKING VIDEOTAPED
DEPOSITION OFPLAINTIFF COURTNEY
12 V. ETNYRE
13 SANDIP ("MICKEY") MINHAS,

individually, QUALCOMM Incorporated, a Complaint Filed: November 2,2009
14 Delaware corporation and DOES 1 through Trial Date: None Set
40, inclusive,
15
Defendants.
16
17
TO COURTNEY ETNYRE AND HER ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:
18
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that, pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section
19
20
2025.010 et seq., defendant Qualcomm Incorporated will take the deposition ofplaintiff Courtney
Etnyre on January 28,2010 at 9:30 am at the law offices ofPaul, Plevin, Sullivan &
21
Connaughton LLP, 401 B Street Tenth Floor, San Diego, California.
22
23
The deposition will be taken before a certified shorthand reporter who is authorized to
administer an oath AND WILL BE VIDEOTAPED. If, for some reason, the deposition is not
24
completed on the above dates, it will be continued on mutually agreeable dates, excluding
25
Sundays and holidays, until completed.
26
27
Notice is further given that this office has requested a realtime-ready court reporter. If any
28
attorney who is present wishes to be connected to the court reporter's systdm, it is your obligation
PAUL, PLEVIN,
SULLIVAN & NOTICE OF TAKING VIDEOTAPED DEPO OF 1
ZONNAUGHTON LLP PLAINTIFF COURTNEY ETNYRE
.
1
to contact Hutchings Court Repoiers, LLC at 800-697-3210 to make arrangements for their
2
technical support personnel to contact you regarding your software needs and to ensure that the
3 court reporter brings adequate cabling and supplies.
4
Dated: December 3,2009

5
PAUL, PLEVIN, SULLIVAN &
CONNAUGHTON LLP
6
7
-
8
By'/ /»,\-KGU-Z>,-
MICHAEDC. SULLIVAN
9
MEEISSA LISTUG KLICK
Attorneys for Defendant
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PAUL, PLEVIN,
SULLIVAN & NOTICE OF TAKING VIDEOTAPED DEPO OF 2
ZONNAUGHTON up PLAINTIFF COURTNEY ETNYRE
2
PAUL, PLEVIN, SULLIVAN & CONNAUGHTON lip
Telephone: 619-237-5200
4 Facsimile: 619-615-0700

QUALCOMM Incorporated
6

10 COURTNEY S. ETNYRE,
CASE NO. 37-2009-00101537.CU-OE-CTL
11 Plaintiff, PROOF OF SERVICE
12 V.
Dept: 66
1,3 SANDIP ("MICKEY") MNHAS, Judge: Charles R. Hayes
14
Delaware corporation and DOES 1 through Trial Date: None Set
40, inclusive,
15
Defendants.
16
17
18
I, the undersigned, certify and declare that I am a citizen of the United States, over the age
19
of eighteen, employed in the County of San Diego, State of California, and not a party to the
20
within-entitled action. My business address is 917 West Grape Street, San Diego, CA 92101.
21
On December 3,2009, I served a true copy ofthe within:
22
NOTICE OF TAKING VIDEOTAPED DEPOSmON OF PLAINTIFF
COURTNEY ETNYRE
23
. FORM INTERROGATORIES - GENERAL (SET ONE)
24
. FORM INTERROGATORIES - EMPLOYMENT LAW (SET ONE)
25
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS, SET ONE
26
• SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE
27
• DECLARATION FOR ADDITIONAL DISCOVERY
28
PAUL, PLEVlN,
SULLIVAN & PROOF OF SERVICE 1
:ONNAUGHTON LLP
.
1
by delivering for personal service to the following:
2
H. Paul Kondrick
3 H. Paul Kondrick, a Professional Corporation

3130 Fourth Avenue
4 San Diego, CA 92103
Telephone: (619) 291-2400
5
Facsimile: (619) 291-7123
6 E-Mail: kondrick@msn.com
Attorney for Plaintiff
7
8
I hereby certify that I am employed by Calexpress San Diego, California, at whose
direction the personal service was made.
j -1
Executed this 3rd day of December 2009, at San Diego, California.
12
_164- f»A
caexpras
Messenger
/
13
14
15
16
17
18
j
19
20
21
23
25
26 '
27
28
PAUL, PLEVIN,
SULLIVAN & PROOF OF SERVICE 2
'ONNAUGHTON Lip
.
1 Etrore v. Minhas el al.

San Diego Superior Court Case No. 37-2009-00101537
2
PROOF OF SERVICE
3
I, the undersigned, hereby declare that I am over the age of eighteen years and not a party
4
to this action. I am employed, or am a resident of, the County of San Diego, California, and my
5
business address is: Paul, Plevin, Sullivan & Connaughton LLP, 401 B Street, Tenth Floor, San
Diego, California 92101.
6
On Decembu 3,2009, I caused to be served the following document(s):
7
• NOTICE OF TAKING VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF PLAINTIFF COURTNEY
ETNYRE
8
o FORM INTERROGATORIES - GENERAL (SET ONE)
9
110
• FORM ]NTERROGATORIES - EMPLOYMENT LAW (SET ONE)
• REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS, SET ONE
11
12
• DECLARAnON FOR ADDmONAL DISCOVERY
13
14
on the interested party (ies) in this action by placing a true copy thereofand addressed as follows:
15 Leonid M. Zilberman
Wilson, Petty, Kosmo'& Turner, LLP
16 550 West C Street, Suite 1050
San Diego, CA 92101-3532
17 Telephone: (619) 236-9600
Facsimile: (619) 236-9669
18 E-Mail: Izilberman@wokt.com
Attorneys for Defendant Sandip Minhas
19
0 (By MAIL SERVICE) I then sealed each envelope and, with postage thereon fully
20
prepaid postage, I placed each for deposit with Uhited States Postal Service, this same day,
2I
at my business address,shown above, following ordinary business practices.
0 (State)foregoing
I declareis true
under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the
and correct.
22
23 0 (Federal) I declare that I am employed by the office of a memberofthe bar of this court at
whose direction the service was made.
24
Executed December 3,2009, at San Diego, California.
25
26
2WMA 64-#,9'
Deborah Baranowski
27
28
PAUL, PLEVIN,
SULLIVAN &
PROOF OF SERVICE 3
CONNAUGHTON up
EXHIBIT 2
PAUL, PLEVIN,
401 B STREET, TENTH FLOOR, SAN DIEGO, CA 92101
PHON8619·237·5200 | PAX 619·615·0700 | WWW.PAULPLEVIN.COM
SULLIVAN &
MELISSA LISTUO KLICK
(619) 243·1561 mklick@paulplevin.com
<- CONNAUGHTON LLP
December 3,2009
iPaul Kondrick
3130 Fourth Avenue
San Diego, CA 92103
Re:, Etnyre v. Qualcomm Incorporated

Dear Mr. Kondrick:
You will notice that there is a deposition notice for your client's deposition
enclosed for January 28,2010. :Ifthis date is not convenient for your client, please
provide us with alternate dates for your client's deposition and we will work with
you to reschedule.
Also, as stated in the instructions for each set of discovery, the documents
Qualcomm seek include electronically stored information. Thus, Kelly expects any
such documents in Ms. Etnyre's control - even if through an online account, or
that she must request - will be produced or an appropriate objection and
explanation provided so that we are able to further discuss the documents not
produced.
Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you.

Sincerely,
Paul, Pievin, Sullivan

& Connaughton LLp
- \ 3,-fnJUL
J Me* Lgtug Klick
MLK
Enclosures
cc: Leonid M. Zilberman
EXHIBIT 3
1 H. Paul Kondrick, Esq.,State Bar No. 88566 .
2 H. Paul Kondrick, A.P.C.
3130 Fourth Avenue
Telephone: (619) 291-2400
4 Facsimile: (619) 291-7123
5
Attorney for Plaintiff, COURTNEY S. ETNYRE
6
7 -
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

9,
10
FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
11 COURTNEY S. ETNYRE, individually, ) Case No. 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL
12 Plaintiff, ) PLAINTIFF, COURTNEY S.

) ETN¥RE'S, REQUEST FOR
13 v. ) PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS TO
14 ) DEFENDANT, QUALCOMM
SANDIP CMICKEY'D MINHAS, individually,) INCORPORATED [SET NO. ONE (1)]
15 QUALCOMM Incorporated, a Delaware )
16
corporation, and DOES 1 through 40, inclusive,)
)
17 Defendants. )
18
19 Propounding Party Plaintiff, COURTNEY S. E'INYRE

20 Responding Party: Defendant QUALCOMM Incorporated
SetNo.: One (1)
21
22 TO: All Parties by and through their attorneys ofrecord:
23 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that plaintiff, Courtney'S, Etnyref 'ETNYRE"], requests

24 that defendant QUALCOMM Incorporated, I"QUALCOMM"1 produce on January 22, 2010,
25 at 10:00 a.m., at the law offices of H. Paul Kon£trick, A Professional Corporation, located at
26 31'30 Fourth Avenue, San Diego, California 92103, the documents and writings set forth with
27 particularity in Exhibit "A" hereto, including to inspect, copy, test. or sample electronically
28 storedinformation in the possession, custody, orcontrol of defendant, QUALCOMM.
-1-
Request for Production- QUALCOMM
1 ,. -- NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN that within thirty (30) days after service oftbis notice
2 and demand for production and inspection and photocopying of documents and other tangible
3 things, which period is extended by five (5) days where service was made by mail, you shall
4 serve the original ofyour Desponse(s) to the demand ofproduction and inspection of
5 documents and other tangible things on the party making this.demand, You shall respond
6 separately to each item or category by statement that you will comply wilh a particular demand
7 for inspection and any related activities, a representation that you lack the ability to comply
8 with the demand for inspection of a particular item or category, or an objection to the
10
9 particular item. Each statement of compliance, each representation, and each objection in the
response ghall bear the same number and be in the same sequence as the corresponding item or
11 category in the demand, but the text ofthat item or category need not be repeated.
I2
13
A statement that the party to whom an inspection has been directed will comply with
14
the particular demand shall state that the production, inspection, and related activity demanded
15
will be:allowed either in whole or in part, and that all documents or things in the demand
16 category that are in the possession custody, or control of that party and to whichno objection
17 is being made will be included'in the production. A representation of inability to comply with
18 a particular demand for inspection shall affirm thata diligent search and a reasonable inquiry
19 has been mnde in an effort to comply with that demand. The statement shall also specify
20 whether the inability to comply is because the particular item or category has never existed,
21 has been destroyed,has been lost, misplaced, or stolen, or has never been, or is no longer in
22 the possession, custody or control of the responding party. The statement shall set forth-the
23 name and address of any natural person or organization known or believed by ihat party to
24 have possession, custody or control of that item or category of item.
25 If only part ofan item or category ofitem inaninspection demandisobjectionable, the
26 response shall contain a statement of compliance, or a representation of inability to comply
27 With respect to the remainder ofthatitem or category. If the responding party objects to the
2% demand for inspection of an item or category ofitem, the response shall (a) identify with
-2-
Request fbr Production. QUALCOMM
-
.
1
1 particularity any document, tangible thing,·or.land, falling within any category of item
2 in the demand to which an objection is being made and (b) set forth clearly the extent of,
3 and the specific ground for, the objection. If an objection is based on a claim of privilege,
4 the particular privilege invoked shall be stated. If an objection is based on a statement that the
5 information sought is protected under Code ofCM Procedure, 5 2018.010, et, seg, thai claim
6 shall be:expressly asserted.
7
YOu qhall sign the response under oath unless the oath contains only objections. Ifyou
8 are a public or private corporation or partnership or associadon or governmental agency, one
10
9 ofyour omcersor,agents shall sign theresponse under oath onyourbehalf. The response
shall comply fully,AthCode of Civil Procedure, § 2031.010, et. seq..
11
12
Iftile production,and photocopying, as necessary, ofthe requested documents is not
13
completed on the aforementioned date, the productionthereofwill be continued from day-to-
14
day thereafter at the same time and place, Saturdays, Sundays and holidays excepted, until
15 completed, and in the event of any scheduling conflict of the persons designated to so produce
16 the documents, parties or counsel, then to the earliest mutually convenient date, time and
I7 location. The documents or other thingsrequested' may be produced hereunder otherwise
18
subject to mutual agreement by the parties, through their counsel.
19 H. Paul Kondtick,
A Profassional Con,orati
H Paul Kon
20
21 Dated: December 23,2009 By:f d{5

22 Attorney for Plaintiff, Courtney S. Etnyre
23
D
24
25
26
27 '
28
-3-
Request for Production - QUALCOMM
.
1
EXHIBIT"A»
2
DEFINITIONS
3
To avoid ambiguity and repetition, the following definitions are incorporated herein by
4
'reference:
5
1. As used herein, the term "writing" or"writings" or "document" or.
6
'*documents" shall be defmed to include any kind' of handwriting, typewriting, printing,

7
8
photostating, photographing, recording, and every other means of recording upon any tangible
9
thing, any form ofcommunication or mpresentation, including letters, words, pictures,
10
symbols or sounds, or combinations thereof however printed, produced, reproduced coded or '
11
stored, of any kind or description, whether sent or received or not including originals, copies,
12
reproductions, fhcsimiles, drafts, both sides of any such item, including writings, drawings,
13
graphs, charts, photographs, phone-records, and other data compilations from which
14
information can be obtained, translated, if necessary, through detection devices into
15 reasonably usable form, and further including, without limitation, all objectsor tangible things
16 such as computer tapes or disks, compact discs Cs'CD's" or"CD Roms'l magnetic tapes,
17
punchcards, computer readouts, miciofilms, microfiche, and all other'records kept by
18 electronic, photographic or mechanical means, and anything similar to the foregoing, however
19 denominated by you, including but not limited to electronically stored information in the
20
possession, custody, or control ofyoub or anyone acting on your behalf.
21 If a document has been prepared in more than one copy, and any copy was not
22 identical and is no longer identical with the original by reason ofa subsequent notation or
23 other notification of any kind whatsoever, including without limitation, notes or modifications
24 on lhe mRrgins or back pagesthereof, each non-identical copy is considered a separate
25 document for puKPoses of this document request, and it is to be made available hereunder.
26 "Wridngs" further includes all drafts and notes, whether typed, printed,:handwritten, or
27 otherwise, made in connection with such document or writing, whether used or not
28
Plaintiff further requests that any electronically stored information be produced in CD,
-4-
1
.
1. CD Roms or thumb drive foim.
2. Each request contained herein for production of documents extends to any

3 documents in the possession, custody or control of defendant QUALCOMM Incorporated
4 , [hereinafter '*QUALCOMM"]. A document is construed to be in its possession, custody or
5 control, if it is in its physical custody, gf if it is.in the physical custody of any other person,
6 and defendant QUALCOMM: (a) owns such document in whole or in pan; (b) has a right by
7 contract statute or otherwise to use, inspect, examine or copy such document on any terms;
8 (c) has any understanding, express or implied,lhat defendant may,use, inspect, examine or
10
9 copy suchdocument onany terms; or (d) has, as a practical matter, been able to use, inspect,
11
examine or copy such document when defendants have sought to do so. Such documents and
12
writings shall include, without limitation, documents that are in the custody of defbndant's
attorney(s), or other agents.
13 3. The term *'you" or'*your"refers to QUALCOMM Incorporatei or any of its

14
1-5
predecessors-in-interest or sucessors-in-interest, and anyone acting on its behalf.
16
4, Whenever used herein, the singular shall include the plural and vice-versa
17 5. Whenever used herein, "and" may be understood to mean"or," and vice-versa
18
whenever such instruction results in a broader request for information.
19 6. With respect to each document to which a claim ofprivilege is asserted,
20
separately, whether in a privilege log or otherwise, state tile,following:
21
(a) The type of document or wIiting;
22 (b) Its date, in particular any date set forth on the document or writing evidencing
23
the date on which it was signedor drafted;
24 (c) Thenmne, business address, and present position of its originator(s) or

authoks);
25
26 (d) The position of its originator(s) or author(s) at the time the document was
27 prepared;
28 (e) The name, business address and present position of each recipient of the
-5-
1 document;
2 (f) The position of each recipient at the time the document was prepared and-the
3
time it was received;
4 ' (g) A general description ofthe subject matter of the document sufficient so that
5 ' the document maybe brought tothe Court's attention formeans ofamotion for
6
order compelling the production of the document;
7
01) The bases of any claims ofprivilege; and
8
9
0) Ifwork-product privilege or immunity is asserted, the proceeding for which the
document was prepared.
10,
7, The tenn «acting onyour behalf includes, but is not limited to, your
11
12
' investigators, agents, employees, and representatives, and' your attorneys and their
investigators, agents, employees, and representatives.
13
I4
8. The term "person" means any natural person, partnership. firm, receiver,
15
corporation, including federal corporation, association. trustee, group, organization, or any
entity of any nature.
16
17
9. The words "concern" or"conceming" include referring to, alluding to,
18
responding to, relating to, connected with, commenting on, in respect of, about, regarding,
19 discussing, showing, desclibing, mentioning, reflecting analyzing, constituting, evidencing, or
pertaining to.
20
21 10, The tenn "policy" means each rule, procedure, or directive, formal or informal,
22 and each common understanding or course of conduot which was recognized as such by you or
23 any third person, or your agents, or other persons acting or purporting to act on your behalf.
24 11. The singular number and masculine'or feminine gender as used herein shall
25 embrace, nnrl be read as applied as, the plural or masculine or feminine or the neuter, as
26 circumstances may make appropriate.
27 12. The term "relevant period» shall, unless otherwise specified, be defined as
28 March 1,2003 to the present, unless otherwise defined.
-6-
Request br Production - QUALCOMM
1 13. ··?'Plgintiff' refers to Courtney S. Emyre [hereinafter also sometimes referred to
2 as'ETNYRE'7.
14. "M]NHAS" refers to defendant SANDIP CMICKEY') MINHAS,

4 15.- '#Complaine' means the complaint filed herein by Courtney S. Etnyre on or
5 about November 2,2009 inthe SanDiego Superior Court, bearing Civil Case No. 37-2009-
6 00101537- CU-OE-CTL.
7 16, If you object to the discovery of electronically stored information on the

grounds thatitis froma source lhat is not reasonably accessible because of undue burden or
10
' expense and thRt the you will not search the source in the absence of an agreement with the
11
demAnrling party or court order, then you shall identify in your response the types or categories
of sources ofelectronically stored information that you assert are notreasonably accessible.
12 By objecting and idenfying information ofatype or categoiy of source or sources that are not
13
14
reasonably accessible, you will still preserve any objections you may have relating to that
15
electroniwlly stored informdion pesuant to Code of Civil Procedure, §2031.210(d), and
otherwise.
16
I7 17. If in responding to a demand for production of electronically stored information

18 you object to a specified form for producing the information, or if no form is specified in the
19 demand, you shall state jn you response the form in which you intend' to produce each type of
20 information. Unless the parties otherwise agree or the court otherwise orders, the following
shall apply:
21
22 (1) If a demand for production does not specify a form or forms for producing a type of
23 electronically stored information, you shall produce the inbrmation in the form or
24 forms in which it isordinarily maintained or in a form that is reasonably usable; and
25 (2) You need not produce the same electronically stored information in more than one
26 form, unless it is non-identical as set forth in paragraph 1, above.
27 _If necessary, at the reasonable expense of the demanding party, you shall, through detection
28 devices, translate any data compilations included in the demand into reasonably usable form.
-7-
Request £or Production - QUALCOMM
18. If electronically stored information produwd in discovery is subject to a claim
2 of privilege or of protection as attorney work-produc4 you may notify any party that received
3 the information of the claim and the basis for the claim. After being notified of a claim of
4 ptivilegeorofprotectionasattomey work-product, a party that received the information shall
5 immediately sequester the information and either return the specified·information and any
6 copies that may exist or present the information to the court conditionally under seal for a
7 determination of theclaim.
8
WRITINGS TO BE PRODUCED
9
10
The writings to be produced under this request for production of documents are as
follows:
11
12
1. The complete personnel file maintained by you on plaintiff, ETNYRE,
13
including but not limited to the following: any change of status/personnel change or similar
14
reports, application f6r employment selection and evaluation summaries, pattern interview
15
f6rms, written employment agleement(s),letters proposing or offering employment
16
evaluations, appraisals, and performance reviews, job proficiency reviews, salary history,
awards and honors, and the like,
'17
18 2. All personnel files maintained by you on, or in relation to, plaintiff during the
19 relevant period whether said personnel files are complete, mnnmarized, segregated and
20 whether main,Ained by you at any branch or regional office, headquarters, your home or other
21
corporate office, or by any employee, officer, director or agent ofyours.
22 3. . All writings which you, or anyone acting on your behalf, believe.concern or
23 evidence, or tend to evidence, your reasons for placing plaintiff, ETNYRE, on administrative
24
leave on or about September 26,2007.
25 4. All writings which you, or anyone acting on your behalf, believe concern or
26 evidence, or tend to evidence, any progressive discipline or warnings leading up to plaintilf
27 being placed on administrative leave on or about September 26,2007.
-8-
Request for Production,- QUALCOMM
.
1 evidence, or tend to evidence, your reasons for placing plaintiff, ETNYRE,ana performance
2 improvement plan rPIP'l in or about October 2007.
4 evidence, ortendto evidence, any progressive discipline or warnings leading up to plaintiff
5 -being placed on a PIP in or about October 2007.
6
7. Allwritings which you,oranyone acting on your behalf, believe concern or
7 evidence„or tend to evidence, refer, relate or pertain, to expenses incurred by your Patent
8
9
Department or Group for so-called'*team-building" events during the period December 2004
through December 31,2007, in particular events that your Patent Department or group
to
11
organized and held, e.g. company-sponsored social events, dinners, '*happy hours," tour(s) of
12
various wineries, and the like, designed to promote comradery within the Patent Department
13
which your employees of the Patent Department, including plaintiff, ETNYRE, were invited
14
or encouraged to attend, including but not limited to expense reports, requisitions or requests,
15
summaries, description of events, approvals and proofs ofpayment or reimbursement
16
8, All wridngs which you, or anyone acting on your behalf, believe concern or
17
evidence, or tend to evidence, reler, relate or pertain, to expenses incurred by plaintiff,
18
ETNYRE, or defendant, MINHAS, in relation to their travels to and from New Jersey on your
19 business during the period January and February 2006, including but not limited to expense
20 reports, requisitions or requests, summaries, description of events, approvals,and proofs of
21 payment or reimbursement for food, travel, lodging, purchases, taxis, and the like.
22 9. All writings which you, or anyone acting on your behalf believe concern or
23 evidence, or tend to evidence, refer, mlate or pertain, to your fratemization or nepotism
24 Policies during the relevant period.

26 evidence, or tend to evidence, refer, relate or pertain. to your policies relative to sexual
27' relations between your employees, e.g., between co-worker who are or were not married to
28 each other, during the relevant period.
-9-
. .
11. Allwfitings which you, or anyone acting on your behalf, believe concern or
2 evidence, ortendto evidence, mfa, relate or pertain, to your reasons for not promoting
3 plaintim ETNYRE, during the period December 2004 through and including the present
4 12.
Your personnel policy manuals and employee handbooks or other statement of
5. employment policies issued by you during the relevantperiod. 1
6 13. All.writings which yog oranyoneactingonyourbehalf, believe evidence, tend
7 to evidence refer, relate, pertain or concern your personnel policies or practices, including but
8 not.limited to employee peiformance improvement plans, administrative leaves or suspension
10 1
9 progressive discipline, including warnings whether verbal or written, discrimination,
retaliation or harassment during the relevant period.
11
12
14. Any and all your publicly issued annual financial reports or statements during
, the relevant period.
13
14
15. Allcomspondence, including but notlimited to, letters,memoranda,or other
15
writings, between or among M[NHAS and YOU, including notes of any conversations,
16 relating to plaintiff and in particular any alleged discrimination, retaliation or harassment of
plaintiff during the relevant period.
17
18 16. All writings which you, or anyone acting on your behalf, believe evidence, tend
19 to evidence, refer, relate, pertain or concern to your mvestigation into the alleged sexual or
20 other assault of plaintiff, EINYRE, by defendant MINHAS, including but not limited to
21
yoice recordings, emails, statements, correspondence, and the like.
23 to evidence, refer, relate, pertain or concern to your investigation into plaintiffs allegations of
24 harassment, retaliation or discrimination based on sex or gender or disability dming the
25 relevant.period.
27 to evidence, refer, relate, pertain or concern to any complaints or charges of harassment,
28
retaliation or discrimination based on sex/gender or disability during the relevant period in
-10-
.
1 your Patent Department or group. . »
3 to evidence, refer, relate, pertain or concern to your investigation of any complaint or charge
4 of harassmeat, Itmlif,tion or discrimination whether based on sex/gender or disability during
5 the relevant period in your Patent Department or group.
6
20. All writings which you, or anyone acting on your behalf, believe evidence, tend
7 to evidence, refer, relate, pertain or concern any complaint whatsoever against, or relating to,
8 plaintiff, EINYRE, including but not limited to her duties as Senior Patent Prosecution
9 Pal'alegal/Project Manager or Patent Prosecution Senior Pamlegal/Project Manager, or
10
similarly named position, during the relevant period.
11
21. All writingsbetweenyou, onone'part andany other person, on the other part
12
that refer, directly or indirectly, to plainti ETNYRE, including but. not limited to
13
communications with, or involving, any of the following persons:
14
Barbara Agnihotri
15
Avneesh Agrawal
16
Jane Baker
17
Nancy Barnhart
18
Charles Bergen
19
Steven Colb
20
Joanne Conway
21
Deborah Dean
22
Carrie Floss (fka Carrie Casey)

23
Brett Gahagan
24
Sandy Godsey
25
Albert Harnois
26
David HufTaker
27'
Artie Kane
28
-11-
Request ibr Production - QUALCOMM
.
1 ·.. Kate Lane
2
Lou Lupin
3
Kyong Macek
4
Judith-Matson, Ph.D.
5
Michelle Maybaum
6
Dmitty Milikovsky
7
Sandip C'Mickey") Minhas
8
Nan Moser
9
Charles Nelson, Ph.D.
10
MilanPatel
11
Arlene Pollard
12
Tami Procopio
13
Thomas Rouse
14
Bill Sailer
15
Janet Sana
16
Kelly Scanlan
17
Susie Simsik
18
Michael Straub
19
Mary Stewart
20
Dan Sullivan
21
John H. Taylor, M.D.

22
Harris Teague
23
Phil Wadsworth
24
Edith Watson
25
DeeAnn Wong, M.D.

26
27 22. All writings which you, or anyone acting on your behalf believe evidence, tend
28 to evidence, refer, relate, pertain to your announcing, mentioning or discussing the
-12-
.
1 administrative.leave or suspension of plaintiff, ETNYRE's, employment during the relevant

2 period
3 · 23. All writings which you, or anyone:acting on your behaH believe evidence, tend
4 to evidence, refer, relate, pertain to you policy with respect to conduct between your
5 employees, discrimination, retaliation and harassment based on gender/sex or disability,
6 including accommodation of any employee experiencing a disability, maintained by you
7 durinlithe relevant period.
8
10
9 to evidence, refer, relate, pertain or concern plaintiff s unsatisfactozy, inadequate or poor job
perfomiance, including work demeanor or attitude, during the relevant period.
11
12
25. The written job descriptionsfor the positions of Senior Patent Prosecution
13
Paralegal/Project Manager and Patent Prosecution Senior Paralegal/Project Manager, or
14
similarly named positions occupied or held by plaintiff, during the relevant period.
15
26. Please provide records or writings which reflect the name, address and
telephone number of any person who has filed a discrimination, retaliation or harassment
r
16
17
complaint or charge against you, either through your procedures or any state or federal agency,
18
based on alleged gender/sex or disability, including the date the complaint was madeand'the
file and the corresponding complaint or charge number.
I9
20 27. Please provide the records or writing which reflect the name, address and
21 telephone number of every person who hasfiled a lawsuit against you, alleging discrimination
22 retaliation or harassment based on alleged gender/sex or disability, the date the complaint was
23 filed, and if applicable and not subject to any confidentiality agreement, disposition of the
24 lawsuit, and even if there was a confidentiality agreement or order, then documents or writings
that reflect resolution ofthe action or matter.
25
26 28. All writings which you, or anyoneacting on your behalf believe evidence, tend
27 to evidence, refer, relate, pertain to your investigation of plaintiff's claims, and in particular
28 correspondence, notes, memoranda, e-mails, calendars, desk calendars or pocket (electronic
-13-
.
1. and otherwise) calendars concerning the suspension; Performance Improvement Plan ("PIP"),
2 and administrative or disability leave, and your accommodalion of plaintiff s disability, during
3 -the relevant period.
4 29.
Any and all: tape or other electronic recordings, or transcripts of recordings, of
5 any conversations, meetings, intelviews or discussions that evidence, tend to evidence, refer,
6 relide, pertain or concern plaintiffs discrimination, retaliation, harassment, assault or other
7 claims, or your suspension ofplaintiff, her administralive leave, PIP, and transfer to other
8
employment positions with you.
9
10
;to evidence, refer, relate, pertain or concern any of your affirmative defenses or expected
11 .
gffirmative defenses to the complaint herein.
12
31. Any writings which you, or anyone acting on your behalf, believe evidence,
13
14
tend to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to any complaints ofimproper behavior by defendant
MD>IHAS, during the relevant period.
15
16
32. Any writings which you, or anyone acting on your behalf; believe evidence,
17
tend to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to any complaints ofimproper behavior relative to
18
alleged gender or sex discrimination, retaliation or harassment, by any persons within your
Patent Department or group during the relevant period.
19
20
33. All writings which you, or anyone acting in your behalf, believe evidence, tend
21
to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to statements made by defendant SANDIP M]NHAS,
22
regarding plaintiff, ETNYRE, to the effect that he wanted to"get in her (ETNYRE)."
23 34. All writings which you, or anyone acting in your behalf, believe evidence, tend
24 to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to threatening, abusive and/or harassing statements made
by defendant, MINHAS, to plaintiff EMYRE.
25
26 35. All writings which you, or anyone acting in your behalf believe evidence, tend
27 to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to statements made by you Senior Patent Counsel, Dmitry
28 Milikovsky, to plaintift ETNYRE, to the effect of*'you (ETNYRE) know what your problem
44-
1
1.. is? Your inability to effectively use latex.", or words to the effect of the foregoing, and your.
2 investigation, if any, into said comments or statements, or alleged comments or statements.
3 36. All writings which you, or anyone acting in your behaf, believe evidence, tend
4 to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to statements made Senior Director of Human Resources,
5 Jane Baker, to Tami Procopio, to the effect of "What can you tell me about Courtney' s affar
6 with Mickey?", or words to the effect ofthe foregoing, and your investigation, if any, into said
7 comments or statements, or alleged comments or statements.
8
10
9 to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to plaintiff ETNYRFs, requests to you, or anyone acting
11«:
on your behalf, to seek other employment opportunities within QUALCOMM and outside her
' department
12'
38.
13
All writings which you, or anyone acting in your behalf believe evidence, tend
14
toevidence, refer, relate or pertain to reasons plaintiff, ETNYRE's, requests for other
15
employment opportunities within QUALCOMM and outside her department, in particular in
16
which defendant, MINHAS, worked, was or were denied by you.
18
to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to plaintifG EINYRE's, application for worker's
compensation benefits.
19
20 40. All writings which you, or anyone acting in your behalf believe evidence, tend
21 to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to the reasons for denial ofplaintiff, ETNYRE's, worker's
compensation claim.
22
24 to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to the Department of Fair Employment and Housing
25 ["DFEH'l Complaint filed on or about February 23,2007 by plaintiff ETNYRE, bearing case .
26 number 8200607-D-0961-00-se, including but not limited' to your investigation of, or
27
response, to that complaint
-15-
1 to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to the DFEH Complaint filed on or about·February 23,
2'2007 byplaintiff, ETNYRE, bearing case number E200607-D-0961-01-4 incluang butnot
3 limited to your investigation of, or response, to that complaint
5 to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to the DFEH Complaint Sled on or about September 27,
6 .2007 by plmintil ErNYRE, bearingcase number E200708-D-0400-00-rae, including butnot
7
-limited to your investigation of, or response, to that complaint. 11
44. All writings which you, or anyone acting in your behalf, believe evidence, tend'
10
9 to evidence, ref6r, relate or pertain to the DFEH Complaint filed on or about December 5,
11
2008 by plaintiff, ETNYRE, bearing case number E200809-D-0248-00-prse, including but not
12
limited to your investigation of, or response, to that complaint.
13
14
to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to the decision and direction by you and defendant,
15
MINHAS, to plaintiff ETNYRE, to travel to New Jersey for your company or corporate
business in or about January and February 2006.
16
18 to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to your 1mowledge of any and all inappropriate physical
19 touchings, including assaults or batteries, of your employees, "uninvited kisses", *'fondling",
20 having buttocks or private parts ofone's body grabbed, and %ttempted sexual activity,"
21 especially within your Patent Department or group, including plaintiff ETNYRE, by
22
defendant, MINHAS, during the relevant period.
24 to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to your in*sligation(s) ofeachand evely inappropriate
25 physical touching, including assaults or batteries, ofyour employees, 'bninvited kisses",
26 'Yondling„, having buttocks or private parts of one's body grabbed, and"attempted sexual'
27 activity," especially within your Patent Department or group, including plaintiff, ETNYRE, by
28 defendant, MINHAS, during therelevant period.
-16-
-
.
1 48. All documents and.writings evidencing any statements by, or written or oral
2 communications with, any present or former employee of QUALCOMM concerning any of
3 -the matters alleged in the complaintherein,
4 49. Any statements, declarations or affidavits (draft or final signed or unsigned)
5 received by yuu or anyone acting on your behalffrom any personwith knowledge ofthe
6 matters alleged in the complaint herein
7
50. All documents and writings relating to any charge(s) or claims against you that
8 yoU, or anyone acting on your behalf; have filed with administrative agencies, including the
9 ' DFEH, the California Equal Employment Development Department, the United States Equal
10 Employment Opportunity Commission, or the Nadonal Labor Relations Board relative to any
11
gender/sex or disability discrimination, retaliation or harassment claim against you, or anyone

12 ,
actmg on your behalf, during the relevant period.
13
14
51. All documents and writings relating to any complaints(s) against you that you,
15
or anyone acting on your behalf, have filed in a court of law, including the Superior Court of
16
California, a similar state court in another state, or any US. District Couri relative to any
17
acting on yourbehalf, during the relevant period,
18
19 52. All documents and writings relating or refming to any sexual interaction
20 between defendmit, MINHAS, and plaintiffeither bef6re or after the sexual events alleged to
have occul:red on or about February 22,2006.
21
23 to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to your training of personnel within your Patent
24 Department or group relave to your discrimination, mtaliation or harassment policies during
the relevant period.
25
27 to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to Bill Sailer's communications with plaintiff, ETNYRE,
28 during the relevant period, including but not limited to notes, e-mails calendars,
-17-
. .
1- cormspondence, and the like whether writtenin hard copy orelectronically...... . --

3 to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to your investigation into any claims or charges of
. 4 , harRGRment, retaliation or discrimination based on gender/sex or disability, within your Patent
5 Department:or group, during the relevant period.
6 . 56, All writings which you, or anyone acting in your behalf, believe evidence, tend
7 to evidence, refer, relate or pertaini to plaintiff, ETNYRE, consenting to defendant, MINHAS,
8 having sexual relations with her, in particular disclosures by defendant MINHAS, of his
10
9 romantic, intimAte. or sexual relationship(s) to you, either in advance or concurrent with any of
those types ofrelationship between plaintiffand defendant, MINHAS.
11
12
57. All wntings which you, or anyone acting in your behalf, believe evidence, tend
13
to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to yourcommunications with Charles Nelson, Ph. D.,
during the relevant period.
14
15
58, All writings which you, or anyone,acting in your behalf, believe evidence, tend
16
to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to the Ke#ey O'Parry v. MadiU, civil action filed in the
17
above-entitled court bearing civil case no. GIC 868143 [hereinafter the"O'Patzy Action"l,
18
including pleadings, discovery (including depositions, interrogatories, requests for adrnigsion
and the like), investigation reports and notes by you.
19
H. Paul Kondrick,
20 A Professional Corporation:
22 Dated: December 23,2009 By: /7 */6

21 · -- - -
23
H. Paul Kondrick, Esq.
Attorney for Plaintiff, COURTNEY s. EVYRE
24
25
26
27
28
-18-
.
1 H. Paul Kondrick, Esq., State Bar No. 88566

2 H. Paul Kondrick, A.P.C.
3130 Fourth Avenue
3 San Diego, Califbmia 92103-5803
Telephone: (619) 291-2400
4 Facsimile: (619) 291-7123
5 Attorney for Plaintiff COURTNEY S. El'NYRE

6
8
9
10
FOR THE COUNTY OF SANDIEGO
11 1 COURTNEY S. ETNYRE, individually, ) Case No. 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL

1'2 Plaintiff, ) PROOF OF SERVICE
)
13 v.
14 )
SANDIP ('*MICKEY") MINHAS, individually,)
16
)
17 Defendants. )
)
18
1 9 L Candice E. Caufield, declare that:

20 I am, and was, at the times ofthe service hereinafter mentioned, over the age of 18
21 and not a party to tile within action; I am employed in the County of San Diego, California
22 where the service occurs; and my business address is 3130 Fourth Avenue, San Diego,
23
California
24
25 On December 23,2009, I served the foregoing document(s) described as:

26 1, AMENDED NOTICE OF PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR ORDER
QUASHING OR MODIFYING DEFENDANTS CIVIL SUBPOENAS FOR
27 PRODUCTION OF BUSINESS RECORDS PERTAINING TO HER PRIOR
28 EMPLOYMENT, AND TO AWARD MONETARY SANCTIONS;
-1-
Proof of Service
1. 2. MEMORANDUM OF·POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OP
2
PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR ORDER QUASHING OR MODIFYING
DEFENDANT'S CIVIL SUBPOENAS PERTAINING TO HER PRIOR
4 3. DECLARATION OF H. PAUL KONDRICK IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF'S
5
MOTION FOR ORDERQUASHING OR MODIFYING DEFENDANT'S
CIVIL SUBPOENAS PERTAINING TO HER PRIOR EMPLOYMENT, AND
TO AWARD MONETARY SANCTIONS;
7 4, SEPARATE STATEMENT OF SUBPOENAED BUSINESS RECORDS IN

8 DISPUTE IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR ORDER
QUASHING OR MODIFYING DEFENDANT'S'CIVIL SUBPOENAS
9 PERTAINING TO HER PRIOR EMPLOYMENT, AND TO AWARD
10, MONETARY SANCTIONS IRULES OF COURT, RULE 3.1345(aA,
PLATIFF, COURTNEY S. ETNYRE'S, REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION
5.
11
OFDOCUMENTS TO DEFENDANT, QUALCOMM INCORPORATED

12 [SET NO. ONE (1)J; and
13 6. PLAJNTIFF COURTNEY S. EINYRE'S, REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION

14 OF DOCUMENTS TO DEFENDANT, SANDIP C'MICKEY') MINHAS
[SET NO. ONE (1)].
15
16 on all interested parties to this action by placing true cepies thereof enclosed in sealed
17 envelopes addressed as follows:
18 Leonid M. Zilberman, Esq.
Wilson, Cusmo & Turner LLP
19
550 West «C» Street, Suite 1050
Telephone: (619) 236-9600
21 Facsimile: (619) 236-9669
22 Attorneys for Defentiant, Sandip (UMickef) Minhas

23
Michael C. Sullivan, Esq.

24
Melissa L. Klick, Esq.
25
Paul, Plevin, Sullivan & Connaughton, LLP
401 '93" Street Tenth Floor
Telephone: (619) 237-5200
27 Facsimile: (619) 615-0700
28,
Attorneys for Defendant QUALCOMM Incorporated
2
ProofofService
.
1 - BY U.S. MAIL (AS INDICATED ABOVE): I placed the originals ofthe described
2 documents in.a sealed envelope addressed to the parties as indicated above on December 23,
3
4 2009. I am familiar with the film's practice of collection and processing correspondence for
5 mailing. I personally deposited the claim in the United States post office or in a mailbox,
6 substation, mail chute, or other like facility regularly maintained by the government of the
7 United States, in a sealed envelope, properly addressed with postage paid.
8
9
X BY PERSONAL SERVICE: I personally gathered a true copy of the above
10 documents, and gave same to our messenger service for personal delivery/service before
11 5:00 pm on December 23,2009 will file the original proof ofpersonal service withthe Court
12 upon request
13 BY FEDERAL EXPRESS/OVERNIGHT MAIL (as indicated above): I placed a

14
15 true copy in a sealed envelope addressed to the parties as indicated above, on December 23,
16 2009. I personally caused it to be deposited with Federal Express on the same day in the
17 ordinary course of business for delivery the next business day.
18 BY FACSIMILE (as.indicated above):By useof hcsimile machine number, (619)
19'291-7123, I faxed a true copy(ies) ofthe document(s) listed above to the parties, on December
20
21 23,2009, at their fax numbers listed above as indicated by their names. The document(s)
22 were/Was transmitted by facsimile transmission and the transmission was reported as
23 complete and without error. The transmission report was properly issued by the transmitting
24 facsimile machine. A copy ofthe transmissionreport will be attached to the proof of service
25 indicatidg that the documents were transmitted' propedy, as necessary, in the future.
26
ill
27
iii
28
-3-
Proof of Service
-
.
I declare under penalty of perjury under.the laws·ofthe State·of California that the
2
3
foregoing is true and correct. Executed this 234 day of Deceniber,:2009.
4
Calice E. Caufield-
5
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
11
16
17
1·8
19 1
1
20
21 1
22
23
24
25
26 1
27
28 ,
1
-4-
Proof of Service
EXHIBIT 4
..
P 401 B STREEr, TENTH FLOOR, SAN DIEGO. CA 92101

PHONE 619 ·237·5200 | FAX 619·615-MOO | WWWPAULPLEVIN.COM
SE
PAUL, PLEVIN,
SULLIVAN &
MICHAEL C SULUVAN
(619) 744-3655
CONNAUGHTON LLP maullivan@paulpievin.com
January 22, 2010
Paul Kondrick
3130 Fourth Avenue
San Diego, CA 92103
Re: Subpoenas to Previous'Employers

Etnyre v. Qualcomm Incorporated
Dear Paul:
Enclosed are Qualcomm's Responses to Ms. Etnyre's First Request for Production of
Documents. I was disappointed to learn that you had denied our request for an
extension to produce responsive documents and respond to the broad and extensive
document demand that you had personally served on December 23,2009. After
having given you many, many extensions to your tolling agreement, often on the last
day, and having granted your request for an extension to respond to discovery, I must
say that your decision was an unpleasant surprise. I hope that does not portend a
trend in the future.
A few comments on the requests and responses are in order. In addition to the sheer
number of requests, many of your requests were overbroad in the extreme, making it
very difficult to respond. Moreover, some of the requests sought unduly burdensome
electromic discovery. If you.wish to discuss some reasonable tailoring of those
requests, we would be happy to meet with you to discuss.
In addition, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 2031.280, Qualcomm objects

to the place and manner of requested production. in addition to the responses, we are
also producing almost 2000 pages of documents to your office on a CD. Given the
breadth of your requests, the search for and processing of responsive documents is
ongoing and we will produce the remainder of thedocuments when they are ready for
production, along with a privilege log.
Finally, to respond to the requests, Qualcomm is forensically collecting, and searching

the electronic media of more than a dozen employees. Because of the nature of the
search, we plan to use defined search terms to uncover potentially responsive
..
Paul, Plevin, Sullivan & Connaughton LLP
Paul Kondrick
January 22, 2010
Page Two
documents. Even though we have several professionals assisting in this effort, it will
take some time to properly complete this effort. For your information, I attach a
document with the search terms we [intend to use. If you believe that any other search
terms should be added to the list, please let me know. If I don't hear from you by the
end of next week, we will proceed with the list as on the attached.
Please contact me if you have any questions. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Paul, Plevin, Sullivan

& Connaughton up
By: 412&<- )63A._

v ME#idel C. Sullivar[)
cc: Leonid M. Zilberman

.
Etnyre v. Minhas et al.
Case No. 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-Crl
Sandip
Courtney
Etnyre
cetnyre
Micky
harass!
retaliat!
O'Patry
Madlll
Erin
Madill
Kelley
battery
emotion!
discrimin!
sex!
"New Jersey"
"bloody nose"
physical
threat!
abusl
"happy hour"
touch!
grop!
butt
promiscuity
"so fucking beautiful"
"so fucking intelligent"
"get In hef'
latex
condom
CE
kiss
naked
nude
invit!
fondlt
harassment
sex
love
Intimate
interview
job
affair
apply
application
romance
confidential
conference
consun
dialogue
meeting
.
Case No. 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL
private
passion
accommodat!
position
Minhas
Mickey
offensive
inappropriate
rape
assault
flirt
disability
injury
damage
EXHIBIT 5
..
401 B STREET, TENTH ROOR, SAN DIEGO, CA 92101
fP
P.HONE 619 ·237·5200 | FAX 619 · 615 · 0700 | WWWPAULPLEVIN.COM '
PAUL, PLEVIN,
SULLIVAN & MELISSA LISTUG KUCK (619) 2434561 mklick@paulplevin.com
C CONNAUGHTON LLP
Via Facsimile and U.S. Mail
February 4, 2010
Paul Kondrick
3130 Foudh Avenue
San Diego, California 92103
Re: Etnyre v. Minhas and Qualcomm Incorporated

San Diego Superior Court - Case No.: 37-2009-00101637-CU-OE-CTL
Dear Paul:
This letter is intended to update you regarding Qualcomm's ongoing production in the
Etnyre litigation. As you know, Qualcomm has identified various custodians for
electronically stored information and has captured their electronic data. We have now
begun processing the search terms list that we provided to you with our January 22,
2010 letter because we have not received any further input from you on the list.
Sincerely,

& Connaughton up
: 7Melisla Listug Klick
cc: Leonid M. Zilberman, Esq.

EXHIBIT 6
..
401 B STREET, TENTH R.OOR,.SAN DIEGO, CA 92101
PHONE 619·237·5200 FAX 619-615·0700 WWWPAULPLEVIN.COM

PAUL, PLEVIN,
56
SULLIVAN & MEWSSA USTUG KUCK (619) 243-1561 mklick@paulplevin .com
CONNAUGHTON LLP
February 19, 2010
Paul Kondrick
3130 Fourth Avenue
Re: Etnyre v. Minhas and Qua/comm /ncorporated

San Diego Superior Court - Case INo.: 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL
Dear Paul:
Qualcomm is diligently gathering documents in response to Ms. Etnyre's Request for

Production. As we indicated in our responses and in our previous correspondence,
we have gathered electronically stored information from several custodians in order to
provide responsive documents. We provided you with a proposed list of search terms
on January 22, 2010, and when we did not receive further input, we confirmed on
February 4, 2010 that we would be utilizing the proposed list. However, after running
the search terms across a sampling of the custodians' data, we discovered that three
terms in the list are likely hitting on a significant amount of irrelevant data. Those
terms are: application, confidential, and meeting.
Thus, we plan to narrow the search terms list previously provided by omittimg
"meeting" and "Confidential," and replacing "application" with "applied" and 'apply." If
you belieVe that making these modifications will remove responsive documents from
our search, please let us know. Otherwise, we will proceed with the modified search
term list on Monday, February 22, 2010.
Sincerely,

& Connaughton up
BY:
*lk=
UJ6sd Lisfug Klick
cc: Leanid M. Zilberman, Esq.
EXHIBIT 7
Page 1 of 2
.
Deborah Baranowski
From: Paul Kondrick [kondrick@msn.coml

Sent: Saturday, January 23, 2010 3:22 PM
To: Melissa Listug Klick; Mike Sullivan
Subject: Courtney Etnyre v. Minhas & QUALCOMM
Melissa,
First, thank youfor taking time this afternoon (Saturday) to drop off the
QUALCOMM cd: QETNY001
I've now spent the better part of 2 hours this afternoon reviewing the disk. First, I am
unable to open the file named "DATA" containing 142 kb of data or information.
The error message continued to appear that both the "DAT" & "OPT" subjites
or fles were damaged or "not supported." lin the event that the "DATA" file on the
QUALCOMM contains intended information as part of the document production,
then pls. inform our office ofthe program or method to open the "DATA" file.
In relation to the "IMAGES" file folder, I opened the 1697 pages of tifformatted
dox. I reviewed those pages. We have, of course, not received QUALCOMM
written response to plaintiff s 1st request for production of documents so we can't be
sure if the documents produced on the cd constitute QUALCOMM's complete
document production, but if the 1697 pages ARE QUALCOMM'sfull & complete
intended document production, then we have a serious discovery problem.
Sub-Jite 00 (464 pages) consists of what could be characterized as a partial personnel

file, e.g. pay records, SOME performance evaluations, hiring info, including some
standard QUALCOMM forms or agreements, including policies, some emails &
correspondence pertaining to Ms. Etnyre's disability leave of absence, termination,
return to work & some benefits info pretty much consisting of Tracy Lawson emails
(including some redacted pages, pp. 312-316). In my estimation, the bulk of the
materials on the cd, approximately 1300+ pages, consist of QUALCOMM's "Policies
& Procedures" manual or publication.
Referring to Plaintiffs Request for Production of Documents propounded to your

client, it appears that your client has NOT produced any documents or writings
whatsoever relative to plaintijfs document categories 3-58!
I lookforward to receipt of the hard copies of the documents on Monday, Jan. 25th,
to perhaps better evaluate whether my initial impressions of QUALCOMM's
cd/electronic document production are in error. In addition, just to make sure we're
all on the same page, I still expect to inspect the originals of QUALCOMM's files &
documents & writings at a mutually convenient time. I also look for the
QUALCOMM's document production response so that we are fully informed as to
2/26/2010
Page 2 of 2
..
whether the present documents being produced, in fact, include atl writings
responsive to the 58 document production categories.
As afinal comment, that is for you & Mike Sullivan to seriously consider, pis
understand that IF QUALCOMM is not producing atl requested documents at this
time, especially documents & writings pertaining to Courtney Etnyre's sexual assault
and discrimination claims, then it is highly unlikely that Ms. Emyre's deposition witi
proceed on Thursday. I look forward to taking these matters up with you & Mike
Sullivan asap on Monday.
-Paul Kondrick
2/26/2010
EXHIB'IT 8
..
401 8 STREEr, TENTH FLOOR, SAN DIEGO, CA 92101
PAUL, PLEVIN, PMONE 619·237·526© | FAX 619·615·0700 | WWWPAULPLEVIN COM
St SULLIVAN &
CONNAUGHTON LLP
MICHAEL C. SULLIVAN
(619) 744-3655 msullivan@paulplevin.com
January 27, 2010
Paul Kondrick
31'30 Fourth Avenue
Re: Plaintiffs Attendance at Deposition

Dear Paul:
Based on our telephone conversation, you informed us that Ms. Etnyre will not appear
for her deposition tomorrow, January 28, 2010. As you know, Ms. Etnyre's deposition
was properly noticed almost two months ago on December 3,2009, weeks before you
served any discovery. Based on your emails and our conversations, you
acknowledged that we are entitled to the deposition and that the omly basis for her riot
to appear is Qualcomm's ongoing document production. Specifically, you assert that
you are entitled to review all responsive documents before yowr client is asked about
any issues addressed in any documents that remain to be produced. However, as we
have discussed, this is not an appropriate basis for her failure to appear.
Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure §2019.020(a), "the fact that a party is conducting
discovery, whether by deposition or another method, shall not operate to delay the
discovery of any other party." Your client did not object to the deposition notice, and
the date and location have been confirmed with your office. The Supreme Court of
CalifOrnia has confirmed that the ostensible disadvantage of being deposed before
obtaining such discovery is not good cause for changing the timing of discovery, unor
does it justify a conclusion that such timing will result in 'annoyance, embarrassment
or oppression.'" (Rosemont v. Sup. Ct. (1964) 60 Cal.2d 709, 714.) Indeed, the
Supreme Court explained, "it is inherent in such proceedings that the party who
secures discovery first may derive advantages by securing information from an
adversary before he or she is required to reciprocate by divwlging information to him."
Cid.) Additionally, the Rosemont Court instructed that "[pladies should be encouraged
to expedite discovery and should not needlessly be deprived of the advantages that
normally flow from prompt action." (/d)
Here, Qualcomm properly served discovery and a deposition notice weeks before Ms.
Etnyre propounded any discovery. Even Ms. Etynre needed additional time to
respond to discovery, which Qualcomm granted. Qwalcomm's reciprocal need -
especially given the intervening holidays and expansive demands - should not be
..
Paul, pievin, Sullivan & Connaughton LLP
Paul 'Kondrick
January 27, 2010
Page Two 1
surprising and provides Ms. Etnyre with no legal basis to fail to appear at her
deposition.
Nonetheless, Qualcomm agreed not to utilize any documents in Ms. Etnyre's

deposition, as exhibits that have not previously been produced. You declined this
compromise (which is.not.required) and will only agree to allow questioning on the
"transactions" covered by the documents already produced by Qualcomm. Indeed, it
is your position that Qualcomm cannot ask Ms. Etynre questions even. about the
documents she has already produced if theremay be other documents not yet found
that address the same subject.
Given your refusal to produce Ms. Etnyre for her deposition tomorrow, Qualcomm will,
appear ex parte on Wednesday, February 3, 2010, at 8:30 a.m. before Judge Strauss
seeking an ordef for Ms. Etnyre to appear at her deposition, or in the alternative, for an
order shortening time on such a motion, and: for appropriate sanctions. .
This will also confirm that we discussed your availability for deposition on Thursday,
February 4, 2010, and you agreed that you were available that date. Mr. Zilberman
indicated that he would attempt to be available that date.
Please contact me by 2:00 p.m. today if you have char:iged your mind and wil agree to
produce your client tomorrow. Thank you.
Sincerely,
& Connaughton LLP ,

I. ./.
BY:
*/lichaal C. u li

William B. SaileF, Esq.
.
P. 1
TRANSMISSION REPORT
(WED) JAN 27 2010 13:33

PAUL, PLEVIN, SULLIVAN & CONNAUGHTON· LLP
U$ER NAME :
DOCUMENT# . 5112646-378
DESTINATION : 92917123
DEST. NUMBER : 92917123 TIME STORED : 13:32, 1/27
FCODE TIME SENT : 13:32, 1/27
DURATION : 48seo
MODE : ECM
PAGE$ : 3 sh*ets
R:ESULT : OK
P 1
401 B STREET TENTH H.OO, SAN DIPHO, CA 92101
EY
PAUL, PLEVIN,
SULLIVAN & rHONE619·137·6200 | FAX 19·615·0700 |WWWPAULM.EVIN.COM
€ CONNAUGHTON LLP
FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL
DATE January 27, 2010

TO See distribution list below NO OF PAGES 3, Induding this page
PROM Michael C. Sullivan
PHONE NO (6 19) 243-1561
RE
Qualcomm/Etnyre
O URGENT O FOR REVIEW O PLEASE COMMENT O PLEASE REPLY O FOR YOUR INFORMATION
Name Fax No.

Paul Kondrick Phone No.
(619) 291-7123 (619) 291-2400
Lonny Zilberrnan (619) 236-9669 (619) 236-9600
Wilson, Petty, 1<osmo & Turner
UP
P. 1
TRANSMISSION REPORT
(WED) JAN 27 2010 13:37

PAUL, PLEVIN, SU,LLIVAN & CONNAUGHTON LLP
USER NAME :
DOCUMENT# : 5112646-379
DESTINATION : 92369669
TIME STOR:ED : 13:32, 1/27
DEBT. NUMBER : 92369669
TIME SENT : 13:33, 1/27
F CODE :
DURATION : 378ec
MODE : ECM
PAGES 3 sheets
RESULT OK
401 R STREET, TENTH FLOOR. SAN DIEGO, CA 92101

PAUL, PLEVIN,
PHONE 619·237,5200 ,FAX9·615·0700 | WWW.PAULPLAVIN.COM
Stt
SULLIVAN &
CONNAUGHTON LLP
1
TO See distribution list below

NO OF PAGES 3, including this page
FROM Michael C. Sullivan PHONE NO (619) 243-1561
RE Qualcomm/Etnyre
O URGENT O FOR REVIEW Il'PLEASE COMMENT O PLEASE REPLY ZI FOR YOUR INFORMATION
Name Pax No. Phone No.

Paul Kondrick (619) 291-7123 (619) 291-2400
Lonny Zilberman (619) 236-9669 (619) 236-9600

Wilson, Petty, Kosmo & Turner
UP
EXHIBIT 9
..
P
401 B STREET, ENTH FLOOR, SAN DIEGO. CA 92101
PHONE 619.·237·5200 | FAX 619·615·0700 | WWW.PAULPLEVIN.COM

PAUL, PLEVIN,
SULLIVAN & MELISSA LISTUG KLICK (619) 2434561 midick@pm:lpievin. com
C CONNAUGHTON LLP
January 27, 2010
Paul Kondrick
3130 Fourth Avenue
Re: Plaintiffs Attendance at Deposition

Dear Paul:
Please be advised, that we will appear ex parte on Wednesday February 3, 2010 at

8:30 a.m. before Judge Strauss in Department 75 to compel Ms. Etnyre's attendance
at her properly noticed deposition. We will request the court order her deposition be
taken on February 4, 2010, as all parties and counsel have indicated they are
available on that date. Enclosed is an amended deposition notice for February 4,
2010.
Please contact us with any questions.
Sincerely,
& Connaug!!5!Nli'-p
By.
r,
,/· Mil!9 Listug Klick
.

J
EXHIBIT 10
PERIOR COURT OF CALIFOR
+A
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

CENTRAL
MINUTE ORDER
Date: 02/03/2010 Time: 08:30:00 AM Dept: C-70
Judicial Officer Presiding: Judge Jay M. Bloom

Clerk: Ernestina Castaneda
Bailiff/Court Attendant: Scot Parriott

ERM:
Reporter: Not reported
Case Init. Date: 11/02/2009
Case No: 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL Case Title: Etnyre vs. Minhas
Case Category: Civil - Unlimited Case Type: Other employment
Event Type: Ex Parte; Ex Parte
Causal Document & Date Filed:
Appearances:
Attorney H. Paul Kondrick appears for Courtney S. Etnyre.

Attorney Michael C. Sullivan appears for Qualcomm Incorporated.
Attorney Leonid M. Zilberman appears for Sandip Minhas.
Ex-parte application for order directing that the timing of plaintiffs deposition be conditioned on
defendant, Qualcomm Incorporated pfoducing documents to allow plaintiff to refresh her recollection
requested by Courtney S. Etnyre.
Ex-parte application for compelling deposition of plaintiff Courtney Etnyre requested by Qualcomm
Incorporated.
Defendant to provide Plaintiffs statements by 2/19/10. Any statements of plaintiff that defendant has.
Deposition to be held no later than 3/5/10.
Date: 02/03/2010 MINUTE ORDER Page: 1

Dept: C-70 Calendar No.: 5
.
Calendar No.: 5
Court Use Only

County of San Diego
SIGN-IN SHEET
CASE: 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL - Courtney S Etnyre vs. Sandip Minhas
EVENT TYPE: Ex Parte EVENT DATE/TIME: 02/03/2010 8:30 am
JUDGE: Jay M. Bloom

DEPARTMENT: C-70
ATTORNEY/PARTICIPANT NAME CUENT NAME SIGNATURE
Klick, Melissa Listug ti, Qualcomm Incorporated [DFN]

M .2 , S U 11 i J 40\
Jfpdr. 41,1'4 4
Etnyre, Courtney S et al. [PLN]
ZILBERMAN, LEONID Minhas, Sandip [DFN]

Uo•wi -24./LA"4/4,1
MOCS #:6
Calendar No.: 4
Court Use Only

County of San Diego
SIGN-IN SHEET
EVENT TYPE: Ex Parte EVENT DATEmME: 02/03/2010 8:30 am
JUDGE: Jay M. Bloom

DEPARTMENT: C-70
ATTORNEY/PARTICIPANT NAME CUENT NAME

SIGNT/7
Klick, Melissa Ustug Qualcomm Incorporated [DFN] gRA /1)WY j

Migy' 1. 91\ i\/4 4
1 1./1 K, .
1 <A W 44
Lp*J ZINS-; It..
Kondrick, H. Paul - Etnyre, Courtney S et. al. [PLN]

L-120'1.0 Z,1. '69<*LA**ir')
EONID M. ZILBERMAN
1-ZILBERMAN@WILSONTURNERKOSMO.COM ·*51«*3277,7K*., 1'
rORNEY AT LAW
WWW.WILSONTURNERKOSMO.COM
·*E.A.'}Ef&*5:*M PAUL, PLEVIN,

21*FA **4*5 *- 9 SULLIVAN &
CONNAUGHTON LLP /
WILSON TURNER KOSMO *LLP ''*S#*t,443*#71 ATTORNEYS AT t. A'W /46'
MICHAEL C. SULLIVAN
40*ST»1* I
.&$*.t. . 401 B STREET. TENTH FLOOR
3*31St<4 1 SAN DIEGO, CA 92101
619·813·8999
3)=.0-b.. T 619·744·3655 ! p 619·615·0700
0 WEST C STREET, SUITE 1050 TEL: 619.236.9600
MSULLIVAN®PAULPLEVIN.COM
V DIEGO. CAL.rORNIA 92101·3532 FAX: 619.236.9669
WWW.PAWLPLEVIN.COM
t=fS{jj#deafilwal.)&L
:.'.*>:r_&1:,
LAW OFFICES
- H. PAUL KONDRICK
PROFESSIONAL. CORPORATION
MOCS #:6
30 FOURTH AVENUE
4 DIEGO. CA 92103
2291 ' 2400 H. PAUL KONDRICK
Attor.-... 1 -.
EXHIBIT 11
Page 1 of 1
.
Deborah Baranowski
Fronn: Mike Sullivan
Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 9:57 AM

To: 'Paul Kondrick'
CC: 'Zilberman, Lonny M.'; Melissa Listug ]Klick

Subject: Etnyre deposition
Paul,
I have checked with my client and the only statements provided by your client concerning her claims were
included in the documentsthat you produced to us. Qwalcomm has no additional written or recorded statements
made by your client regarding'her claims in this case. Accordingly, we do see why the deposition cannot proceed
tomorrow.
The court's order was that Ms. Etnyre should have access to her own statements in Qualcomm's possession prior
to her deposition, and she does.
Please contact me to confirm that the deposition will go forward tomorrow as scheduled.
Thanks. Mike
Mike Sullivan I Direct: 619.744.3655
Paul, Plevin,
8 Sullivan &
Connaughton LLP
4018 Street, Tenth Floor

San Diego, CA 92101
T: 619.237.5200 1 F: 619.615.0700
www.paulglevin.com
Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail is confidential and intended only for the recipients listed above. If you have received this e-
mail in error, please delete it immediately and inform the sender of the error or contact admin@paulglevin.com
2/26/2010
EXHIBIT 11
. .
fP PAUL, PLEVIN,
SULLIVAN &
PHONE 619 ·237·5200 FAX 619 · 615 · 0700 WWW.PAULPLEVIN.COM
MICHAEL C. SULLIVAN
(619) 744·3655 msullivan@paulplevin.com
C CONNAUGHTON LLP
February 17, 2010
Paul Kondrick
3130 Fourth Avenue

Re: Etnyre v. Minhas and Qualcomm Incorporated

San Diego Superior Court - Case No.: 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL
,Dear Paul:
'Enclosed is the Court's Minute Order from the parties' February 3, 2010, ex pade hearing.
The Court ordered Qualcomm to "provide 'Plaintiffs statements by 2/19/2010. Any statements
of plaintiff that defendant has." That same date (February 3), I confirmed to you that the only
statements of Ms. Etnyre's that Qualcomm had in its possession were already produced to
Qualcomm by Ms. Etnryre. It is my understanding from you that Ms. Etnyre provided a
recorded statement to Franco Investigative Services, but Qualcomm does not have that
statement. If Ms. Etnyre believes that she created any other statements regarding the facts of
this case that she has not already produced, please let me know.
Further, the Court ordered plaintiffs deposition to be held no later'than March 5, 2010.
Toward that end, we have tried to schedule Ms. Etnyre's deposition within the timeframe
provided by the Court and understand that you are unwilling to produce her. Thus, we have
also enclosed a deposition notice for Ms. Etnyre on March 4, 2010.
If you will not agree to unconditionally produce Ms. Etnyre, given the fact that Qualcomm has
satisfied the Court's order, Qualcomm will file a motion to compel Ms. Etnyre's deposition.
Additionally, we are providing you with notice that we will seek ex parte relief for an order
shortening time for such a motion on Monday, Marcb 1, 2010, at 8:30 a.m. in Department 70
before the Honorable Jay Bloom.
Sincerely,

& Connaughton up
/lichael C. Slillivan-
cc: Leonid iM. Zilberman, Esq.

f:!:B-UY-ZUIU IUE U*:62 PM FAX NO; - 'Ii' P. 02
;PERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA

COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
CENTRAL
*.
MINUTE ORDER
Date: 02/03/2010
Time: 08:30:00 AM Dept: C-70
Balliff/Court Attendant: Scot Parriott

ERM:

Event Type: Ex Parte: Ex Parte
Appearances:

Ex-parts application for 6rder directing that the timing of plaintifs deposition be conditioned an
defendant, Qualcommi
requested by Incorporated
Courtney S. Etnyre. producing documents to allow plaintiff to refresh her recollection
Ex-parte application for compelling deposition of plainuff Courtney Etnyre requested by Qualcomm
Incorporatea.
Date: 02/03/2010
MINUTE ORDER
Dept: C-70 Page: 1
Calendar No.: 5
. .

Telephone: 619-237-5200
4 Facsimile: 619-615-0700

6
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

9
10 COURTNEY S. ETNYRE, CASE NO. 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-Cn
11 Plaintiff, SECOND AMENDED NOTICE OF TAKING

VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF
12 V. PLAINTIFF COURTNEY ETNYRE

40, inclusive,
15
Defendants.
16
17
TO COURTNEY EINYRE AND HER ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:
18
19
2025.010 et seq., defendant Qualcomm Incorporated will take the deposition ofplaintiffCourtney
20
Etnyre on March 4, 2010 at 9:30 a.m. at the law offices of Paul, Plevin, Sullivan & Connaughton
21
LLP, 401 B Street, Tenth Floor, San Diego, California.
22
23
24
25
26
27
attorney who is present wishes to be cennected to the court reportef's system, it is your obligation
28
PAUL PLEVIN
SULLIVAN &
SECOND AMENDED NOTICE OF TAKING 1
CONNAUGHTON LLP
DEPOSITION
.
1 to contact Hutchings Court Reporters, LLC at 800-697-3210 to make arrangements for their
2 technical support personnel to contact you regarding your software needs and to ensure that the

5 CONNAUGHTON LLP
BY: / -.
8 c _*HC. SULIVAN
MEL:*;SA LISTUG KLICK
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PAUL PLEV]N
SULLIVAN &
SECOND AMENDED NOTICE OF TAKING 2
CONNAUGHTON LLP
DEPOSITION
. .
1 Etnyre v. Minhas et al.

2
PROOF OF SERVICE
3
4 to this action. I am employed, or am a resident of, the County of San Diego, California, and my
business address is: Paul, Plevin, Sullivan & Connaughton LLP, 4011 8 Street, Tenth Floor, San
5 Diego, California 92101.
6 On February 17, 2010, Icaused to be served the following document(s):
7 • SECOND AMENDED NOTICE OF TAKING VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF

PLAINTIFF COURTNEY ETNYRE
8
on the interested party(ies) in this action by placing a true copy thereof and addressed as follows:
9
H. Paul Kondrick Leonid M. Zilberman
10 H. Paul Kondrick, a Professional Corporation Wilson Turner Kosmo LLP
3130 Fourth Avenue 550 West C Street, Suite 1050
11 San Diego, CA 92103 San Diego, CA 92101-3532
Telephone: (619) 291-2400 Telephone: (619) 236-9600
12 Facsimile: (619) 291-7123 Facsimile: (619) 236-9669
E-Mail: kondrick@msn.com E-Mail': 1zilberman@wpkt.com
13 Attorney for Plaintiff Attorneys for Defendant Sandip Minhas
14 0 (By MAIL SERVICE) I then sealed each envelope and, with postage thereon fully
prepaid postage, I placed each for deposit with United States Postal Service, this same day,
15 at my business address shown above, following ordinary business practices.
16 'El (State) Ideclare under penalty ofpedury under the laws of the State of California that the
foregoing is true and correct.
17 1 0 (Federal) I declare that I am employed by the office of a member of the bar of this court at
whese direction the service was made.
18
Executed February 17,2010, at San Diego, California.

19
20 6U- (3·1:
21 Deborah Baranowski
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PAUL PLEVIN
SULLIVAN & .
PROOF OF SERVICE 1
CONNAUGHTON LLP
EXHIBIT 13
I.
. .
I MICHAEL C. SULLIVAN (SBN 131817)

MELISSA USTUG KLICK (SBN 228470)
Telephone: 619-237.5200
4 Facsimile: 609-615-0700
5 1 Attorneys for Defendant

6
10 COURTNEY S. ETNYRE, i CASE NO. 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL
11 Plaintiff, SECOND AMENDED NOTICE OF TAKING

VII}EOTAPED DEPOSITION OF
12 V. PLAINTIFF COURTNEY ETNYRE

40, inclusive,
15
Defendants.
16
17
18
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section
19
2025.010 et seq., defendant Qualcomm Incorporated will take the deposition of plaintiff Courtney
20
Etnyre on March 4, 2010 at 9:30 a.m. at the law offices of Paul, Plevin, Sullivan & Connaughton
21
LLP, 401 B Street, Tenth Floor, San Diego, California.
22
23
24
25
26
27
attorney who is present wishes to be connected to the court reporter's system, it is your obligation
28
PAUL PLEVIN
SULUVAN & SECOND AMENDED NOTICE OF TAKING 1

CONNAUGHTON LL) DEPOSITION
.
1 to contact Hutchings Court Reporters, LLC at 800-697-3210 to make arrangements for their
2 technical support personnel to contact you regarding your software needs and to ensure that the
Dated: February 17,2010 PAUL, PLEVIN, SULLIVAN &

5 CONNAUGHTON LLP
7
6 Ah A-, A-,n U Lk:/
8 WGH*ELt. SULLIVAN
ME16!SBA LISTUG KLICK
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PAUL PLEVIN
SULLIVAN & SECOND AMENDED NOTICE OF TAKING 2

DEPOSITION
CONNAUOHTON LLP
. .
1 Emyre v. Minhas et al.

2
PROOF OF SERVICE
3
4 to this action. I am employed, or am a resident of, the County of San, Diego, California, and my
6 On February 17, 2010, I caused to be served the following document(s):
7 • SECOND AMENDED NOTICE OF TAKING VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF

PLAINTIFF COURTNEY ETNYRE
8
on the interested party (ies) in this action by placing a true copy thereof and addressed as follows
9
10 H. Paul Kondrick, a Professional Corporation Wilson Turner Kosmo LLP
11 San Diego, CA 921,03 San Diego, CA 92101-3532
E-Mail: kondrick@msn.com E-Mail: tzilberman@wpkt.com
prepaid postage, I placed each for deposit with United States Postal Service, this same day,
15 at my business address shown above, following ordinary business practices.
16 (State) Ideclare under penalty ofperjury under the laws of the State of California that the
17
gederal) l declare that I am employed by the office of a member of the bar of this court at
18
Executed February 17,2010, at San Diego, California.

19
20
b,60UL.
21 Deborah Baranowski
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PAUL PLEVIN
PROOF OF SERVICE 1
SULLIVAN &
CONNAUGHTON LLP
9>-
4
. Eli :n
CIVIL BUSIN65%OFF
CENTRAL DIVIS
4 1 MICHAELC. SULLIVAN (SBN 131817)
2 PAUL, PLEVIN, SULLIVAN & CONNAUGHTON LLP 2610 FEB 24 P 3: U u
3 San Diego, California 92101-4232 CLERK-SUPEHIOIUCOURT
SAN
Telephone: 619-237-5200
4 Facsimile: 619-615-0700

QUALCOMM INCORPORATED
6

8
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

9

INCORPORATED'S NOTICE OF MOTION
12 V. AND MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER
DISCOVERY RESPONSES OF PLAINTIFF
13 SANDIP ("MICKEY") MINHAS, COURTNEY ETNYRE AND FOR

individually, QUALCOMM Incorporated, a SANCTIONS AGAINST PLAINTIFF AND
14 Delaware corporation and DOES 1 through HER COUNSEL OF RECORD PAUL
40, inclusive, KONDRICK UNDER C.C.P. §§ 2023.010 &
15 2030.300(d)
Defendants.
16
Date: June 11, 2010
Time: 11:00 a.m.
17
Dept: 70
18 Judge: Jay M. Bloom

19 Trial Date: None Set
20
22 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on June 11, 2010, at 11:00 a.m., or as soon thereafter as
23 counsel may be heard in Department 70 of the above-entitled Court, Defendant Qualcomm
24 Incorporated ("Qualcomm") will move this Court for an order compelling further discovery
25 responses of Plaintiff Courtney Etnyre and for an order awarding monetary sanctions to
26 Qualcomm and against Ms. Etnyre and her attorney jointly in the total amount of $1,543.50. This
27 motion is brought pursuant to Code ofCivil Procedure sections 2030.300(d) and 2023.010(f),on
28 the grounds that Etnyre is providing evasive and incomplete responses to relevant and proper
PAUL, PLEVIN,
SULLIVAN &
QUALCOMM NOTICE OF MOTION TO COMPEL 1
CONNAUGHTON LLP
FURTHER DISCOVERY RESPONSES OF
.
1 Form Interrogatory (General and Employment) Nos. 2.13, 12.2, 200.2, 200.3, 204.1 and 210.4,
2 despite Qualcomm's attempts to meet and confer regarding these responses.
3 This motion is based on this notice of motion and motion, the memorandum of points and
4 authorities in support thereof, the declaration of Melissa Listug Klick, the notice of lodgment of
5 exhibits and all exhibits attached thereto, the complete files and records of this action, and such
6 other evidence or arguments as may be presented at or beforethe hearing on this motion.
7 Prior to the hearing, the department may issue a tentative ruling pursuant to California
8 Rules of Court rule 3.1310. Counsel may obtain tentative rulings on the internet at
9 http://www.sdcourt.ca.gov/. If neither party appears on the date and at the time noticed for the
10 hearing, the tentative ruling shall be adopted as the final ruling of the Court. Counsel are to call
11 the department at (619) 450-7055 on the day prior to the hearing if they submit on the tentative
12 ruling.
13
14 CONNAUGHIOl>H«Lp
15
-//VIA
16 (By: A _3./
L C. SULLIVAN
17
USEY#A LISTUG KLICK
18 QUALCOMM INCORPORATED
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PAUL, PLEVIN, 2
SULLIVAN &
QUALCOMM NOTICE OFMOTION TO COMPEL
CONNAUGHTON LLP FURTHER DISCOVERY RESPONSES OF
,
. .
.1 MICHAEL C. SULLIVAN (SBN 131817) C/.1//19054LED

LEN iRALSS OF:
MELISSA LISTUG KLICK (SBN 228470) DIVIS,
401 B Street, Tenth Floor 2010 FEB 24
skn-SUPERI
t.t r'.
Telephone: 619-237-5200
4 Facsimile: 619-615-0700 DIEGO C OR CC
0U
NTY.
6

8
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

9

INCORPORATED'S MEMORANDUM OF
12 V. POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT
OF ITS MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER
13 SANDW ("MICKEY") MINHAS, DISCOVERY RESPONSES FROM
' individually, QUALCOMM Incorporated, a PLAINTIFF COURTNEY ETNYRE AND
14 Delaware corporation and DOES 1 through FOR SANCTIONS AGAINST PLAINTIFF
40, inclusive, AND HER COUNSEL OF RECORD PAUL
15 KONDRICK UNDER C.C.P. §§ 2023.010 &
Defendants. 2030.300(d)
16
17 I)ate: June 11, 2010

Time: 11:00 a.m.
Dept: 70
18
Judge: Jay M. Bloom
19 Complaint Filed: November 2,2009
Trial Date: None Set
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PAUL, PLEVIN,
SULLIVAN &
CONNAUGHTON LLP
.
1 TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page No.
2
I. INTRODUCTION 1
3
4 II. BRIEF BACKGROUND 2
III. STANDARD FOR MOTION TO COMPEL 3

5
IV. LEGAL ARGUMENT.. 3

6
3
7 A. Qualcomm is Entitled to Discover Relevant Information.
4
8 1. Form Interrogatory (General) No. 2.13
4
5
10 3. Form Interrogatory (Employment) Nos. 200.2 & 200.3
5
11 4. Form Interrogatory (Employment) No: 204.1
12 5. Form Interrogatory (Employment) No. 210.4 6
V. ATTORNEYS' FEES ARE APPROPRIATF 6

13
VI. CONCLUSION 7
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PAUL, PLEVIN, QUALCOMM'S MEMO OF POINTS & i

SULLIVAN & AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO
CONNAUGHTON LLP COMPEL FURTHER DISCOVERY RESPONSES
. .
1 I.
2 INTRODUCTION
3 Plaintiff Courtney Etnyre ("Etnyre") filed suit against her current employer, defendant
0
4 Qualcomm Incorporated ("Qualcomm"), for a variety of claims including sexual battery (also
5 against her former supervisor), negligent and intentional infliction of emotional distress,
6 harassment, retaliation, and discrimination. Etnyre utterly fails not only to provide supplemental
7 responses to discovery, she has completely ignored Qualcomm's robust meet and confer efforts.
8 Unfortunately, Etnyre is' unjustifiably withholding and obstructing relevant discovery in
9 this matter, once again. This is not out of character for Etnyre and her counsel in this case.
10 Qualcomm has been forced to engage in several other preventable discovery disputes, including
11 ' the compelling ofEtnyre's medical records and her deposition attendance. (Listug Klick Decl. 11
12 5.) These issues will not be addressed' in this motion as Qualcomm remains hopeful that meet and
13 confer efforts will be successful as to these issues. Here, Etnyre has simply refused to provide full
14 and complete responses to certain interrogatories which seek information directly relevant to the
15 issues in this case, and she has also refusedto meaningfully meet and confer with Qualcomm
16 about these deficient responses.
17 This is a simple discovery dispute and Etnyre undoubtedly will try to make it complicated
18 to distract the Court from the clear and simple problem before it. Qualcomm served Etnyre with
19 discovery on December 3,2009. She responded (after Qualcomm granted her an extension) on
20 January 5, 2010. Subsequently, Qualcomm met and conferred about six defective and evasive
21 responses, hoping to avoid any court intervention. Etnyre simply did not respond, in any manner
22 to this letter. Then, Qualcomm sent a follow-up letter to Etnyre seeking a response to its meet and
23 confer efforts. Again, Etnyre did not respond, in any manner. As a further attempt to avoid this
24 otherwise seemingly unnecessary motion, Qualcomm's counsel called Etnyre's counsel hoping to
25 extract some agreement to supplement the responses. Again, however, while agreeing to"meet
26 and confer on the discovery issues in the case" Etnyre's counsel refused to actually discuss the
27 inadequate responses or agree to cause his client to supplement them.
28 111
PAUL, PLEVIN, QUALCOMM'S MEMO OF POINTS & 1

.
1 Qualcomm will continue in its efforts to meet and confer during the pendency of this
2 motion to avoid court involvement. However, now, because Etnyre has no justifiable reason or
3 valid objection for failing to properly and substantively respond to the interrogatories, Qualcomm
4 respectfully requests that this Court grant its motion to compel Etnyre's further responses to these
5 particular form interrogatories.
H.
6
7 BRIEF BACKGROUND
8 On December 3,2009, Qualcomm served Form Interragatories - General, Set One and
9 Form Interrogatories - Employment, Set One on Etnyre. (Listug Klick Decl. 112.) On January 4,
10 2010, Etnyre requested an extension to serve the responsesand documents, which Qualcomm
11 immediately granted. (Listug Klick Decl. 112.) On January 7, 2010, Qualcomm received Etnyre's
12 responses; however, some of the responses were incomplete, unclear or evasive. (Listug Klick
13 Decl. 11 2; Exhs. 1-2.)
14 After carefully reviewing Etnyre's responses and responsive documents, on February 12,
15 2010, Qualcomm faxed and mailed correspondence to Etnyre's counsel identifying specific
16 defects in six of the interrogatories. (Listug Klick Decl. 11 3; Exh. 3.) Again, on February 22,
17 2010, after receiving no response from Etnyre regarding the February 12, 2010 correspondence,
18 Qualcomm faxed and mailed correspondence to Etnyre's counsel asking about the previously
19 noted defects and reminding Etnyre's counsel that he had yet to respond. (Listug Klick Decl. 1[ 4;
20 Exh. 4.) Later in the day, Qualcomm telephoned Etnyre'scounsel regarding the same. (Listug
21 Klick Decl. 1 5.) To date, all that Etnyre's counsel has done in response to Qualcomm' s meet and
22 confer communications is agree to further meet and confer generally on all the discovery disputes
23 in this matter, but he has not provided further response, will not agree to provide further response,
24 nor has he provided any explanation for not providing supplemental responses. (Listug Klick
25 Decl. 115.)
26 Consequently, it was necessary for Qualcomm to unhappily bring this motion to compel
27 Etnyre's further and complete responses.
28 ill

.
III.
1
2 STANDARD FOR MOTION TO COMPEL
3 A motion to compel further responses to interrogatories is authorized when "[aln answer
4 to a particular interrogatory is evasive or incomplete." (Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 2030.300(a)(1);
5 Deyo v. Kilbourne (1978) 84 Cal.App.3d 771,787.) Good cause exists to compel Etnyre's further
6 responses because the interrogatories at issue seek information wholly relevant to this litigation,
7 and Etnyre refuses to respond without any explanation or justification.
8 This motion is also proper pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure sections
9 2016.040 and 2030.300(b), as counsel for Qualcomm met and conferred reasonably and in good
10 faith with counsel for Etnyre before filing this instant motion, to informally resolve this dispute.
11 (Listug Klick Decl. lili 3-5; Exhs. 3-4.)
12 IV.
13 LEGAL ARGUMENT
14 A. Qualcomm is Entitled to Discover Relevant Information.
15 California's discovery statutes are to be broadly construed so as to uphold the right to
16 discovery wherever possible. (Greyhound Corp. v. Superior Court (1997) 16 Cal.4th 1101,
17 1108.) A party is entitled to discovery"regarding any matter, not privifeged, that is relevant to the
18 subject matter involved..." ifthe matter itself is admissible in evidence or appears "reasonably
19 calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence." (Code. Civ. Proc. § 2017.010.)
20 Interrogatories, specifically, are "an effective means of detecting false, fraudulent and sham
21 claims and defenses which might otherwise be hidden behind evasive language in an adept
22 pleading." (Deyo, supra, 84 Cal.App.3d at pp. 779-780.) They also "serve to facilitate
23 preparation for trial by providing means of securing evidence and evidentiary leads." (Id.)
24 The California Discovery Act imposes upon parties a duty to answer discoveryrequests
25 "in a straightforward fashion, and as completely as possible, given the information available to
26 them." (Schnedling v. Dinwiddie Construction Co. (1999) 69 Cal.App.4th 64,76 [regarding

evasive," or
3 66
27 interrogatory responses].) Where interrogatory responses are "inadequate,
28 lll

1 "incomplete," a party may move for an order compelling further responses. (Cal. Code Civ. Proc.
2 § 2030.300.)
3 Here, as set forth in Qualcomm's separate statement of discovery filed herewith, each of
4 Etnyre's responses at issue is evasive, unclear or incomplete. Accordingly, it is proper for this
5 Court,to issue an order compelling further and verified responses from Etnyre to each of the
6 following interrogatories:
8 Form Interrogatory 2.13 seeks basic information about Ms. Etnyre's business trip to New
9 Jersey, during which she alleges she was sexually assaulted by Defendant (her former supervisor)
10 Sandip Minhas. Specifically, it asked Etnyre: "Within 24 hours before the incident Ide#ned as
11 the alleged assault] did you or any person involved...use or take any of the following substances:
12 alcoholic beverage, marijuana, or other drug or medication of any kind (prescription or not)?"
13 Etnyre merely responded with the approximate time and amount of alcohol each of the other
14 individuals on the business trip imbibed and did not respond asto herself.
15 1 This matter easily falls within the range of what is discoverable. The purpose of this
16 specific request is to determine what information is available about this specific, alleged (serious)
17 incident. The interrogatory is, at a minimum, reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of
18 admissible evidence. Further, Etnyre's response to Form Interrogatory 2.13 is patently
19 incomplete, such that the Court should order her to respond sufficiently. (Cal. Code Civ. Proc. §
20 2030.300; Deyo, supra, 84 Cal.App.3d at p. 783.)
22 Form Interrogatory 12.2 asked Etnyre to provide information on interviews conducted on
23 her behalf. Although she responded that no interviews were conducted, Qualcomm has reason to
24 believe that her former attorney did contact, and perhaps interviewed, individuals. (Listug Klick
25 Decl. 11 7.) Qualcomm is entitled to such information as it is directly relevant to the subject matter
26 involved. (Cal. Code. Civ. Proc.§2017.010.)
27 California Code of Civil Procedure section 2030.220(c) requires that Etnyre furnish
28 information available from other sources under hercontrol, such as her former counsel. (Deyo,
PAUL, PLEVIN, QUALCOMM'S MEMO OF POINTS & 4 .
.
1 supra, 84 Cal.App.3d at 782.) Thus, Qualcomm asks that the Court order Etnyre to adequately
2 supplement this response.
3 3. Form Interrogatory Employment) Nos. 200.2 & 200.3
4 In response to Form Interrogatories 200.2 and 200.3, Etnyre provided particularly vague
5 and incomplete responses. Form Interrogatory 200.2 asked that Etnyre state all facts upon which
6 she based any contention that her employment relationship with Qualcomm was not at-will and
7 Form Interrogatory 200.3 asked Etnyre to state facts on which she based her contention that her
8 employment relationship with Qualcomm was governed by any agreement - written, oral, or
9 implied. Etnyre answered that she "made no contention as relevant to her discrimination,
10 harassment, retaliation, or other causes of action set forth in the complaint herein." In so
11 responding, Etnyre evaded the inquiry.
12 To the extent that Etnyre is challenging various employment decisions made about her -
13 failure to promote, improper performance reviews, etc. - Qualcomm is entitled to know the
14 parameters of the employment relationship as Etnyre views it. As she did not so respond, and as
15 this information is at the very least reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible
16 evidence, Etnyre should be required to supplement both of these responses. (Cal. Code. Civ.
17 Proc. § 2017.010.)1
18 4. Form Interrogatory (Employment) No. 204.1
19 Form Interrogatory 204.1 asks Etnyre to "name and describe each disability alleged in the
20 pleadings." In response, Etnyre simply stated that her disabilities were mental, emotional and
21 physical, without providing any description. Etnyre also refers Qualcomm to an accommodation
22 letter apparently drafted by Dr. DeeAnn Wong, M.D. without providing reference to the alleged
23 letter.
24 In responding to this interrogatory Etnyre was required to identify and describe each
25 disability she alleges. As Etnyre's response was clearly evasive, Qualcomm asks that the Court
26
27 1 It is notable that Etnyre has also propounded Form Interrogatories Nos. 200.3 and 200.4 seeking similar
information about the employment relationship. (Listug Klick Decl. 1[ 6.)
28

1 order her to provide a more complete response, particularly describing each mental, physical and
2 emotional disability she alleges Qualcomm did, or did not accommodate, and did, or did not,
3 cause.
4 5. Form Interrogatory (Employment) No. 210.4
5 Form Interrogatory 210.4 asks Etnyre to describe how she attempted to minimize the
6 amount of her lost income. Instead of so describing, Etnyre states that she"looked for work prior
7 to returning to work for defendant, Qualcomm, in or about March 2009." Etnyre provided no
8 description of which company or employer she "looked for work" at or what specific, efforts she
9 made to locate prospective employers or positiens.
10 Because Etnyre seeks compensatory damages for alleged lost income, Qualcomm is
11 entitled to discover any efforts made to mitigate her alleged loss. As Etnyre's response was
12 clearly incomplete and without sufficient detail, Qualcomm asks that the Court order Etnyre to
13 fully respond to this interrogatory.
V.
14 !1
15 ATTORNEYS' FEES ARE APPROPRIATE
16 California Code of Civil Procedure section 2030.300(d) provides that a court "shall
17 impose a monetary sanction" against persons who unsuccessfully oppose a motion to compel,
18 unless that person makes a showing of "substantial justification." (Cal. Code Civ. Proc. §
19 2030.300(d).) Such sanctions are to be awarded pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section
20 2023.010, which specifies that a party shall not make evasive responses to discovery. (Cal. Code
21 Civ. Proc. § 2023.010(f).)
22 Here, Etnyre willfully failed to respond to proper interrogatories. Despite Qualcomm's
23 efforts to avoid the present motion, her refusal has made it necessary. Accordingly, fees are
24 appropriate, and Qualcomm requests an award of reasonable attorneys' fees in the amount of
25 $1,543.50.
26 lll
27 111
28 Ill

4 0.
1 VI.
2 CONCLUSION
3 For the reasons set forth above and, in greater detail, in the separate statement of discovery
4 and responses in dispute, Defendant Qualcomm Incorporated respectfully requests that this Court
5 issue an order requiring Plaintiff Courtney Etnyre to adequately respond to Form Interrogatories
6 , (General and Employment), Set Nos. One and for sanctions against Etnyre and her counsel of
7 record under California Code of Civil Procedures sections 2030.300(d) and 2023.010(f).
8
PAUL, PLEVIN, S LIVAN &
Dated: February 24, 2010
9 CONNAUG '0 P
10
BY:
11 . SULLIVAN
SA LISTUG KLICK
12 meys for Defendant
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

1 MICHAEL C. SULLIVAN (SBN 131817) CIVIL BUSIFESS
ILED
0
MELISSA LISTUG KLICK (SBN 228470) CENTAA
2 PAUL, PLEVIN, SULLIVAN & CONNAUGHTON lip
L DIVI
3
San Diego, California 92101-4232
2010 FEB 2 V p
Telephone: 619-237-5200 64 ERK -
Facsimile: 619-615-0700 SAN 0UPE9/OR t
4 CGO C
JUNT)
5 Attorneys fer Defendant
6
8
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

9

INCORPORATED'S SEPARATE
12 V. STATEMENT IN SUPPORT OF MOTION
TO COMPEL AND FOR SANCTIONS
13 SANDIP ("MICKEY") MINHAS, AGAINST PLAINTIFF AND HER COUNSEL
individually, QUALCOMM Incorporated, a OF RECORD PAUL KONDRICK UNDER
14 Delaware corporafion and DOES 1 through C.C.P. §§ 2023.010 & 2030.300(d)
40, inclusive,
15
Defendants. Date: June 11, 2010
16 Time: 11:00 a.m.
Dept: 70

18
19
20 Pursuant to California Rules of Court, Rule 3.1345, Qualcomm Incorporated
21 ("Qualcomm'D submits the following separate statement of specific discovery requests at issue in
22 support of its Motion to Compel Further Responses and for Sanctions.

FORM INTERROGATORIES
23
24 FORM INTERROGATORY NO. 2.13:
25 Within 24 hours before the INCIDENT did you or any person involved in the
26 INCIDENT use or take any of the following substances: alcoholic beverage, marijuana, or other
27 drug or medication of any kind (prescription or not)? If so, for each person state:
28 (a) the name, ADDRESS, and telephone number;

PAUL, PLEVIN, QUALCOMM SEPARATE STATEMENT RE 1
SULLIVAN & MOTION TO COMPELFURTHER DISCOVERY
CONNAUGHTON LLP RESPONSES OF PLAINTIFF ETNYRE
.
1 (b) the nature or description of each substance;
2 (c) the quantity of each substance used or taken;
3 (d) the date and time of day when each substance was used or taken;
4 (e) the ADDRESS where each substance was used or taken;
5 (f) the name, ADDRESS, and telephone number of each person who was present
6 wheneach substance was used or taken; and
7 (g) the name, ADDRESS, and telephone number of any HEALTH CARE
8 PROVIDER that prescribed or furnished the substance and the condition for which it was
9 prescribed or furnished.
10 RESPONSE TO FORM INTERROGATORY NO. 2.13:
11 1. Milan Patel:
12 Senior Patent Agent for QUALCOMM ((858) 651-6892)
13 February 22,2006 (Hotel) - approximately 3 cocktails at or about 7:00 p.m.
14 February 22,2006 - approximately 3 cocktails at or about 7:00 p.m.
15 - approximately 2 glasses ofwine at or about 8:30 [p.m.
16 February 24,2007 - approximately 2 cocktails at or about 12:30 a.m...
17 2. David Huffaker:
18 (Former) Patent Counsel for QUALCOMM (Phone number not known)
19 February 22,2006 - wine (Lunch sponsored by Michael Straub) l pm
20 - approximately 2 beers at or about 7:00 p.m.
21 February 24,2006 - approximately 3 cocktails at or about 7:00.p.m.
22 - approximately 2 glasses of wine at or about 8:30 p.m.
23 February 25,2006 - approximately 3 cocktails at or about 12:30 a.m.
24 3. Sandip Minhas:
25 Vice President Patent Counsel for QUALCOMM ((858) 651-4908)
26 February 22,2006 - wine (Lunch sponsored by Michael Straub) at or about 1 p.m.
27 - approximately 3 cocktails at or about 7:00 p.m.
28 Ill

SULLIVAN & MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER DISCOVERY
..
1 February 24,2006 - approximately 3 cocktails at or about 7:00 p.m.
2 - approximately 2 glasses ofwine at or about 8:30 p.m.
3 February 25,2006 - approximately 2 cocktails at or about 12:30 am
4 REASON FURTHER ANSWER SHOULD BE COMPELLED:
5 Form Interrogatory 2.13 seeks basic information about Ms. Etnyre's business trip to New
6 Jersey, during which she alleges she was sexually assaulted by Defendant Sandip Minhas.
7 Specifically, it asked Etnyre: "Within 24 hours before the incident [defined as the alleged assau/4
8 did you or any person involved....use ortake any of the following substances: alcoholic beverage,
9 marijuana, or other drug or medication of any kind (prescription or not)?" Etnyre merely
10 responded with the approximate time and amount of alcohol each of the other individuals on the
11 business trip imbibed.
12 This matter easily falls within the range of what is discoverable. The purpose of this
13 specific request is to determine what information is available about this specific, alleged (serious)
14 incident. The interrogatory is, at a minimum, reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of
15 admissibleevidence. Further, Etnyre's response to Form Interrogatory 2.13 is patently
16 incomplete, such that the Court should order her to respond sufficiently. (Cal. Code Civ. Proc. §
17 2030.300; Deyo, supra, 84 Cal.App.3d at p. 783.)
18 FORM INTERROGATORY NO. 12.2:
19 Have YOU OR ANYONE ACTING ON YOUR BEHALF interviewed any individual
20 concerning the INCIDENT? If so, for each individual state:
21 (a) the name, ADDRESS, and telephone number of the individual interviewed;
22 (b) the date of the interview; and
23 (c) the name, ADDRESS, and telephone number of the PERSON who conducted the
24 interview.
25 RESPONSE TO FORM INTERROGATORY NO. 12.2:
26 NO.
27 111
28 111

.
2 Form Interrogatory 12.2 asked Etnyre to provide information on interviews conducted on
3 her behalf. Although she responded that no interviews were conducted, Qualcomm has reason to
4 believe that her former attorney did contact and perhaps interviewed individuals. (Listug Klick
5 Decl. 11 6.) Qualcomm is entitled to such information as it is directly relevant to the subject matter
6 involved. (Cal. Code. Civ. Proc. § 2017.010.)
7 California Code of Civil Procedure section 2030.220(c) requires that Etnyre furnish
8 information available from other sources under her control, such as her former counsel. (Deyo,
9 supra, 84 Cal.App.3d at 782.) Thus, Qualcomm asks that the Court order Etnyre to adequately
10 supplement this response.
11 EMPLOYMENT LAW FORM INTERROGATORIES
12 EMPLOYMENT LAW FORM INTERROGATORY NO. 200.2:
13 Do you contend that the EMPLOYMENT relationship was not"at will"? If so:
14 Ca) . state all facts upon which you base this contention;
15 (b) state the name, ADDRESS, and telephone number of each PERSON who has
16 knowledge of those facts; and
17 (c) identify all DOCUMENTS that support your contention.
18 RESPONSE TO EMPLOYMENT LAW FORM INTERROGATORY NO. 200.2:
19 Plaintiff makes no such contention as relevant to her discrimination, harassment,
20 retaliation, or other causes of actions set forth in the complaint herein.
22 In response to Form Interrogatory 200.2, Etnyre provided a particularly vague and
23 incomplete response. Form Interrogatory 200.2 asked that Etnyre state all facts upon which she
24 based any contention that her employment relationship with Qualcomm was not at-will. Etnyre
25 answered that she"made no contention as relevant to her discrimination, harassment, retaliation,
26 or other causes of action set forth in the complaint herein." In so responding, Etnyre evaded the
27 inquiry.
28 111

1 To the extent that Etnyre is challenging various employment decisions made about her -
2 failure to promote, impropes performance reviews, etc. - Qualcomm is entitled to know the
5 evidence, Etnyre should be required to supplement this response. (Cal. Code. Civ. Proc. §
6 2017.010.)
8 Do you contend that the EMPLOYMENT relationship was governed by any agreement -
9 written, oral or implied? If sol

10 (a) state all facts upon which you base this contention;
11 (b) state the name, ADDRESS, and telephone number of each PERSON who has
12 knowledge of those facts; and
13 (c) identify all DOCUMENTS that support your contention.
15 Plaintiffmakes no such contention as relevant to her discrimination, harassment,
16 retaliation, or other causes of actions set forth in the complaint herein.
18 In response to Form Interrogatories 200.3, Etnyre provided particularly vague and
19 incomplete response, as she did in response to Form Interrogatory 200.2. Form Interrogatory
20 200.3 asked that Etnyre state all facts on which she based her contention that her employment
21 relationship with Qualcomm was governed by any agreement - written, oral, or implied. Etnyre
22 answered that she "made no contention as relevant to her discrimination, harassment, retaliation,
23 or other causes of action set forth in the complaint herein." In so responding, Etnyre evaded the
24 inquiry.
25 Again, Etnyre is required to state whether she believes her employment relationship with
26 Qualcomm was governed by any agreement and, if so, upon what facts she bases such a
27 contention. To the extent that Etnyre is challenging various employment decisions made about
28 her - failure to promote, improper performance reviews, etc. - Qualcomm is entitled to know the
3 evidence, Etnyre should be required to supplement this response. (Cal. Code. Civ. Proc. §
4 2017.010.)
6 Name and describe each disability alleged in the PLEADINGS.
8 Mental/Emotional and physical. Refer to DeAnn Wong, M.D. accommodation letters.
10 Form Interrogatory 204.1 asks Etnyre to "name and describe each disability alleged in the
11 pleadings." In response, Etnyre simply stated that her disabilities were mental, emotional and
12 physical, without providing any description. Etnyre also refers Qualcomm to an accommodation
13 letter apparently drafted by Dr. DeeAnn Wong, M.D. without providing reference tothe alleged
14 letter.
15 In responding to this interrogatery Etnyre was required to identify and describe each
16 disability she alleges. As Etnyre's response was clearly evasive, Qualcomm asks that the Court
17 order her to provide a more complete response, particularly describing each mental, physical and
18 emotional disability she alleges Qualcomm did, or did not accommodate, and did, or did not,
19 cause.
21 Have you attempted to minimize the amount of your lost income? If so, describe how; if
22 not, explain why not.
24 Yes. Looked for employment prior to returning to work for defendant, QUALCOMM, in
25 or about March 2009.
27 Form Interrogatory 210.4 asks Etnyre to describe how she attempted to minimize the
28 amount ofher lost income, Instead of so describing, Etnyre states that she "looked for work prior
SWLLIVAN & MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER DISCOVERY
.
1 to returning to work for defendant, Qualcomm, in or about March 2009." Etnyre provided no
2 description of which company or employer she "looked for work" at. Moreover, she fails to
3 describe the process through which she did this "looking."
4 Because Etnyre seeks compensatory damages for alleged wage loss, Qualcomm is entitled
5 to discover any efforts made to mitigate her alleged loss. As Etnyre's response was clearly
6 incomplete and without sufficient detail, Qualcomm asks that the Court order Etnyre to fully
7 respond to this interrogatory.
8
9 CONNAUGHION LLP
A / f \_ A
11 1 By: f lR]fTS
10
i M8*FA@y.ULLIVAN
LN'*[ISSA LISTUG KLICK
12
13 Qualcomm Incorporated
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

-C
. .
2
PAUL, PLEVIN, SULLIVAN & CONNAUGHTON LLP
401 B Street; Tenth Floor
Uys/Ress OF
. ILED
Rp.L DIVIS?* 1
3 San Diego, California 92101-4232 2(HO FEB 24 P 3:On
Telephone: 619-237-5200 CLERK-
4 Facsimile: 619-615-0700
SUPERIOR COURT
SAN DIEGO
COUNTY.CA
6

8
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

9
11 Plaintiff, DECLARATION OF MELISSA LISTUG

KLICK IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO
COMPEL FURTHER DISCOVERY
12 V.
RESPONSES FROM PLAINTIFF

COURTNEY ETNYRE AND FOR
individually, QUALCOMM Incorporated, a SANCTIONS AGAINST PLAINTIFF AND
HER COUNSEL OF RECORD PAUL
14 Delaware corporation and DOES 1 through
40, inclusive, KONDRICK UNDER C.C.P. §§ 2023.010 &
15 2030.300(d)
Defendants.
16
Date: June 11, 2010
Time: 11:00 a.m.
17
Dept: 70
18 Judge: Hon. Jay M. Bloom

19
20
21 I, Melissa J. Listug Klick, declare:
22 1. Iam an associate in the law firm of Paul, Plevin, Sullivan & Connaughton LLP,
23 attorneys of record for Defendant Qualcomm Incorporated ("Qualcomm") inthe above-entitled
24 matter, and am licensed to practice before this Court. I have personal knowledge of the following
25 facts and, if called as a witness, could and would testify competently thereto.
26 2. On December 3,2009, Qualcomm propounded Form Interrogatories - General,
27 Set One and Form Interrogatories - Employment, Set One on Plaintiff Courtney Etnyre. On
28 January 4, 2010, Ms. Etnyre's counsel requested, and' I immediately granted, an extensionto
PAUL, PLEVIN, DECLARATION OF MELISSA LISTUG KLICK IN 1
SULLIVAN & SUPPORT OF QUALCOMM'S MOTION TO
1
-' M
..
1 respond to this discovery. On January 7, 2010, we received Courtney Etnyre's responses. True
2 and correct copies of Courtney Etnyre's responses to Form Interrogatories - General, Set One and
3 Form Interrogatories - Employment, Set One are attached as Exhibits 1-2 to the accompanying
4 lodgment of exhibits.
5i 3. On February 12, 2010, I faxed and mailed correspondence to Courtney Etnyre's

6 counsel identifying six specific interrogatory responses that were evasive and defective. I did so
7 to avoid court intervention in the matter. A true and correct copy of my letter is attached as
8 Exhibit 3 the accompanying lodgment of exhibits.
9 4. As I did not receive a response to my February 12, 2010 meet and confer letter
10 regarding Ms. Etnyre's deficient responses, on February 22, 2010, I faxed and mailed yet another
11 letter to her counsel asking about the previously noted defects and: reminding him that he had yet
12 to respond to my earlier correspondence. A true and correct copy of this letter is attached as
13 , Exhibit 4 the accompanying lodgment of exhibits. In addition, I called Ms. Etnyre's counsel in
14 the late afternoon on February 22, 2010, to attempt to obtaih an agreement to supplement the
15 responses and to discover any explanation for the deficient responses. In response, Ms. Etnyre's
16 counsel agreed to generally meet and confer regarding all discovery disputes in this matter, but
17 has not provided any agreement to supplement or provide an explanation as to why he will not
18 supplement the six intel'rogatory responses at issue in this motion. In this litigation, Qualcomm
19 has been forced to engage in several other preventable discovery disputes, including the
20 compelling of Ms. Etnyre's medical records because she will not provide an authorization.
21 5. I am informed and believe that Ms. Etnyre had a previous attorney working on her
22 behalf in this case, Michael Crosby, and that her former attorney contacted, and perhaps
23 interviewed, individuals regarding her claims.
24 6. Amongst other discovery, Ms. Etnyre has propounded Form Interrogatories 200.3
25 and 200.4 on Qualcomm, requesting information regarding Ms. Etnyre's employment relationship
26 and/or any employment agreements she had with Qualcomm.
27 7. As a result of Plaintiffs failure to provide supplemental responses, Qualcomm
28 has incurred and will incur reasonable attorneys' fees in regard to the preparation of this motion to
PAUL, PLEVIN, DECLARATION OF MELISSA LISTUG KLICK IN 2
..
1 compel. My billing rate is $225.00 per hour, and I have spent approximately 2.3 hours preparing
2 this motion. in addition, Emily J. Fox has spent approximately 5.7 hours preparing this motion.
3 Her billing rate is $180 per hour. Accordingly, Qualcomm requests attorneys' fees in the total
4 amount of $1543.50 ([$225 x 2.3 hours] + [$180 x 5.7 hours] = $1,543.50). If necessary we will
5 submit an additional declaration for time spent drafting a reply.
6 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the
7 foregoing is true and correct.
Executed on February 24, 2010,18elisstf

at San\1Diego,T\JB?1<57
faia v ,
8
10 s g Klick
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PAUL, PLEVIN, DECLARATION OF MELISSA USTUG KLICK IN 3

FILED
1 MICHAEL C. SULLIVAN (SBN 131817) CIVIL BUSINESS OFFICE 10
MELISSA LISTUG KLICK (SBN 228470) CENTRAL DIVISION
401 B Street, Tenth Floor 2010 FEB 24 P 3 00
Telephone: 619-237-5200 CLERK-SUPERIOR COURT
4 Facsimile: 619-615-0700 SAN DIEGO COUNTY. CA
5 Attorneys fer Defendant
6

8
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

9
11 Plaintiff, NOTICE OF LODGMENT OF EXHIBITS IN

SUPPORT OF MOTION TO COMPEL
12 V.
PLAINTIFF'S FURTHER RESPONSES TO
DISCOVERY AND FOR SANCTIONS
13 SAND ("MICKEY") MINHAS, AGAINST PLAINTIFF AND HER COUNSEL
individually, QUALCOMM Incorporated, a OF RECORD PAUL KONDRICK UNDER
14 Delaware corporation and DOES 1 through C.C.P. §§ 2023.010 & 2030.300(d)
40, inclusive,
15
Defendants. Date: June 11, 2010
Time: 11:00 a.m.
16
Dept: 70

18
19
20
TO PLAINTIFF AND HER ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:
21 Defendant QUALCOMM Incorporated ("Qualcomm") hereby lodges the following
22 exhibits in support of its motion to compel Plaintiffs further response to discovery:
23 Exhibit 1: Ms. Etnyre's responses to Qualcomm's Form Interrogatories - General, Set
24 No. One;
25 Exhibit 2: Ms. Etnyre's responses to Qualcomm's Form Interrogatories -
26 Employment, Set No. One;
27 Exhibit 3: February 12, 2010 letter to Paul Kendrick from Melissa Listug Klick;
28 111
PAUL, PLEVIN, NOTICE OF LODGMENT OF EXHIBITS IN 1

..
1 Exhibit 4: February 22, 2010 letter to Paul Kondrick from Melissa Listug Klick.

3
CONNAUGHTRI LLP
4
By: 0._'
5 ....NffRABL C. SUELIVAN
MELISSA LISTUG KLICK
7
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PAUL, PLEVIN, NOTICE OF LODGMENT OF EXHIBITS IN 2

-- 1
-'
Etnyre v. Minhas et al. Cl

VIL BUSIN235 OFFICE 10
-
1 L- U
2
San Diego Superior Court Case No. 37-2009-00101537 · CENTRAL DIVISIO,4
PROOF OF SERVICE
3 2010 FEB 24 P 300
I, the undersigned, hereby declare that I am over the age of eighteen yealls,:and not a party
4
business address is: Paul, Plevin, Sullivan& Connaughton LLP, 401 B StreelT
to thts action. I am employed, or am a resident of, the County of San Diego,
7 • QUALCOMM'S NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER

DISCOVERY RESPONSES OF PLAINTIFF AND FOR SANCTIONS AGAINST
8 PLAINTIFF AND HER COUNSEL PAUL KONDRICK UNDER CCP § 2023.010 &
2030.300(d);
9
• MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT THEREOF;
10
• SEPARATE STATEMENT IN SUPPORT THEREOF;
11
® DECLARATION OF MELISSA LISTUG KLICK IN SUPPORT THEREOF;
12
• NOTICE OF LODGMENT OF EXHIBITS IN SUPPORT THEREOF.
13
on the interested party (ies) in this action by placing a true copy thereof and addressed as follows:
14
15 H. Paul Kondrick Leonid M. Zilberman
H. Paul Kondrick, a Professional Corporation Wilson Turner Kosmo LLP

16 3130 Fourth Avenue 550 West C Street, Suite 1050
San Diego, CA 92103 San Diego, CA 92101-3532
17 Telephone: (619) 291-2400 Telephone: (619) 236-9600
Facsimile: (619) 291-7123 Facsimile: (619) 236-9669
18 E-Mail: kondrick@msn.com E-Mail: tzilberman@wpkt. com
Attorney for Plaintiff Attorneys for Defendant Sandip Minhas
19
(By MAIL SERVICE) I then sealed each envelope and, with postage thereon fully
20 prepaid postage, I placed each for deposit with United States Postal Service, this same
day, at my business address shown above, following ordinary business practices.
21
(By PERSONAL SERVICE) I delivered such envelope by hand to the office of the
addressee.
22
(By FACSIMILE) I transmitted the documents by facsimile machine, pursuant to

23
California Rules of Court, Rule 2.306. The facsimile machine I used complied with Rule
2.301 and no error was reported by the machine. The transmitting facsimile machine
24
number is (619) 615-0700. The fax number of the party being served is listed above.
Pursuant to Rule 2.306, I caused the machine to print a transmission record of the
25
transmission, a copy of which is attached to this declaration.
26 (By OVERNIGHT DELIVERY) I deposited in a box or other facility regularly
maintained by the express service carrier, or delivered to a courier or driver authorized by
27 . the express service carrier to receive documents, in an envelope or package with delivery
fees paid or provided for, and addressed on whom it is to be served pursuant to Code of
28 Civil Procedure section 1013(c).
PAUL PLEVIN
PROOF OF SERVICE 1
SULLIVAN'&
CONNAUGHTON LLP
«,
1 0 (By E-MAIL OR ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION) Based on a court order or an

agreement of the parties to accept service by e-mail or electronic transmission, I caused
2 the documents to be sent to the person(s) at the e-mail addresses listed above. I did not
receive, within a reasonable time after the transmission, any electronic message or other
3 indication that the transmission was unsuccessful.
4
0 (State) I declare under penalty of pegury under the laws of the State of California that the
5
0 (Federal) I declare that I am employed by the office of a member of the bar of this court
at whose direction the service was made.
6
Executed February 24, 2010, at San Diego, California.
7
A
9
6- PAGE STOUT
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PAUL PLEVIN
PROOF OF SERVICE 2
SULLIVAN &
CONNAUGHTON LLP
.
-n
1
H. Paul Kendrick, Esq., State Bar No. 88566
2
H. Paul Kondrick, A.P.C. 20!0 FEB 23 PH 3: 36
3130 Fourth Avenue

b:.8 UK:l: -b..., CI
Telephone: (619) 291-2400 CLm

4
Facsimile: (619) 291-7123
5
6
8
9
10
COURTNEY S. ETNYRE, individually, ) Case No. 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL

11
)
12 Plaintiff, ) PROOF OF SERVICE
)
13
V. )
14
SANDIP ("MICKEY") MINHAS, individually,)
16
)
Defendants. )
17
)
18
19
I, Candice E. Caufield, declare that:
20
I am, and was at the times of the service hereinafter mentioned, over the age of 18 and
21
not a party to the within action; I am employed in the County of San Diego, California where
22
23
the service occurs; and my business address is 3130 Fourth Avenue, San Diego, California.
24 On February 23, 2010, I served the foregoing document(s) described as:
25
1. THIRD AMENDED NOTICE OF PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR ORDER
26
QUASHING OR MODIFYING DEFENDANT'S CIVIL SUBPOENAS FOR
PRODUCTION OF BUSINESS RECORDS PERTAINING TO HER PRIOR
27 EMPLOYMENT, AND TO AWARD MONETARY SANCTIONS
28
on all interested parties to this action by placing true copies thereof enclosed in sealed
-1- Proof of Service

1
envelopes addressed as follows:
.
2
Leonid M. Zilberman, Esq.
3 Wilson Petty Kosmo LLP
550 West "C" Street, Suite 1050
4
San Diego, CA 92101
Telephone: (619) 236-9600
5
Facsimile: (619) 236-9669
6
Attorney for Defendant, Sandip ('*Mickey") Minhas
7
8
9 Paul, Plevin, Sullivan & Connaughton, LLP
401 "B" Street, Tenth Floor
10
San Diego, CA 92101
11
Telephone: (619) 237-5200
Facsimile: (619) 615-0700
12
Attorney for Defendant, QUALCOMM Incorporated

13
14
X BY U.S. MAIL (AS INDICATED ABOVE): I placed the originals of the described
15 documents in a sealed envelope addressed to the parties as indicated above on February 23,
16
2010. Iam familiar with the firm's practice of collection and processing correspondence for
17
mailing. I personally deposited the claim in the United States post office or in a mailbox,
18
substation, mail chute, or other like facility regularly maintained by the government of the
19
21 BY PERSONAL SERVICE: I personally gathered a true copy ofthe above
22
documents, and gave same to our messenger service for personal delivery/service before
23
5:00 p.m. on February 23, 2010 will file the original proof of personal service with the Court
24
upon request.
25
27 true copy in a sealed envelope addressed to the parties as indicated above, on February 23,
28
2010. I personally caused it to be deposited with Federal Express on the same day in the

1
ordinary course of business for delivery the next business day.
2
BY FACSIMILE (as indicated above): By use of facsimile machine number, (619) 291-
3
7123, I faxed a true copy(ies) of the document(s) listed above to the parties, on February 23,
4
2010, at their fax numbers listed above as indicated by their names. The document(s) were/was
5
6 transmitted by facsimile transmission and the transmission was reported as complete and
7
without error. The transmission report was properly issued by the transmitting facsimile
8
machine. A copy of the transmission report will be attached to the proof of service indicating
9
that the documents were transmitted properly, as necessary, in the future.

10
11
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws ofthe State of California that the
12 foregoing is true and correct. Executed this 23rd day of February, 2010.
13
Candice E. Caufield
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

.
r
In
1 H. Paul Kondrick, Esq. (State Bar No. 88566)

H. Paul Kondrick, a Professional Corporation 261 O FEB 23 Ptl 3: 36
2 3130 Fourth Avenue
3 Telephonef (619) 291-2400 C •/ E
Facsimile: (619) 291-7123

4 Attorney for Plaintiff, COURTNEY S. ETNYRE
8 FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
COURTNEY S. ETNYRE, individually Case No. 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL

10 )
Plaintiff, ) THIRD AMENDED NOTICE OF
11 ) PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR
V. ) ORDER QUASHING OR
12 ) MODIFYING DEFENDANT'S CIVIL
SANDIP ("MICKEY") MINHAS, individually, ) SUBPOENAS FOR PRODUCTION
13 QUALCOMM Incorporated, a Delaware ) OF BUSINESS RECORDS
corporation, and DOES 1 through 40, inclusive, ) PERTAINING TO HER PRIOR

14 ) EMPLOYMENT, AND TO AWARD
) MONETARY SANCTIONS
15 Defendants. )
) Date: May 7, 2010
16 Time: 11:00 a.m.
Department: DC-70
19 To: Defendants, QUALCOMM Incorporated and SANDIP ("MICKEY") MINHAS, by
20 and through their respective attorneys of record herein, Paul, Plevin, Sullivan & Connaughton,
21 LLP, and in particular attorney Michael C. Sullivan thereof, and Wilson, Cosmo & Turner LLP,
22 and in particular attorney Leonid M. Zilberman:
23 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that for purposes of this motion, and in particular filing
24 pleadings, on May 7, 2010, at 11:00 a.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, in
25 Department DC-70 of the above-entitled Court, located at 330 West Broadway, San Diego,
26 California 92101, plaintiff, COURTNEY S. ETNYRE ["ETNYRE"], will move the Court for an
27 order quashing or otherwise modifying the five (5) Civil Deposition Subpoenas for Production
28 of Business Records pertaining to her prior employment issued by defendant, QUALCOMM
-1- Notice of Motion to Quash QUALCOMM Subpoenas

1 Incorporated r'QUALCOMM"] variously dated December 3,4 and 8,2009, directed to
2 plaintifs former employers, namely law firms Casey, Gerry, Schenk, Francavilla, Blatt &
3 Penfield (San Diego), Howrey LLP (Los Angeles), Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett &
4 Dunner LLP (Washington, D.C.), Pfizer, Inc. (San Diego) and Sheppard, Mullin, Richter &
5 Hampton LLP (San Diego), all relating to the production of documents and things from
6 plaintiffs former employers [hereinafter collectively the "Subject Subpoenas"], and to award
7 monetary sanctions. The Court will issue its tentative ruling at approximately 2:00 p.m. on
8 May 6, 2010 at the Court's internet website.
9 Plaintiff, ETNYRE, will specifically move the Court for an order quashing, or
10 alternatively modifying, the aforementioned Subject Subpoenas for the production of documents
11 and things by plaintiff's former employers seeking plaintiff s personnel and employment records
12 as shown and specifically set forth in the accompanying Separate Statement of Subpoenaed
13 Records in Dispute. Plaintiff, ETNYRE, will further request, in the alternative, that the Court
14 order that the Subject Subpoenas should be modified so that:
15 a. The Court limits the scope of records or documents that plaintiff's former
16 employers, Casey, Gerry, Schenk, Francavilla, Blatt & Penfield (San Diego), Howrey LLP (Los
17 Angeles), Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP (Washington, D.C.), Pfizer,
18 Inc. (San Diego) and Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP (San Diego), produce, in
19 particular ordering disclosure of only that information that might be relevant to the suit in the
20 least intrusive scope and manner possible;
21 b. Imposing on defendant, QUALCOMM, the burden to demonstrate that there are

22 no less intrusive means, such as depositions, that would yield the information sought by it from
23 plaintifs former employers as presently sought by the Subject Subpoenas;
24 c. The trial court should first examine the employment, personnel or other records
25 and document pertaining to plaintiff, COURTNEY S. ETNYRE, or other persons, in camera

26 before allowing them to be turned over to defendant, QUALCOMM, or its deposition officer,
27 Copyscan, Inc.; and
28 d. Specifically precluding any documents or writings pertain to plaintiff,

.
1 ETNYRE's, sexual conduct with individuals other than the alleged perpetrator, in this case
2 defendant, SANDIP ("MICKEY") MINHAS ["MINHAS"], including any claims of sexual
3 misconduct plaintiff, ETNYRE, may have made except for this case, unless and until
4 defendants, or any of them, establish specific facts showing that there is good cause for that
5 discovery, and that the matter sought to be discovered is relevant to the subject matter ofthe
6 above-entitled action and reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence
7 based on a showing that shall be made by a noticed' motion, accompanied by a meet and confer
8 declaration under Code of Civil Procedure, #2016.040, and shall not be made or considered by
9 the court at an exparte hearing, in accordance with Code OfCivil Procedure, #201 Z220(a).
10 Plaintiff, ETNYRE, further requests an order that defendant, QUALCOMM, and their
11 attorneys, pay the moving party, plaintiff, ETNYRE, the minimum sum of $1,277.50 in
12 attorneys' fees [4.5 total hours], including an additional 1.5 hours, anticipated to attend the
13 hearing on the pending motion, without taking into account any need to review any opposition
14 to this motion or to prepare additional reply papers, and a $40.00 filing fee for this motion, as
15 the reasonable attorneys' fees and costs and incurred by plaintiff in connection with this motion
16 to quash or modify subpoena.
17 111
18 Ill
19 Ill
20 111
21 Ill
22 Jll
23 111
24 111
25 Ill
26 Ill
27 Ill
28 111
-3- Notice ofMotion to Quash QUALCOMM Subpoenas

.
1 The motion will be made on the grounds that the Subject Subpoenas are, in some
2 instance, defective, and seek plaintifs employment and personnel records from her previous
3 employers dating back more than 12 years; the Subject Subpoenas were, and are, without
4 substantial justification; the Subject Subpoenas improperly invade or infringe on plaintiff s right
5 of privacy; and defendant failed to reasonably and appropriately meet and confer without
6 burdening either this Court or the moving party, Ms. ETNYRE, with either hearing or bringing
7 these discovery matters. The motion will be based on this notice of motion and the Declaration
8 of H. Paul Kondrick in Support of Plaintiffs Motion for Order Quashing or Modifying
9 Defendant's Civil Subpoenas Pertaining to Her Prior Employment, and to Award Monetary
10 Sanctions, Separate Statement of Subpoenaed Records in Dispute, and memorandum of points
11 and authorities, served and filed herein on or about December 23,2009, and on the records and
12 files herein, and on such evidence as may, be presented at the hearing of the motion, and oral
13 argument.
H. Paul Kondrick,
15
16 Dated: February 23, 2010

8113*
H. Paul Kondrick
17 Attorney for Plaintiff, COURTNEY
S. ETNYRE
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

.. FILE D
Clerk of the Superior Court
FEB 1 9 2010
2 PAUL, PLEVIN, SULLIVAN & CONNAUGHTON LLp By: E. CASTANEDA, Deputy
Telephone: 619-237-5200
4 Facsimile: 619-615-0700

6

11 , Plaintiff, AMENDED NOTICE OF MOTION AND

MOTION TO COMPEL MEDICAL
12 V. RECORDS AND REQUEST FOR
ATTORNEYS' FEES
13 SANDIP ("MICKEY") MINHAS, L
individually, QUALCOMM Incorporated, a
14 Delaware corporation and DOES 1 through Date: May 7, 2010
40, inclusive, ' Time: 11:00 a.m.
15 Dept: 70
Defendants. Judge: Hon. Jay M. Bloom
17
18
19
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on May 7, 2010, at 11:00 a.m., or as soon thereafter as
20
counsel may be heard in Department 70 of the above-entitled Court, Defendant Qualcomm
21
Incorporated ("Qualcomm") will move this Court for an order: (1) compelling Dr. Judith Matson
22
to comply with the Deposition Subpoena for Business Records served by Qualcomm on
23
December 9,2009 pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 2025.480(a) on the grounds that
24
Dr. Matson has failed to produce documents pursuant to a subpoena issued pursuant to Code of
25
Civil Procedure section 2020.010 et seq. and (2) awarding reasonable attorneys' fees against Dr.
26
Matson in the amount of $1,800 pursuant to Code of,Civil Procedure section 2025.480(f) because
27
Dr. Matson groundlessly necessitated the filing of this m6tion and her refusal to produce records
28
PAUL, PLEVIN,
Amended Notice of Motion and Motion to Compel
1
SULLIVAN &
M(34"1*t/(d691>1) by
C. Cor*io
¥
..
1 is done without substantial justification or sanctions in the amount of $500.00 pursuant to Code of
2 Civil Procedure sections 1992 and 2020.240.
4 authorities in support thereof, the notice of non-California authorities, the declaration of Melissa
5 Listug Klick, the notice of non-California authorities, the notice of lodgment of exhibits and all
6 exhibits attached thereto, the complete files and records of this action, and such other evidence or
7 arguments as may be presented at or before the hearing on this motion.
12 the department at (619) 450-7055 on the day prior to the hearing if they submit on the tentative
13 ruling.
14

15
CONNAflN L
16
'j -00 6>
By: A,/
17 MYCDKEL U SULLIVAN
(-00#MMMESA LfSTUG KLICK
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PAUL, PLEVIN, 2
SULLIVAN & 1 Amended Notice of Motion and Motion to Compel
CONNAUGHTON LLP
. .
F 1
1 Etnyre v. Minhas et al. C,erkof the fipfrieSurl' IC'

n
2
San Diego Superior Court Case No. 37-2009-00101537 FEB 1 9 2010
3
PROOF OF SERVICE
By: E. CASTANEDA, Deputy
7 • AMENDED NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO COMPEL MEDICAL

RECORDS AND REQUEST FOR ATTORNE¥S' FEES
8
9

10 Wilson Turner Kosmo LLP
H. Paul Kendrick, a Professional Corporation
11
12
E-Mail: kendrick@msn.com E-Mail: tzilberman@wpkt. com
13
14
Judith Matson Ph.D. (By Overnight Mail)
2416 La Tinada Court
15
Carlsbad, CA 92009
Telephone: 858-793-2613
16
0 ,(By MAIL SERVICE) I then sealed each envelope and, with postage thereon fully
17
prepaid postage, I placed each for deposit with United States Postal Service, this same
18
(By OVERNIGHT DELIVERY) I deposited in a box or other facility regularly

19 maintained by the express service carrier, or delivered to a courier or driver authorized by
the express service carrier to receive documents, in an envelope or package with delivery
20 fees paid' or provided for, and addressed on whom it is to be served pursuant to Code of
Civil Procedure section 1013(c).
21
I declare under penalty of pegury under the laws of the State of California that the
23 Executed February 19, 2010, at San Diego, California.
24
25
316044.. 2,44412 4 QJL
Deborah Baranowsla
26
27
28
PAUL PLEVIN
PROOF OF SERVICE 1
SULLIVAN &
CONNAUGHTON LLP
.
To: Dept 70
Date: 2-18-2010
Case Number: 37-2009-101537
Your Honor:
Please see attached cover letter with Motion paperwork
1. This case has been reassigned several different times due to recusals
2. The motion that was originally set in Dept 75 was vacated by the clerk and the motion
papenvork was returned to filer
3. The attorney is wanting to protect the original filing date of the motion paperwork that
had been submitted on 12/23/09
1/*-09
55»1 tr /7/
Please advise
Thank you 1
Please Return to: C. Porter,Supervisor - Team 3 - Civil Business Office
01 *'7 ,
-1 /V J.
\ p
\ p
. . FILED
CIVIL BUSINESS OFFICE 8
CENTPAI_ D! -:'T- :

MELISSA LISTUG KLICK (SBN 228470) 10 FEB 16 PM 3: 23
401 B Street, Tenth Floor CLERK-SUPENTZ I.OURl
SAN DIEGO COUk f V C 6
Telephone: 619-237-5200
4 Facsimile: 619-615-0700

6

8
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

9
11 Plaintiff, NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO

COMPEL MEDICAL RECORDS AND
12 V. REQUEST FOR ATTORNEYS' FEES
01
13 SANDIP ("MICKEY") MNHAS arao/6 3'L
individually, QUALCOMM Incorporated, a Date:
14 Delaware corporation and DOES 1 through Time: 1-301'4diljcm

40, inclusive, Dept: 70
Defendants. Complaint Filed: November 2,2009
16 Trial Date: . None Set
17
18 TO PLAINTIFF AND HER ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:
19 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on April 16,2010, at 1:30 p:m; or as soon thereafter as
20 counsel may be heard in Department 70 of the above-entitled Court, Defendant Qualcomm
21 Incorporated ("Qualcomm") will move this Court for an order: (1) compelling Dr. Judith Matson
22 to comply with the Deposition Subpoena for Business Records served by Qualcomm on
23 December 9,2009 pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 2025.480(a) on the grounds that
24 Dr. Matson has failed to produce documents pursuant to a subpoena issued pursuant to Code of
25 Civil Procedure section 2020.010 et seq. and (2) awarding reasonable attorneys' fees against Dr.
, 26 Matson in the amount of $1,800 pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 2025.480(f) because
4 27 Dr. Matson groundlessly necessitated the filing of this motion and her refusal to produce records
is done without substantial justification or sanctions in the amount of $500.00 pursuant to Code of
PAUL, PLEVIN, 1
SULLIVAN & Notice of Motion and Motion to Compel
P
.
1 Civil Procedure sections 1992 and 2020.240.
3 authorities in support thereof, the notice of non-California authorities, the declaration of Melissa
4 Listug Klick, the notice of non-California authorities, the notice of lodgment of exhibits and all
5 exhibits attached thereto, the complete files and records of this action, and such other evidence or
6 arguments as may be presented at or before the hearing on this motion.
11 the department at (619) 450-7055 on the day prior to the hearing ifthey submit on the tentative
12 ruling.
13
Dated: February 116,2010 PAUL, PLEVIN, SULLIVAN &

14
CON*UiT0LP
15
16
By: Z
L,0*[IC0. SULLIVAN
- MENESBA=LISTUG KLICK
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PAUL, PLEVIN, 2
SULLIVAN & Notice of Motion and Motion to Compel
CONNAUGHTON LLP
2
PROOF OF SERVICE
3
6 On February 16,2010, I caused to be served the following document(s):
7 • NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO COMPEL MEDICAL RECORDS

AND REQUEST FOR ATTORNEYS' FEES;
8 • MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF MOTION
TO COMPEL MEDICAL RECORDS AND REQUEST FOR ATTORNEYS' FEES;
9
• DECLARATION OF MELISSA LISTUG KLICK IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO
10 COMPEL MEDICAL RECORDS AND REQUEST FOR ATTORNEYS' FEES;
• NOTICE OF LODGMENT OF EXHIBITS IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO
11
COMPEL MEDICAL RECORDS;
12 • NOTICE OF LODGMENT OF NON-CALIFORNIA AUTHORITIES IN
SUPPORT OF MOTION TO COMPEL MEDICAL RECORDS AND REQUEST
13 FOR ATTORNEYS' FEES
14
H. Paul K6ndrick
H. Paul Kondrick, a Professional Corporation Wilson Turner Kosmo LLP
3130 Fourth Avenue
17
18
E-Mail: kondrick@msn.com E-Mail: tzilberman@wpkt. com
19
Judith Matson Ph.D. (By Overnight Mail)

20
2416 La Tinada Court
Carlsbad, CA 92009
21
Telephone: 858-793-2613
22
23
24 (By OVERNIGHT DELIVERY) I deposited in a box or other facility regularly
25 the express service camer to receive documents, in an envelope or package with delivery
26 Civil Procedure section 1013(c).
27
28
PAUL PLEVIN
PROOF OF SERVICE 1
SULLIVAN &
CONNAUGHTON LLP
.
..
1 I declare under penalty ofpeKiury under the laws of the Stateof California that the
2
Executed February 16, 2010, at San Diego, California.
3
4
777d-e*£b»)
C Martha Martinez 21
5
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PAUL PLEVIN
PROOF OF SERVICE 2
SULLIVAN &
CONNAUGHTON LLP
.
a.. FILED
. CIVIL BUSINESS OFFICE 8
CENTS,Son':L 6 J
1 MICHAEL C. SULLIVAN (SBN 131817) 10 FEB 16 PM 3: 23

2 PAUL, PLEVIN, SULLIVAN & CONNAUGHTON LLP CDr r :---:_' ,· , :-'F
CLERK-
401 B Street Tenth Floor SAN DIEGodouN 6*'
Telephone: 619-237-5200
4 Facsimile: 619-615-0700

6

8
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

9
10 COURTNEY S. ETNYRE CASE NO. 37-2009-001,01537-CU-OE-CTL
Plaintiff, MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND

11
AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF MOTION
TO COMPEL MEDICAL RECORDS AND
12 V.
REQUEST FOR ATTORNEYS' FEES

14
Delaware corporation and DOES 1 through I)ate: *** rf[£.,
40, inclusive, Time: +514 I i :066 mxJ(L
Dept: 70
15
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PAUL, PLEVIN,
SULLIVAN & Motion to Compel
CONNAUGHTON LLP
.
1 TABLE OF CONTENTS
2 Page
1
3 I. INTRODUCTION
II. FACTUAL BACKGROUND ... 1

4
5 III. DR. MATSON SHOULD BE COMPELLED TO COMPLY WITH THE

3
SUBPOENA
6
3
A. Etnyre's Medical Records are Relevant
7
B. Qualcomm has Complied with HIPAA's Requirements for
4
8 Disclosure Without Authorizatinn
5
9 IV. QUALCOMM IS ENTITLED TO REASONABLE ATTORNEYS' FEES
V. CONCLUSION 6
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PAUL, PLEVIN, 1
CONNAUGHTON LLP
.
1 L
2 INTRODUCTION
3 In this lawsuit, Plaintiff Courtney Etnyre ("Etnyre") claims she suffered severe physical
4 and emotional distress after her then-current supervisor, Defendant Sandip Minhas, allegedly
5 sexually assaulted her person, and further that her employer, Defendant Qualcomm Incorporated
6 ("Qualcomm"), allegedly failed to appropriately respond. Not only does Qualcomm vehemently
7 dispute Etnyre's allegations in their entirety, it also disputes that she suffered the alleged physical
8 and emotional distress. Importantly, Etnyre's emotional distress - if she has suffered such - is
9 likely borne out of pre-existing conditions and not the allegations in her complaint.
10 In order to conduct necessary discovery regarding Etnyre's alleged emotional distress,

11 Qualcomm subpoenaed Etnyre's medical records from various doctors, including Dr. Judith I
12 Matson - one of the doctors Plaintiff claims treated her for the harm allegedly caused by the
13 defendants. Dr. Matson has failed to produce documents and has indicated she will not do so
14 despite the following facts: (1) Etnyre did not object to the subpoena; (2) Etnyre's attorney has
15 indicated, in writing, that she will not object because the documents are relevant; (3) Etnyre has
16 refused to provide any authorizations, under any circumstances; and (4) Dr. Matson has been
17 advised by Qualcomm of her legal obligation to produce the records, and that her refusal to do so
18 without a signed authorization is unjustified.
19 Accordingly, Qualcomm now requests that this Court compel the production of the
20 subpoenaed medical documents from Dr. Matson.
21 II.
22 FACTUAL BACKGROUND
23 Etnyre filed this lawsuit against Qualcomm alleging sexual battery and assault, negligence,
24 harassment, discrimination and retaliation based on sex, and intentional and negligent infliction of
25 emotional distress, arising out of an alleged sexual assault by Defendant Sandip Minhas during an
26 out-of-town business trip. (See Complaint 1111 15-83.) On December 3,2009, Qualcomm served
27 Etnyre with various interrogatories. (Listug Klick Decl. 11 2.) In response to questions regarding
28 her alleged emotional and physical injuries, Etnyre answered that she suffered from extensive
PAUL, PLEVIN, 1
CONNAUGHTON LLP
..
1 ' emotional, physical and behavioral symptoms. (Listug Klick Decl. 112; Exh. 2, p. 9:15-19.)
2 ' Etnyre also responded that she sought medical attention from Dr. Judith Matson for her alleged
3 injuries. (See, e.g., Exh. 1, p. 65-21; Exh. 2, p. 14:18-15:21,)1
4 On December 9,2009, Qualcomm served Dr. Matson with a subpoena to retrieve Etnyre's
5 medical records. (Listug Klick Decl. 93; Exhs. 3 and 4.)2 On December 16, 2009, Dr. Matson
6 sent Qualcomm's counsel a letter indicating that she would not comply with the subpoena without
7 a signed authorization. (Listug Klick 11 4.; Exh. 5.) In an attempt to avoid the present motion, on
8 December 17, 2009, Qualcomm sent Etnyre's counsel a letter asking him to have his client sign
9 an authorization form, which would expedite Qualcomm's retrieval of medical records from
10 certain providers, including Dr. Matson. (Listug Klick Decl. 115; Exh. 6.) She refused. (Listug
11 Klick Decl. 116; Exh. 7.) Although she refused to sign the authorization, Etnyre did not object,
12 did not file a motion to quash, and did not otherwise inform Qualcomm or Dr. Matson that she
13 had any problem with the subpoenas. (Listug Klick Decl. 11 6; Exh. 7.) Indeed, Etnyre sent
14 Qualcomm a letter (andagreed to have the letter sent to Dr. Matson) specifically indicating that
15 she was aware of the subpoena and that she would not object. (Listug Klick Decl. 116; Exh. 7.)
16 Finally, Etnyre's counsel also agreed that, if called, he would again reiterate that she did not
17 object to the production of such documents. (Listug Klick Decl. 117.)
18 Therefore, on January 15, 2010, Qualcomm sent Dr. Matson a letter, once again
19 attempting to procure the subpoenaed documents without Court intervention. (Listug Klick Decl.
20 11 8; Exh. 8.) In it, Qualcomm explained that Dr. Matson did not have a viable legal objection to
21 the subpoena and explained that Etnyre understood the documents had been requested and she did
22 not object to the production (Qualcomm also enclosed her attorney's letter stating the same).
23 (Listug Klick Decl. 11 8.) Unfortunately, Dr. Matson responded on January 22, 2010, that she still
24 would not produce such documents, and would not do so without a signed authorization. (Listug
25 Klick Decl. 11 9; Exh. 9.) Since Etnyre has refused to provide the same, the present motionwas
26
i Notably, Ms. Etnyre provided Dr. Matson's name as a relevant witness in response to more than 30
27 interrogatories. Qualcomm has underlined the responses in Exhibits 1 and 2 for ease of reference.
2 Qualcomm also issued subpoenas to three other medical providers at that time.
28
PAUL, PLEVIN, 2
CONNAUGHTON LLP
.
1 necessary.
III.
2
3 DR. MATSON SHOULD BE COMPELLED TO COMPLY WITH THE SUBPOENA
4 Personal service of a deposition subpoena obligates any resident of California to appear,

5 testify and produce whatever documents or things are specified in the subpoena. (Code Civ. Pro.
6 § 2020.220(c).) If a nonparty disobeys a deposition subpoena, the subpoenaing party may seek a
7 court order compelling the nonparty to comply with the subpoena. (Code Civ. Pro. §
8 2025.480(b); Unzipped Apparel, LLC v. Bader (2007)156 Cal.App.4th 123, 131 [California Code
9 of Civil Procedure section 2025.480 applies to deposition subpoenas where the subpoena only
10 , requires a production of business records].) While there is a"good cause" requirement for
11 motions to compel document discovery from apar(y, "there is apparently no such requirement on
12 a motion to compel a nonparly to comply with a deposition subpoena for document production."
13 (Weil & Brown, Cal. Prac. Guide: Civ. Pro. Before Trial, 8:609.3.)
14 Here, Dr. Matson has summarily - without legally viable justification - simply refused to
15 respond to a properly-issued subpoena.3 (Listug Klick Decl. 111 4,8,9; Exhs. 5, 8,9.) Because
16 Qualcomm is entitled to the discovery it seeks, Dr. Matson should be compelled to produce any
17 responsive documents.
18 A. Etnyre's Medical Records are Relevant.
19 It is well established that a person's health records (mental and physical) are discoverable
20 if aplaintiff puts her health in dispute in a lawsuit. (See In re Lvschutz (1970)2 Cal.3d 415,432-
21 434; People v. Mickle (1991) 54 Cal.3d 140, 190 ["it would be unfair to allow the patient to
22 describe at length to the jury the details.of his supposed ailment, and then neatly suppress the
23 available proof,1 ; see also Fremont Indem. Co. v. Sup. Ct. (Shad) (1982) 137 Cal.App.3d 554,
24 560; Evid. Code § 1016(a) I"There is no privilege under this article as to a communication
25 relevant to an issue concerning the mental or emotional condition of the patient if such issue has
26 been tendered by the patient"l.) Indeed, a patient's failure to object, in and of itself, constitutes
27
3 According to the Code, Qualcomm could actually move for a finding of contempt and penalty for Dr.
28
Matson's failure to obey the subpoena. (Code Civ. Proc. §§ 2020.240,1992; Evid. Code § 1560(e).)
PAUL, PLEVIN, 3
CONNAUGHTON up
..
.
1 waiver of any psychotherapist-patient privilege. Unabnit v. Berkson (1988) 199 Cal.App.3d 1230,
2 1239 [after being given opportunity to object to subpoena, failure to do so waives
3 psychotherapist-patient privilege].)
4 In her complaint against Qualcomm, Etnyre claimed, among other things, that Qualcomm
5 is liable for allegedly severe emotional injuries. (See, e.g., Complaint 111115-83.) Further, Etnyre
6 specifically identified Dr. Matson in discovery as an individual with information relevant to her
7 claims in this matter. (Exhs. 1,2.) When asked to identify"every doctor, psychiatrist, therapist,
8 counselor, or medical or healthcare professional of any kind that [shel had visited because of any
9 injury that [she claimed] resulted from any conduct alleged in [her] complaint," she provided Dr.
10 Matson's information. (Exh. 1, p. 6:5-10,17.) Finally, Etnyre was provided with a copyofthe
11 i subpoena in advance of its service and failed to object - and indicated this was deliberate. (Exh.
12 7.)
13 Based on these allegations, Etnyre has clearly put her mental state at issue in her lawsuit
14 against Qualcomm, and her mental health records are discoverable by Qualcomm. Thus,
15 Qualcomm is entitled to a copy of Dr. Matson's records regarding Etnyre.
16 B. Qualcomm has Complied with HIPAA's Requirements for Disclosure Without
17 Authorization.
18 Dr. Matson's only objection is purportedly based on the Health Insurance Portability and
19 i Accountability Act ("HIPAA") and is wholly Without merit. HIPAA provides that Protected
20 Health Information ("PHI") can be disclosed in various circumstances. As relevant here, PHI can
21 be disclosed:
22 without the written authorization ofthe individual...:(e)...(ii) in

response to a subpoena...if...[the provider] receives satisfactory
23 assurance...from the party seeking the information that reasonable
efforts have been made by such party to ensure that the individual
24 who is subject ofthe protected health information that has been
requested has been given notice of the request..."
25
26 45 C.F.R. subtit. A, § 154.512(e) (Oct. 1,2007) (emphasis added); see also Kaiinoski v. Evans
27 (2005) 377 F.Supp.2d 136,139 [order enforced defendant's subpoena requesting medical notes].)
28 Here, Qualcomm has not just made reasonable efforts, but has actually notified Etnyre of
PAUL, PLEVIN, 4
CONNAUGHTON LLP
1 the subpoena, she has failed to object, and she has indicated that she will not object. As
2 evidenced by the Notice to Consumer served on Dr. Matson's office with the subpoena,
3 Qualcomm provided notice ofthe subpoena to Etnyre, through her counsel, on December 3,2009.
4 (Exh. 3.) Pursuant to the Notice, Etnyre had five days to object before Qualcomm served the
5 subpoena on Dr. Matson. She did not. Indeed, on December 22,2009, Qualcomm received a
6 letter from Etnyre's counsel indicating that she understood the records were relevant and that she
7 did not, and will not, object to their production. (Exh. 7.)
8 Thus, HIPAA does not provide a basis for Dr. Matson to withhold necessary discovery
9 from Qualcomm, and this Court should compel her to produce her records pursuant to the
10 subpoena.
IV.
11
11
12 QUALCOMM IS ENTITLED TO REASONABLE ATTORNEYS' FEES
13 California Code of Civil Procedure section 2025.480(f) provides that a court"shall
14 impose a monetary sanction" against persons who unsuccessfully oppose a motion to compel,
15 unless that person makes a showing of "substantial justification." (Code Civ. Proc. § 2025.480(f)
16 [emphasis added].) Such sanctions are to be awarded pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section
17 2023.010, which specifically provides that it is a misuse of the discovery process to "fai10 to
18 respond or submit to an authorized method of discovery." (Code Civ. Proc. § 2025.010.) At the
19 very least, Dr. Matson should be sanctioned theamount of $500.00 pursuant to Code of Civil
20 Procedure section 1992, as indicated, in bold capital letters on the face of the subpoena. (Code
21 Civ. Proc.§ 2020.240 [incorporating Section 1992 fine of $500 for non-party deposition
22 subpoenas].)
23 Here, Dr. Matson willfully failed to respond to a lawfully-issued deposition subpoena.

24 Despite being informed of the legal infirmities of her objection, she persisted, making this motion
25 necessary. Accordingly, fees are appropriate, and Qualcomm requests an award of reasonable
26 attorneys' fees in the amount of $11,800.00.
27 Ill '
28 1:l I
PAUL, PLEVIN, 5
CONNAUGHTON'up
,
V.
CONCLUSION
Based on the foregoing, Qualcomm respectfully requests that this Court compel non-party
44 Dr. Judith Matson to produce all documents requested in the subpoena and to award reasonable
5 attorneys' fees.
6
Dated: February 16, 2010 PAUL, PLEVIN, SW,LIVAN &
7 8
7
CONN'#PV"VE,pr
L,MICAEJLS. SULLIVAN
MET tsSA LISTUG KLICK
..10 Attorneys for Defendant
··f , .11,1:
''.12
,-. 13
14
13
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
;. :23
24
25
26
27
28
PAUL, PLEVIN, 6
CONNAUGHTON up
. -t-.9
. fr' FILED
CIVT[ BUSINESS OFFICE 8
CENTRAL 27:,2:-3;
MELISSA LISTUG KLICK (SBN 228470) 10 FEB 16 PM 3: 23
401 B Street, Tenth Floor CLERK-SUPERIOR LOURE
3 San Diego, California 92101-4232 SAN DIEGO COUk fv Ca
Telephone: 619-237-5200
4 Facsimile: 619-615-0700

6

8
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

9
11 Plaintiff, DECLARATION OF MELISSA LISTUG

KLICK IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO
12 V. COMPEL MEDICAL RECORDS AND
REQUEST FOR ATTORNEYS' FEES
individually, QUALCOMM Incorporated, a nax, St, ,@610 3%1-
14 Delaware corporation and DOES 1 through Date: Apru-44201*
40, inclusive, Time: 16,9-Bal&.$- 11:OOQ'PH'Q
Dept: 70
15
17
18
19 I, Melissa J. Listug Klick, declare:
20 1. I am an associate in the law firm of Paul, Plevin, Sullivan & Connaughton LLP,
21 attorneys of record for Defendant Qualcomm Incorporated ("Qualcomm") in the above-entitled
22 matter, and am licensed to practice before this Court. I have personal knowledge ofthe following
23 facts and, if called as a witness, could and would testify competently thereto.
24 2. On December 3,2009, I signed and served Courtney Etnyre with various
25 interrogatories on behalf of Qualcomm. In response to questions regarding her alleged emotional
26 and physical injuries, Ms. Etnyre answered that she suffered from various emotional, physical and
27 behavioral symptoms as a result of the alleged conduct of Qualcomm. For example, attached as
28 Exhibits 1 and 2 to the accompanying notice of lodgment ofexhibits are Ms. Etnyre's responses
PAUL, PLEVIN, 1
SULLIVAN & Declaration ofMelissa Listug Klick ISO Motion to
CONNAUGHTON up Compel Medical Records
..
1 to Special Interrogatories and Form Interrogatories - General. Ms. Etnyre also responded that she
2 sought medical attention from Dr. Judith Matson for her alleged injuries.
3 3. On December 3,2009, I issued a subpoena to Dr. Matson and served it, along
4 with a Notice to Consumer, on Ms. Etnyre. Attached as Exhibit 3 to the accompanying notice of . l
5 lodgment of exhibits is a true and correct copy of the Deposition Subpoena For Production of
6 Business Records, Notice to Consumer, and accompanying proof of service issued to Di Matson.
7 At that time, I also issued subpoenas to three other medical providers. We did not receive any
8 objections from Ms. Etnyre. Therefore, on December 9,2009, Qualcomm served Dr. Matson
9 with a subpoena to retrieve Ms. Etnyre's medical records. Attached as Exhibit 4 to the
10 accompanying notice of lodgment of exhibits is a true and correct copy of subpoena and
11 accompanying documents served on Dr. Matson, along with the proof of service on Dr. Matson.
12 4. On December 16, 2009, Dr. Matson sent Qualcomm's counsel a letter indicating I
13 that she would not comply with the subpoena without a signed authorization. Attached as Exhibit
14 5 to the accompanying notice of lodgment ofexhibits is a true and correct copy of Dr. Matson's
15 letter.
16 5. In an attemptto avoid the present motion, on December 17, 2009, I sent Ms.
17 Etnyre's counsel a letter asking him to 'have his client sign an authorization form, which would
18 expedite Qualcomm's retrieval of medical records from certain providers, including Dr. Matson.
19 Attached as Exhibit 6 to the accompanying notice of lodgment of exhibits is a true and correct
20 copy of my December 17, 2009 letter to Paul Kondrick, Ms. Etnyre's attorney.
21 6. In response, on December 22,2009, Mr. Kondrick sent us a letter specifically
22 indicating that Ms. Etnyre was aware of the subpoena and that she would not object. However, he
23 refused to have his client sign any authorizations. Attached as Exhibit 7 to the accompanying
24 notice of lodgment of exhibits is a true and correct copy of Mr. Kondrick's December 22,2009
25 letter.
26 7. On January 13,2010, Michael Sullivan and I had a conference call with Mr.
27 Kondrick to discuss various issues, including the authorizations we had sent him on December 17,
28 2009. In the call, Mr. Kondrick reiterated an unbending position that he would never have his
PAUL, PLEVIN, 2
SULLIVAN,&
Declaration of Melissa Listug'Klick ISO Motion to
CONNAUGHTON LLP Compel Medical Records
..
1 clients sign authorizations for records, no matter how relevant, and no matter whether or not he
2 objected to the production. At Qualcomm's request, he agreed that, if called, he would again
3 reiterate that she did not object to the production of such documents and gave Qualcomm
4 permission to send his December 22,2009, letter to the medical providers.
5 8. On January 15, 2010, Qualcomm sent Dr. Matson a letter, once again attempting
6 to procure the subpoenaeddocuments without court intervention. In it, we explained that Dr.
7 Matson did not have a viable legal objection to the subpoena and explained that Ms. Etnyre
8 understood the documents had been requested, and she did not object to the production. In
9 addition, we enclosed her attorney's letter stating the same. Attached as Exhibit 8 to the
10 accompanying notice of lodgment of exhibits is a true and correct copy of my January 15, 2010
11 letter to Dr. Matson.
12 9. Unfortunately, Dr. Matson responded on January 22, 2010, that she still would not
13 produce responsive documents, and would not do so without a signed authorization. She did not
14 address the legal authority cited by Qualcomm, nor did she provide any contrary authority in her
15 letter. Rather, she simply refused to comply and attached her first letter. Attached as Exhibit 9 to
16 the accompanying notice oflodgment of exhibits is atrue and correct copy ofDr. Matson's
17 January 22, 2010 letter.
18 10. Since that time, Qualcomm also subpoenaed the records of two additional medical
19 providers named by Ms. Etnyre in response to discovery: WellPoint and Sharp Mesa Vista
20 Hospital. We have not yet received these records, and Sharp Mesa Vista Hospital has indicated it
21 does not intend to respond. Thus, we will be meeting and conferring with these providers, as
22 well, because we presume that Mr. Kendrick will not alter his refusal to have Ms. Etnyre sign the
23 necessary authorizations.
24 11. As aresult of Dr. Matson's refusal to comply with a legally enforceable subpoena
25 or to provide any legally viable justification for this failure, Qualcomm has incurred, and will
26 incur, reasonable attorneys' fees in regard to the preparation of this motion. My billing rate is
27 $225.00 per hour, and I have spent approximately 4 hours preparing this motion, and will spend
28 additional time preparihg a reply and appearing for oral argument. In addition, another associate
PAUL, PLEVIN,
SULLIVAN &
Declaration of Melissa Listug Klick ISO Motion to 3
CONNAUGHTON LLP Compel Medical Records
..
1 in our office, Emily Fox, has spent approximately 5 hours preparing this motion. Her billing rate
2 is $180.00 per hour. Accordingly, Qualcomm requests this Court award sanctions against Dr.
3 Matson in the total amount of $1,800 ([$225 x 4 hours] + [$180.00 x 5 hours] = $1,800.00).
4 Qualcomm will file a supplemental declaration with its reply brief, if necessary.
5 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the
7 Executed on February 16, 2010, at San Diego, C
9 e ssa g Klick
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
it
24
25
26
27
28
PAUL, PLEVIN, 4
SULLIVAN & Declaration of Melissa Listug Klick ISO Motion to
CONNAUGHTON LD Compel Medical Records
·Sh · FILED
. VIL BUSINESS OFFICE 8
CE N T R AL D 1'\'' ! S I.ON
10 FEB 16 PM 3: 23
2 PAUL, PLEVIN, SULLIVAN & CONNAUGHTON LLP CLERK-SUPERi OF: 1.(,Ei< F
SAN DIEGO COUN. F V. e +
3
401 B Street,
San Diego, California 92101-4232 Tenth Floor ©
Telephone: 619-237-5200
4 Facsimile: 619-615-0700

6

8
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

9
11 Plaintiff, NOTICE OF LODGMENT OF NON-

CALIFORNIA AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT
12 V. OF MOTION TO COMPEL MEDICAL
RECORDS AND REQUEST FOR
ATTORNEYS' FEES
40, inclusive, Date: ]=4#talo *34
15 Time: A .49:rs=: I T. 00 f4 YM 31
Defendants. Dept: 70

17
18
19 TO PLAINTIFF AND HER ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:
20 Defendant Qualcomm Incorporated hereby lodges the following non-California authorities
21 in support of its motion to compel medical records:
22 1. Kalinoski v. Evans (2005) 377 F.Supp.2d 136; and
23 2. 45 C.F.R. subtit. A, § 154.512 (Oct. 1,2007).
PAUL, S U\IAN &

24 Dated: February 16, 2010
CONN U N
25
Y
26 C. SULLIVAN
A LISTUG KLICK
28
PAUL, PLEVIN, 1
SULLIVAN & Notice of Non-California Authorities:in Support of
CONNAUGHTON LLP Motion to Compel Medical Records
.

Telephone: 619-237-5200
4 Facsimile: 619-615-0700

6
02
3 03%
7 Zin -r, mr
rn ZI --1 C
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA m u>
8 CDC-
0-0
- -1.W=3
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO , u rn
9
c 25 C)
CASE NO. 37-2009-00101537-(fE-CYL

-rl
10 COURTNEY S. ETNYRE, -n
-
11 Plaintiff, NOTICE OF LODGMENT QHIMTS IK

SUPPORT OFMOTION T(EDOMPEL
12 V. MEDICAL RECORDS AND REQUEST FOR
ATTORNEYS' FEES

Date:
40, inclusive, Time: 4-;»rm;. tr.Lis<.v,Jab
Dept: 70
15
Defendants. Judge: Jay M. Bloom
17
18
19
20
Defendant QUALCOMM Incorporated ("Qualcomm") hereby lodges the following
21
exhibits in support of its motion to compel medical records:
22
Exhibit 1: Ms. Etnyre's responses to Qualcomm's Special Interrogatories;
23
Exhibit 2: Ms. Etnyre's responses to Qualcomm's Form Interrogatories - General;
24
Exhibit 3': Notice to Consumer, Deposition Subpoena for Production of Business
25
Records, and accompanying proof of service served on Ms. Etnyre;
26
Exhibit 4: Deposition Subpoena for Production of Business Records, Notice to
27
Consumer with Proof of Service and accompanying proof of service served on Dr. Matson on
28
PAUL, PLEVIN, 1
SULLIVAN & Notice of Lodgment of Exhibits ISO Motion to
Compel Medical Records
. .
1 December 9,2009;
2 Exhibit 5: December 16,2009 letter from Dr. Matson to Melissa Listug Klick;
3 Exhibit 6: December 17,2009 letter to Paul Kondrick from Melissa Listug Klick;
4 Exhibit 7: December 22,2009 letter from Paul Kondrick to Melissa Listug Klick;
5 Exhibit 8: January 15, 2010 letter to Dr. Matson from Melissa Listug Klick;
6 Exhibit 9: January 22, 2010 letter from Dr. Matson to Melissa Listug Klick.

8 CONNAUGHTO LP
10
BY:
11 . 131:LW AN
LIS A ISTUG KLICK
12 A ys for Defendant
13
14
, 15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PAUL, PLEVIN, 2
SULLIVAN & Notice of Lodgment of Exhibits ISO Motion to
CONNAUGHTONLLP Compel Medical Records
LAW OFFICES -
H. PAUL KONDRICK
PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
Februarf2010
Hand-Delivered Via Messenger
Christine Porter
San Diego Superior Court
Civil Business Office
330 W. Broadway
San Diego, CA 92101
Re: Courtney Etnyre v. Sandip Minhas, et al.; San Diego Superior Court Case No.
: 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL
...
Dear Ms. Porter:
Per your request, enclosed is'the original and conformed copy ofthe previously filed Plaintiffs
Motion for Order Quashing or Modifying Defendant's Civil Subpoenas for Production of Business
Records Pertaining to Her Prior Employment, and to Award Monetary Sanctions, including notice of
motidn, memorandum of points and authorities and supporting declaration of H. Paul Kondrick. You
will also find enclosed the $40 check for the motion filing fee dated December 23,2009. Finally, We are
returning to you the unsigned SDSC ADM-53 form dated February 10, 2010, indicating that the motion
was "vacated 2/2/10 by dept 75." It is important to know that our office originally fled the motion
on December 23,2009 in order, to automatically stay the production of our client's personnel
records from five (5) previous emplbyers, pursuant to subpoenas issued by defense counsel. The
timing ofthe filing was, and is, critical to suspending the enforcement ofthose subpoenas.
By way.of background on December 18, 2009, at approximately 10:50 a.m., bur office left a
message for the Hon. Richard E.L. Strauss's Calendar Clerk, Melissa, to secure a hearing date for the
Motion to Quash. Melissa returned our call on December 21, 2009 at approximately 3:05 p.m. During
that call, the motion was scheduled for March 12, 2010 at 1:30 pm with oral argument proceeding on
March 19,2010 at 1:30 p.m. On December 23,2009, our office filed the motion.
4
On February 11, 2010, our messenger service (advanced Attorney Service) returned our moving
papers, filing-fee and the before-mentioned return slip from the San Diego Superior Court Civil Business
Office stating that our papers could not beprocessed because Department 75 vacated our hearing date on
February 2, 2010. During a phdne conversation this morning, Melissa in Department 75 informed me
that their department did not vacate the hearing date.
Today, at approximately 2:30 p.m., our office spoke with Clara Banks in Department 71 (because
Department 70 was dark) and scheduled the motion to quash for May 28,2010 at 11:00-Em. in
Department 70. In our view, the motion papers should never have been returned to our office, but
rather, the motion should be re-filed nuncpro tunc. Thank you for your attention to this matter.
-
, . Very truly yours, -
Candice Caufield
Legal Assistant to H. Paul Kondrick, Esq.
CEC:cc
,
Enclosures-
3130 FOURTH AVENUE 0' SAN DIEGO, CA 92103-5803 0 (619) 291--2400 0 FAX (619)291-7123
/SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORIV
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO I
CENTRAL
MINUTE ORDER

Fl L ED
Judicial Officer Presiding: Judge Jeffrey B. Barton r,--'· .,4„n R,Innrlor Court
Clerk: Cynthia Rein
FEB 0 4 7010
Bailiff/Court Attendant: not present
ERM: By: C. REIN, Deputy
Reporter: not reported
Event Type: Ex Parte
Appearances:
There are no appearances by any party.
The Court recuses itself under Code of Civil Procedure §170.1 (a) (3). The matter is sent for
reassignment.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
r#r- 86:E 3
JUDGE OF THE SAN DIEGO SUPERIOR COURT

Dept: C-69 Calendar No.:
.
PERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA

COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
CENTRAL
MINUTE ORDER

Bailiff/Court Attendant: Scot Parriott

ERM:
Event Type: Ex Parte; Ex Parte
Appearances:

Ex-parte application for order directing that the timing of plaintiffs deposition be conditioned on
defendant, Qualcomm Incorporated producing documents to allow plaintiff to refresh her r.ecollection
requested by Courtney S. Etnyre.
Ex-parte application for compelling deposition of plaintiff Courtney Etnyre requested by Qualcomm
Incorporated.

Dept: C-70 Calendar No.: 5
.
Calendar No.: 4
Court Use Only

County of San Diego
SIGN-IN SHEET
EVENT TYPE: Ex Parte EVENT DATE,TIME: 02/03/2010 8:30 am
JUDGE: Jay M. Bloom

DEPARTMENT: C-70
ATTORNEY/PARTICIPANT NAME CLIENT NAME
Klick, Melissa Listu

M ir.ka, 1 Svilivqn
Qualcomm Incorporated [DFN]
9:24.1 16-9.: /4
Kondrick, M. raul Etnyre, Courtney S et. al. [PLN]
1\1 J--1»1
L.,doM'O 21' I %>A'LA< A'J
U
*
MOCS#:5
.
Calendar No.: 6
Court Use Only

County of San Diego
SIGN-IN SHEET
CASE: 37-2009-00101537-CW-OE-CTL - Courtney S Etnyre vs. Sandip Minhas
EVENT TYPE: Ex Parte EVENT DATE/TIME: 02/03/2010 8:30 am
JUDGE: Jay M. Bloom

DEPARTMENT: C-70
ATTORNEY/PARTICIPANT NAME CUENT NAME SIGNATURE /--Dn
Klick, Melissa Listug,1 '

M 82,- S 41 Il I J \
Qualcomm Incorporated [DFN]
«»6
Etnyre, Courtney Set al. [PLN]
-7*0711 4,2-1__
ZILBERMAN. LEONID Minhas, Sandip [DFN]
600,wi -24./4*u*•4,•-1
MOCS #:6
FOR COURT USE ONLY
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
STREET ADDRESS: 330 West Broadway
MAILING ADDRESS: 330 West Broadway
CITY AND ZIP CODE: San Diego, CA 92101

BRANCH NAME: Central
TELEPHONE NUMBER: (619) 450-7075
PLAINTIFF(S) : Courtney S Etnyre
DEFENDANT(S) : Sandip Minhas et:al

02/02/2010
COURTNEY S ETNYRE VS. SANDIP MINHAS
I.
CASE NUMBER:
NOTICE OF CASE REASSIGNMENT

37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL
Filed: 11/02/2009
EFFECTIVE IMMEDIAT.ELY, THE ABOVE-ENTITLED CASE HAS BEEN REASSIGNED
to Judge ¥uri,Hofmann, in Department C-60
due to the following reason: Recusal
All subsequent documents filed in this case must include the name of the new judge and the department number on the first
page immediately below the number of the case. All counsel and self-represented litigants are advised that Division 11 of the
Superior Count Rules is strictly enforced. It is the duty of each plaintiff (and cross-complainant) to serve a copy of this notice
with the complaint (and cross-complaint).
ANY NEW HEARINGS ON THIS CASE WILL BE SCHEDULED BEFORE THE NEW JUDICIAL OFFICER
Page: 1
(Rev 8-06)
Central
330 West Broadway
San Diego, CA 92101
SHORT TITLE: Etnyre vs. Minhas
CASE NUMBER:
CLERK'S CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE BY MAIL
37-2009-00101537-CO-OE-CTL
I certify that I am not a party to tbis cause. I certify that a true copy of the NOTICE OF CASE REASSIGNMENT
was mailed following standard court practices in, a sealed envelope with postage fully prepaid, addressed as
indicated below. The certification occured at San Diego, California: on 02/02/2010. The mailing occured at
Sacramento, California on 02/03/2010.
--644
Clerk of the Court, by: -- -0 Uin , Deputy
H. Paul Kondrick Melissa Listug Klick

3130 FOWRTH AVENUE 401 B STREET TENTH FLOOR
SAN DIEGO, CA 92103-5803 SAN DIEGO, CA 92101-4232
Page: 2
.
FOR COURT USE ONLY
SUPERIOR COURTOF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
BRANCHiNAME: Central
DEFENDANT(S) : Sandip Minhas et.al.

02/02/2010
CASE NUMBER:

37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL
Filed: 11/02/2009
EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY, THE ABOVE-ENTITLED CASE HAS BEEN REASSIGNED
to Judge Jay M. Bloom, in Department C-70
Superior Court Rules is strictly enforced. It is the duty of each plaintiff (and cross-complainant) to serve a copy of this notice
Page: 1
(Rev 8-06)
1
.
Central
330 West Broadway
San, Diego, CA 92101
CASE NUMBER:
37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL
I certify that I am not a party to this cause.'1 certify that a true copy of the NOTICE OF CASE REASSIGNMENT
was mailed following 'standard' court practices in a sealed envelope with postage fully prepaid, addressed as
indicated below. The certification occured at San Diego, California on 02/02/2010. The mailing occured at
Clerk of the Court, by: D. Um

, Deputy
H. Paul,Kondrick Melissa Listug Klick

3130 FOURTH AVENUE 401 B STREET TENIH FLOOR
Page: 2
.
FOR COURT USE ONLY
MAIUNG ADDRESS: 330 West Broadway

Central
BRANCH NAME:
TELIEPHONE NUMBER: (619) 450-7075

02/02/2010
CASENUMBER:

37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL
F.iled: 11/02/2009
to Judge Jeffrey B. Barton, in Department C-69
Superior Court Rulesis strictly enforced. Itis the duty of each plaintiff (and cross-complainant) to serve a copy of this notice
Page: 1
(Rev 8-06) NOTICE OF CASE REASSIGNMENT
.

Central
330 West Broadway
San Diego, CA 92101
CASE NUMBER:
37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL
I certify that I am not a party to this cause. I certify that a true copy of the NOTICE OF CASE REASSIGNMENT
was mailed following, standard court practices in a sealed envelope with postage fully prepaid, addressed as
indicated ibelow. The certification occured at San Diego, California on 02/02/2010. The mailing occwred at
Sacramentq, 'California on 02/03/2010.
_GAULL*
Clerk of the Court, by: D. Um
, Deputy
H. Paul Kondrick Melissa Listug Klick

3130 FOURTH AVENUE 401' B STREET TENTH FLOOR
Page: 2
.
F' L
ED
H. Paul Kondrick, Esq. (State Bar No. 88566)
FEB 0 * 2010
1
H. Paul Kondrick, a Professional Corporation

3
Telephone: (619) 291-2400
By: M. WONG·JIMENEZ, Deptiv
Facsimile: (619) 291-7123
5 FEB 02'10 AM10.49
9
COURTNEY S. ETNYRE, individually ) Case No. 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL
10 )
Plaintiff, ) PLAINTIFF'S EX PARTE
11 ) APPLICATION FOR ORDER
V. DIRECTING THAT THE TIMING
12 ) OF PLAINTIFF'S DEPOSITION BE
SANDIP ("MICKEY") MINHAS, individually, CONDITIONED ON DEFENDANT,
13 QUALCOMM Incorporated, a Delaware ) QUALCOMM INCORPORATED,
corporation, and DOES 1 through 40, inclusive, PRODUCING DOCUMENTS TO
14 ALLOW PLAINTIFF TO REFRESH
HER RECOLLECTION
15 Defendants. )
Date: February 3, 2010
16 Time: 8:30 a.m.
Department: DC-75
17 Judge: Hon. Richard E.L. Strauss

19
20 Plaintiff, COURTNEY ETNYRE ['*ETNYRE"l, hereby makes exparte application to

21 the above-entitled Court for an order directing that the timing ofplaintiffs deposition be
22 conditioned on defendant QUALCOMM Incorporated ["QUALCOMM"], producing
23 documents to allow plaintiff to refresh hef recollection. In particular, plaintiff seeks an order:
24 (a) directing defendant, QUALCOMM, to produce those documents previously requested by
25 plaintiff in her request for production of documents, by a date certain, so that she can refresh
26 her recollection; and (b) further order that plaintiff, ETNYRE's, deposition to proceed within a
27 specific period, such as one (1) week, after defendant, QUALCOMM, produces its documents
28 and writings. The bases ofplaintiffs application and request are that:
-1- Ex Parte Application

. .
1 1. Plaintiff, ETNYRE, is employed as a paralegal by defendant, QUALCOMM
2 Incorporated I"QUALCOMM"]. She contends that she was sexually assaulted and battered by
3 her immediate supervisor defendant, SANDIP ("MICKEY") MINHAS ["Minhas"], who is also
4 employed as an attorney by defendant, QUALCOMM.
5 2. On November 2,2009, plaintiff filed the above-entitled action.
6 3. On December 1, 2009, defendant QUALCOMM, accepted service of summons
7 and complaint, and on December 3,2009, it noticed plaintiff' s deposition for January 28,2010.
8 Defendant, QUALCOMM, also subpoenaed plaintiff' s employment records from her prior
9 employers on that same date. Plaintiff, ETNYRE, has since moved to quash those subpoenas.
10 4. On December 23,2009, plaintiff served her first request for production of
11 documents on defendant QUALCOMM. Pursuant to plaintiffs document production request,

12 defendant, QUALCOMM, was noticed to produce its writings and documents by January 22,
13 2010.
14 5. The events giving rise to plaintiffs sexual assault and battery, and discrimination
15 claims go back to early-2006.
16 6. During the period 2006-2007, plaintiff, ETNYRE, gave defendant,
17 QUALCOMM, a number of statements in relation to the alleged sexual assault, battery and
18 discrimination claims, some in writing and at least one tape-recorded.
19 7. Because ofthe passage of time from the underlying events giving rise to this
20 lawsuit and the fact that defendant, QUALCOMM, holds written statement from plaintiff,
21 ETNYRE, and in all likelihood a tape-recorded interview of her relative to her claims in this
22 action, it is essential for her to have access to those writings, including tape-recording(s), in
23 order to refresh her recollection as to events.
24 8. In relation to plaintiff' s earlier request for production of documents served on

25 defendant, QUALCOMM, it is essential for her to have access to, and review, the following
26 document categories:
27 • Request No. 1. "The complete personnel file maintained by you on plaintiff,
28 ETNYRE,...";

.
1 • Request No. 3. All writings relative to QUALCOMM's"reasons for placing

2 plaintiff, ETNYRE, on administrative leave on or about September 26,2007."
3 • Request No. 8. All writings relating "to expenses incurred by plaintiff,
4 ETNYRE, or defendant, MINHAS, in relation to their travels to and from New
5 Jersey on your business during the period January and February 2006."
6 • Request No. 15. "All correspondence, including but not limited to, letters,
7 memoranda, or other writings, between or among MINHAS and
8 [QUALCOMM], including notes of any conversations, relating to plaintiff, and
9 in particular any alleged discrimination, retaliation or harassment of plaintiff
10 during the relevant period."
11 • Request No. 16. "All writings which you, or anyone acting on your behalf,
12 believe evidence, tend to evidence, refer, relate, pertain or concern to your
13 investigation into the alleged sexual or other assault of plaintiff, ETNYRE, by
14 defendant, MINHAS, including but not limited to voice recordings, emails,
15 statements, correspondence, and the like."
16 • Request No. 17. "All writings which... relate, pertain or concern to your
17 investigation into plaintiff' s allegations of harassment, retaliation or
18 discrimination based on sex or gender or disability during the relevant period."
19 • Request No. 28. "All writings which... refer, relate, pertain to your investigation
20 of plaintiffs claims, and in particular correspondence, notes, memoranda, e-
21 mails, calendars, desk calendars or pocket (electronic and otherwise) calendars

22 concerning the suspension, Performance Improvement Plan ("PIP'D, and
23 administrative or disability leave, and your accommodation of plaintiffs
24 disability, during the relevant period."
25 • Request No. 33. "All writings which you, or anyone acting in your behalf,
26 believe evidence, tend to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to statements made by
27 defendant, SANDIP MINHAS, regarding plaintiff, ETNYRE, to the efFect that he

28 wanted to"get in her (ETNYRE)."
1
1,
3 believe evidence, tend to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to threatening, abusive
4 and/or harassing statements made by defendant, MINHAS, to plaintiff,
5 ETNYRE."
6 • Request No. 39. '*All writings which you, or anyone acting in your behalf,
7 believe evidence, tend to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to plaintiff,
8 ElINYRE's, application for worker's compensation benefits."
9 • Request Nos. 41-44. "All writings which... relate or pertain to the Department
10 of Fair Employment and Housing ["DFEH "]" Complaints filed on or about
11 February 23,2007, September 27,2007 and December 5,2008 by plaintiff,
12 ETNYRE.
13 • Request No. 47. "All writings which you, or anyone acting in your behal£
14 believe evidence, tend to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to your investigation(s)
15 of each and every inappropriate physical touching, including assaults or batteries,
16 of your employees, "uninvited kisses", "fondling", having buttocks or private
17 parts of one's body grabbed, and "attempted sexual activity," especially within
18 your Patent Department or group, including plaintiff, ETNYRE, by defendant,
19 MINHAS, during the relevant period."
20 • Request No. 48. "All documents and writings evidencing any statements by, or
21 written or oral communications with, any present or former employee of
22 QUALCOMM concerning any of the matters alleged in the complaint herein."
23 • Request No. 49. "Any statements, declarations or affidavits (draft or final,
24 signed or unsigned) received by you or anyone acting on your behalf from any
25 person with knowledge of the matters alleged in the complaint herein."
27 believe evidence, tend to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to plaintiff, ElNYRE,
28 consenting to defendant, MINHAS, having sexual relations with her, in particular

.
2 disclosures by defendant, MINHAS, of his romantic, intimate or sexual
3 relationship(s) to you, either in advance or concurrent with any of those types of
4 relationship between plaintiff and defendant, MINHAS."
5 9. Defendant, QUALCOMM, failed to produce the documents and writings
6 requested pursuant to Plaintiffs first request for production of documents on January 22,-2010,
7 as noticed.
8 10. On Saturday, January 23, 2010, QUALCOMM's attorney, Melissa Klick,
9 delivered a compact disc to plaintiff' s attorney, essentially containing documents unhelpful to
10 plaintiff preparing for her deposition, including to refresh her recollection. For instance, the
11 bulk of the materials on the compact disc, approximately 1300+ pages, consisted of
12 QUALCOMM's "Policies and Procedures" manual or publication, and they were not even
13 produced in a numerical order, that is in the sequence they would appear in a policy and
14 procedure rnanual.
15 11. On January 27, 2010, the parties' counsel conferred by telephone, and plaintiff,
16 ETNYRE, requested that her deposition be put offorrescheduled to adate just a short period
17 after QUALCOMM produced its documents, or at least those documents memorializing or
18 referring to plaintiff's statements and QUALCOMM's investigation of the events giving rise to
19 this lawsuit, namely plaintifs alleged sexual assault and battery and discrimination. To date,
20 defendant, QUALCOMM, has been unable to even state a date certain by which it will produce
21 all, or even basis a substantial part of the documents requested by plaintiff.
22 12. Plaintifftimely notified defendant, QUALCOMM, that she is requesting "that the
23 Court: (a) set a deadline for defendant, QUALCOMM, to produce documents responsive to
24 plaintiffs December 23,2009 request for production of documents; and (b) stay the taking of
25 plaintiffs deposition until defendant, QUALCOMM, especially produces those documents
26 salient to the alleged sexual assault and battery, and sexual discrimination, harassment and
27 retaliation."
28 The exparte application is supported by the accompanying declaration of H. Paul

1
2 Kondrick and memorandum ofpoints and authorities.
3 Respectfully submitted,
4 H. Paul Kondrick,
A Professional Corporation'
LK
5
6
Dated: February 2, 2010 BY:
AN
7 H. Paul Kondrick
Attorney for Plaintiff, COURTNEY S.
8 ETNYRE
9 DECLARATION OF H. PAUL KONDRICK
10 I, H. Paul Kondrick, declare as follows:
11 1. I am an attorney at law duly licensed to practice before all of the courts ofthe
12 State of California, and I am attorney of record for plaintiff, COURTNEY ETNYRE [hereinafter
13 "ETNYRE"], in the above-entitled action. I am familiar with the pleadings in the above-
14 entitled matter, and in particular the discovery relative to the above-entitled matter.
15 2. Plaintiff, ETNYRE, is employed as a paralegal by defendant, QUALCOMM
16 Incorporated ["QUALCOMM"]. She contends that she was sexually assaulted and battered by
17 her immediate supervisor defendant, SANDIP ("MICKEY'") MINHAS ["Minhas"], who is also
18 employed as an attorney by defendant, QUALCOMM.
19 3. On November 2,2009, plaintiff filed the above-entitled action.
20 4. On December 1, 2009, defendant, QUALCOMM, accepted service of summons
21 and complaint, and on December 3,2009, it noticed plaintiffs deposition for January 28, 2010.
22 Defendant QUALCOMM, also subpoenaed plaintiff s employment records from her prior
23 employers on that same date. Plaintiff, ETNYRE, has since moved to quash those subpoenas.
24 5. On December 23,2009, plaintiff served her first request for production of
25 documents on defendant, QUALCOMM. A true and correct copy ofthat document production
26 request is attached hereto as Exhibit"A." Pursuant to plaintifs document production request,
27 defendant, QUALCOMM, was noticed to produce its writings and documents by January 22,
28 2010.

.
2 6. The events giving rise to plaintiffs sexual assault and battery, and discrimination
3 claims go back to early-2006. In the interim, the parties entered into a successive tolling
4 agreements relative to any statutes of limitation.
5 7. Based on informal discovery, I came to understand that during the period 2006
6 -2007, plaintiff, ETNYRE, gave defendant, QUALCOMM, a number of statements in relation to
7 the alleged sexual assault, battery and discrimination claims, some in writing and at least one
8 tape-recorded. Because of a workers' compensation claim filed by plaintiff, ETNYRE,
9 defendant, QUALCOMM' s, private investigator tape-recorded an interview with plaintiff,
10 ETNYRE.
11 8. In my professional view, because ofthe passage oftime from the underlying
12 events giving rise to this lawsuit and the fact that defendant, QUALCOMM, holds written
13 statement from plaintiff, ETNYRE, and in all likelihobd a tape-recorded interview of her
14 relative to her claims in this action, it is essential for her to have access to those writings,
15 including tape-recording(s), in order to refresh her recollection as to events.
16 9. In relation to plaintiff' s earlier request for production of documents served on
17 defendant, QUALCOMM, in my view, it is essential for her to have access to, and review, the
18 following document categories:
19 • Request No. 1. "The complete personnel file maintained by you on plaintiff,
20 ETNYRE,...";
21 • Request No. 3. All writings relative to QUALCOMM's "reasons for placing
22 plaintiff, ETNYRE, on administrative leave on or about September 26,2007."
23 • Request No. 8. All writings relating '*to expenses incurred by plaintiff,
24 ETNYRE, or defendant, MINHAS, in relation to their travels to and from New
25 Jersey on your business during the period January and February 2006."
26 • Request No. 15. "All correspondence, including but not limited to, letters,
27 memoranda, or other writings, between or among MINHAS and
28 [QUALCOMM], including notes of any conversations, relating to plaintiff, and

.
2 in particular any alleged discrimination, retaliation or harassment of plaintiff
3 during the relevant period."
4 0
Request No. 16. "All writings which you, or anyone acting on your behalf,
5 believe evidence, tend to evidence, refer, relate, pertain or concern to your
6 investigation into the alleged sexual or other assault of plAintiff, ETNYRE, by
7 defendant, MINHAS, including but not limited to voice recordings, emails,
8 statements, correspondence, and the like."
9 .
Request No. 17. "All writings which... relate, pertain or concern to your
10 investigation into plaintiff's allegations of harassment, retaliation or
11 discrimination based on sex or gender or disability during the relevant period."
12 Request No. 28. "All writings which... refer, relate, pertain to your investigation
13 of plaintiffs claims, and in particular correspondence, notes, memoranda, e-
14 mails, calendars, desk calendars or pocket (electronic and otherwise) calendars
15 concerning the suspension, Performance Improvement Plan ("PIP"), and

·21
16 administrative or disability leave, and your accommodation of plaintiff' s
17 disability, during the relevant period."
18 .
Request No. 33. "All writings which you, or anyone acting in your behalf,
19 believe evidence, tend to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to statements made by
20 defendant, SANDIP MINIAS, regarding plaintiff, ETNYRE, to the effect that he
21 wanted to"get in her (ETNYRE)."
22 .
23 believe evidence, tend to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to threatening, abusive
24 and/or harassing statements made by defendant, MINHAS, to plaintiff,
25 ETNYRE."
26 .
27 believe evidence, tend to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to plaintiff,
28 ETNYRE's, application for worker's compensation benefits."

.
2 • Request Nos. 41 -44. "All writings which... relate or pertain to the Department
3 of Fair Employment and Housing ["DFEH"]" Complaints filed on or about
4 February 23,2007, September 27,2007 and December 5,2008 by plaintiff,
5 ETNYRE.
7 believe evidence, tend to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to your investigation(s)
8 of each and every inappropriate physical touching, including assaults or batteries,
9 of your employees, "uninvited kisses", "fondling", having buttocks or private
10 parts of one's body grabbed, and"attempted sexual activity," especially within
11 your Patent Department or group, including plaintiff, ETNYRE, by defendant,
12 MINHAS, during the relevant period."
13 • Request No. 48. "All documents and writings, evidencing any statements by, or
14 written or oral communications with, any present or former employee of
15 QUALCOMM concerning any of the matters alleged in the complaint herein."
16 • Request No. 49. "Any statements, declarations or affidavits (draft or final,
17 signed or unsigned) received by you or anyone acting on your behalf from any
18 person with knowledge of the matters alleged in the complaint herein."
20 believe evidence, tend to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to plaintiff, ETNYRE,
21 consenting to defendant, MINHAS, having sexual relations with her, in particular
22 disclosures by defendant, MINHAS, of his romantic, intimate or sexual
23 relationship(s) to you, either in advance or concurrent with any of those types of
24 relationship between plaintiff and defendant, MINHAS."
25 10. Defendant QUALCOMM, failed to produce the documents and writings
26 requested pursuant to Plaintiff's first request for production of documents on January 22, 2010,
27 as noticed. Accordingly, on January 20, 2010, I directed an e-mail to opposing counsel,
28 Michael Sullivan inquiring into the status of the document production. A true and correct copy

. .
2 ofthat e-mail is attached hereto as Exhibit *'B."
3 11. On Saturday, January 23, 2010, QUALCOMM's attorney, Melissa Klick,
4 delivered a compact disc to our law office. I immediately inserted the compact disc into our
5 computer, and spent the better part of 2 hours that afternoon reviewing the disc. I opened and
6 reviewed approximately 1697 pages of tif-formatted documents. Based on our review or
7 inspection ofthose documents, they were unhelpful to plaintiff preparing for her deposition,
8 including to refresh her recollection. For instance, the bulk of the materials on the compact disc,
9 approximately 1300+ pages, consisted of QUALCOMM's "Policies and Procedures" manual
10 or publication, and they were not even produced in a numerical order, that is in the sequence
11 they would appear in a policy and procedure manual. Moreover, the initial 464 pages of the
12 document production consisted of what could be characterized as a partial personnel file, e.g.,
13 payroll records, some performance evaluations, some e-mails and correspondence pertaining to
14 plaintif s disability leave of absence, and the like. I immediately sent a confinning e-mail to
15 Attorney Klick dated January 23, 2010, true and correct copy ofwhich is attached hereto as
16 Exhibit "C."
17 12. In my e-mail to Attorney Klick, I further raise the issue of whether plaintiff's
18 deposition could, under the circumstances, go forward as noticed, namely on January 284. In
19 particular, I stated the following:
20 "As a final comment, that is for you & Mike Sullivan to seriously consider, pls
21 understand that IF QUALCOMM is not producing all requested documents at this time,
22 especially documents & writings pertaining to Courtney Etnyre's sexual assault and
23 discrimination claims, thenit is highly unlikely that Ms. Etnyre's deposition will proceed
24 on Thursday. I look forward to taking these matters up with you & Mike Sullivan asap
25 on Monday."
26 13. On January 26, 2010, I directed an e-mail to opposing counsel, Atty. Michael
27 Sullivan, a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit"D," in which are
28 requested that we confer not later than January 26, 2010, relative to whether plaintiffs

.
2 deposition to go forward on Thursday, January 28, 2010, in view of QUALCOMM's failure to
3 produce its writings.
4 14. On January 27, 2010, I conferred by telephone with opposing counsel requesting
5 that plaintiff, ETNYRE's's, deposition be put offor rescheduled to a date just a short period
6 after QUALCOMM produced its documents, or at least those documents memorializing or
7 referring to plaintiffs statements and QUALCOMM's investigationofthe events giving rise to
8 this lawsuit, namely plaintiffs alleged sexual assault and battery andl discrimination. We were
9 unable to come to agreement. In particular, during that telephone conversation and conference,
10 counsel for defendant, QUALCOMM, was unable to even state a date certain by which
11 QUALCOMM would produce all, or even basis a substantial part of the documents requested by
12 plaintiff.
13 15. By letter dated and sent by facsimile on February 1, 2010, I advised opposing
14 counsel for the parties, that our office had secured the exparte hearing date and time,
15 Wednesday, February 3, 2010at 8:30 am in Department 75 ofthe San Diego Superior Court
16 located at 301 W. Broadway in downtown San Diego, to request "that the Court: (a) set a
17 deadline for defendant, QUALCOMM, to produce documents responsive to plaintif s
18 December 23,2009 request for production of documents; and (b) stay the taking of plaintiff' s
19 deposition until defendant, QUALCOMM, especially produces those documents salient to the
20 alleged sexual assault and battery, and sexual discrimination, harassment and retaliation." A
21 true and correct copy of my letter to opposing counsel and fax transmission confirmation are
22 attached hereto as Exhibit "E."
23 16. Ifcalled as a witness in the above-entitled matter, I could and would competently
24 testify that the foregoing facts are true and correct within my personal knowledge, except for
25 those matters stated on information, belief or opinion, and as to those matters, I believe the same
26 to be true.
27 Ill
28 ill

. .
2 I declare under penalty ofpedury under the laws ofthe State of California that the
Executed this 2nd day of February, 2010, in San Dieg , California

4-M\-L1 f
4
5
If. Paul Kondrick
6 0
7 MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES
8 THE TRIAL COURT MAY PROPERLY ISSUE A PROTECTIVE ORDER DIRECTING

THAT PLAINTIFF. COURTNEY ETNYRE'S. DEPOSITION BE TAKEN AT A
9 DIFFERENT TIME ON CERTAIN SPECIFIED CONDITIONS. NAMELY DELAYING
HER DEPOSITION UNTIL SHE HAS THE CHANCE TO REVIEW HER EARLIER
10 STATEMENTS. INCLUDING TAPE RECORI*NGS. TO REFRESH HER
RECOLLECTION.
11
Before, after or even during a deposition, "for good cause shown," the court may grant
12
a protective order to control the deposition proceedings or the information obtained

13
thereby. Code ofcivi/ Procedure, #2025.420. The court is further empowered to issue
14
whatever order"justice requires" to protect a party or deponent against"unwarranted
15
annoyance, embarrassment, or oppression, or undue burden and expense.[Code ofCivil

16
Procedure, §2025.420(19. ,
17
If an issue as to priority of discovery, including depositions, arises, then a protective
18
order may be sought under either ofthe following provisions:

19
• "(F)or good cause shown, the court may establish the sequence ana timng of
20
discovery for the convenience of parties and witnesses and in the'imefests of
21
justice." ICode of Civil Procedure, §2019.020(b)¥, and '
22
• "The court, for good cause shown, may make any order that justice requires to
23
protect any party.. from unwarranted annoyance, embarrassment, or oppression,
24
or undue burden and expense. This protective order may include... the following
25
directions:
26
( 1) That the deposition not be taken at all;
27
(2) That the deposition be taken at a different time...;
28
(5) That the deposition be taken only on certain specified terms and
.
2 conditions...." \Code of Civil Procedure, §2025.420(bA.
3 "For good cause shown," the court is empowered to make whatever orders are required,
4 including: "Change the time or place from that stated in the deposition notice...." Code ofcivil
5 Procedure, #2025.620(a). While generally depositions proceed in the order in which they are
6 noticed, if one party is seeking an unfair advantage from the timing of the deposition, the other
7 may seek aprotective order. For instance, in Poeschl v. Superior Court (1964) 229 Cal. App. 2d
8 383,386-387, the court delayed the deposition until deponent had chance to review earlier
9 tape-recorded conversation to refresh his recollection of events.
10 In the present matter, defendant, QUALCOMM, seeks an unfair advantage. It refuses to
11 turn over to plaintiff, ETNYRE, its documents which will permit plaintiff to refresh her
12 recollection of events occurring four (4) years, or more, ago. The Court should not tolerate such
13 conduct.
14 CONCLUSION
15 Based on the foregoing, plaintiff, ETNYRE, requests that the Court: (a) set a deadline .
16 for defendant, QUALCOMM, to produce documents responsive to plaintiff' s December 23,
17 2009 request for production of documents; and (b) stay the taking of plaintiff s deposition until
18 defendant, QUALCOMM, especially producesthose documents salient to the alleged sexual
19 assault and battery, and sexual discrimination, harassment and retaliation.
21 H. Paul Kondrick,
A Professional Corporation:
22
23
Dated: February 2, 2010
24 H. Paul Ko'ndrick
Attorney
ETNYRE
for Plaintiff, COUNEIEY S.
25
26
27
28

.
EXHIBIT A 49
4 :f
1 H. Paul Kondrick, Esq., State Bar No. 88566

2 H. Paul Kendrick, A.P.C.
3130 Fourth Avenue
Telephone: (619) 291-2400
4 Facsimile: (619) 291-7123
5
6

9
10

)
12
Plaintiff, ) PLAINTIFF, COURTNEY S.
13 ) ETNYRE'S, REQUEST FOR
v. ) PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS TO
SANDIP ("MICKEY'l M[NHAS, individually,) INCORPORATED [SET NO. ONE (1)1
15
QUALCOMM Incorporated, a Delaware )
16
)
17 Defendants. )
18
19
Propounding Party: Plaintiff, COURTNEY S. ETNYRE
Responding Party: Defendant, QUALCOMM Incorporated
20
Set No.: One (1)

21
22 TO: All Parties by and through their attorneys ofrecord:

23 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that plaintiff, Courtney S. Etnyre ["ETNYRE"I, requests
24 that defendant QUALCOMM Incorporated, ["QUALCOMM"], produce on January 22, 2010,
25 at 10:00 a.m., at the law offices ofH. Paul Kondrick, A Professional Corporation, located at
26 3130 Fourth Avenue, San Diego, California 92103, the documents and writings set forth with
27
particularity in Exhibit "A" hereto, including to inspect, copy, test, or sample electronically
28
stored information in the possession, custody, or control of de*dant, QUALCOMM.
EXHIBIT A ...0
-1-
1 NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN that within thirty 00) days after service ofthis notice
2 and demand for production and inspection and photocopying of documents and other tangible
3 things, which period is extended by five (5) days where service was made by mail, you shall
4 serve theoriginal ofyour response(s) to the demand ofproduction and inspection of
5 documents and other tangible things on the party making this demand. You shall respond
6 separately to each item or category by statement that you will comply with a particular demand
7 for inspection and any related activities, a representation that you lack the ability to comply
8 with the demand for inspection ofa particular item or category, or an objection to the
10
9 particular item. Each statement of compliance, each representation, and each objection in the
11 response shall bear the same number and be in the same sequence as the corresponding item or
12
category in the demand, but the text ofthat item or category need not be repeated.
13 A statement that the party to whom an inspection has been directed will comply with
14 the particular demand shall state that the production, inspection, and related activity demanded
15 will be allowed, either in whole or in part, and that all documents or things in the demand
16 category that are in the possession, custody, or control of that party and to which no objection
17 is being made will be included in the production. A representation of inability to comply with
18 a particular demand for inspection shall affirm that a diligent search and a reasonable inquiry
19 ' has been made in an effort to comply with that demand. The statement shall also specify
20 whether the inability to comply is because the particular item or category has never existed,
21 has been destroyed, has been lost, misplaced, or stolen, or has never been, or is no longer in
22 the possession, custody or control of the responding party. The statement shall set forth the
23 name and address of any natural person or organization known or believed by that party to
24 have possession, custody or control of that item or category of item.
25
Ifonly part ofan itemorcategory of item in an inspection demand is objectionable, the
26
response shall contain a statement of compliance, or a representation of inability to comply
27
with respect to the remainder of that item or category. If the responding party objects to the
28 demand for inspection of an item or category of item, the response shall (a) identify with
-2-
1 particularity any document, tangible thing, or land, falling within any category of item
2 in the demand to which an objection is being made and (b) set forth clearly the extent of,
3 and the specific ground for, the objection. If an objection is based on a claim ofprivilege,
4
the particular privilege invoked shall be stated. If an objection is based on a statement that the
information soughtis protectedunder Code of Civil Procedure, § 2018.010, et. seq, diatclaim
6
shall be expressly asserted.
7
You shall sign the response under oath unless the oath contains only objections. If you
8 area public or private corporation or partnership or association or governmental' agency, one
9
10 of your officers or agents shall sign the response under oath on your behalf. The response
11
shall comply fully with Code ofCivil Procedure, # 2031.010, et. seq..
12 Ifthe production and photocopying, as necessary, of the requested documents is not
13 completed on the aforementioned date, the production thereof will be continued from day-to-
14 day thereafter at the same time and place, Saturdays, Sundays and holidays excepted, until
15 completed, and in the event of any scheduling conflict of the persons designated to so produce
16 the documents, parties or counsel, then to the earliest mutually convenient date, time and
17 location. The documents or other things requested may be produced hereunder otherwise
18 subject to mutual agreement by the parties, through their counsel.
A Professional Corporati )
Byf_
20
21 Dated: December 23,2009

H. Paul Kondrick
22 Attorney for Plaintiff, Courtney S. Etnyre
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
1
EXHIBIT aA"
2
DEFINITIONS
3
4
reference:
6
1. As used herein, the term "writing" or "writings" or "document" or
7
"documents" shall be defined to include any kind ofhandwriting, typewriting, printing,
8 photostating, photographing, recording, and every other means of recording upon any tangible
9 thing, any form of communication or representation, including letters, words, pictures,
10 symbols or sounds, or combinations thereof, however printed, produced, reproduced, coded or
1 1 stored, of any kind or description, whether sent or received or not, including originals, copies,
12 reproductions, facsimiles, drafts, both sides of any such item, including writings, drawings,
13 graphs, charts, photographs, phone-records, and other data compilations from which
14 information can be obtained, translated, if necessary, through detection devices into
15 reasonably usable form, and further including, without limitation, all objects or tangible things
16 such as computer tapes or disks, compact discs C'CD' s" or '*CD Roms") magnetic tapes,
17 punchcards, computer readouts, microfilms, microfiche, and all other records kept by
18 electronic, photographic or mechanical means, and anything similar to the foregoing, however
19 denominated by you, including but not limited to electronically stored information in the
20 possession, custody, or control of you, or anyone acting on your behalf.
21 If a document has been prepared in more than one copy, and any copy was not
22
identical and is no longer identical with the original by reason of a subsequent notation or
23
other notification of any kind whatsoever, including without limitation, notes or modifications
24
on the margins or back pages thereof, each non-identical copy is considered a separate
25
document for purposes of this document request, and it is to be made available hereunder.
26
"Writings" further includes all drafts and notes, whether typed, printed, handwritten, or
27
otherwise, made in connection with such document or writing, whether used or not.
28
Plaintiff further requests that any electronically stored information be produced in CD,
4
1 CD Roms or thumb drive form.
2 2. Each request contained herein for production of documents extends to any

3 documents in the possession, custody or control of defendant QUALCOMM Incorporated
4 [hereinafter '*QUALCOMM"l. A document is construed to be in its possession, custody or
5
control, if it is in its physical custody, gI if it is in the physical custody of any other person,
6 and defendant QUALCOMM: (a) owns such document in whole or in part; (b) has a right by
7
contract, statute or otherwise to use, inspect, examine or copy such document on any terms;
8 (c) has any understanding, express or implied, that defendant may use, inspect, examine or
9
10
copy such document on any terms; or (d) has, as a practical matter, been able to use, inspect
11
12
writings shall include, without limitation, documents that are in the custody of defendant's
13
14 3. The term "you" or "your" refers to QUALCOMM Incorporated, or any of its

15
predecessors-in-interest or successors-in-interest, and anyone acting on its behalf.
16 4. Whenever used herein, the singular shall include the plural and vice-versa.
17 5. Whenever used herein, "and" may be understood to mean "or," and vice-versa,
18 whenever such instruction results in a broader request for information.
19 6. With respect to each document to which a claim of privilege is asserted,
20 separately, whether in a privilege log or otherwise, state the following:
21
(a) The type of document or writing;
22 (b) Its date, in particular any date set forth on the document or writing evidencing
23 the date on which it was signed or drafted;
24 (c) The name, business address, and present position of its eriginator(s) or
25
author(s);
26 (d) The position of its originator(s) or author(s) at the time the document was
27 prepared;
28
(e) The name, business address and present position of each recipient of the
-5-
1
document;
2
(f) The position of each recipient at the time the document was prepared and the
3
4
(g) A general description ofthe subject matter ofthe document sufficient so that
5
the document may be brought to the Court's attention for means of a motion for
6
order compelling the production of the document;
7
(h) The bases of any claims ofprivilege; and
8
(i) If work-product privilege or immunity is asserted, the proceeding for which the
9
to
7. The term"acting on your behalf' includes, but is not limited to, your
11
investigators, agents, employees, and representatives, and your attorneys and their
12

13
14
8. The term "person" means any natural person, partnership, firm, receiver,
15
corporation, including federal corporation, association trustee, group, organization, or any
entity ofany nature.
16
17
9. The words"concem" or "concerning" include referring to, alluding to,
18
responding to, relating to, connected with, commenting on, in respect of, about, regarding,
19
discussing, showing, describing, mentioning, reflecting, analyzing, constituting, evidencing, or
pertaining to.
20
21 10. The term "policy" means each rule, procedure, or directive, formal or informal,
22 and each common understanding or course of conduct which was recognized as such by you or
23 any third person, or your agents, or other persons acting or purporting to act on your behal£
11.
24 The singular number and masculine or feminine gender as used herein shall
25 embrace, and be read as applied as, the plural or masculine or feminine or the neuter, as
26
circumstances may make appropriate.
27 12. The term"relevant period" shall, unless otherwise specified, be defined as

28 March 1, 2003 to the present unless otherwise defined.
-6-
13. "Plaintiff' refers to Courtney S. Etnyre [hereinafter also sometimes referred to
3 14. *MINHAS" refers to defendant, SANDIP ("MICKEY") MINHAS.

4
5 15. "Complaint" means the complaint filed herein by Courtney S. Etnyre on or

about November 2,2009 in the San Diego Superior Court, bearing Civil Case No. 37-2009-
6 00101537- CU-OB>CTL.
7
8 16, If you object to the discovery of electronically stored information on the

9 grounds that it is from a source that is not reasonably accessible because of undue burden or
10 expense and that the you will not search the source in the absence of an agreement with the
11 demanding party or court order, then you shall identify in your response the types or categories '
12 of sources of electronically stored information that you assert are not reasonably accessible.
13 By objecting and identifying information of a type or category of source or sources that are not
14 reasonably accessible, you will still preserve any objections you may have relating to that
15 electronically stored information pursuant to Code ofcivil Procedure, #2031.210(d),and
otherwise.
16
17
17. If in responding to a demand for production of electronically stored information
18
you object to a specified form for producing the information, or ifno form is specified in the
19
demand, you shall state in you response the form in which you intend to produce each type of
20
information. Unless the parties otherwise agree or the court otherwise orders, the following
shall apply:
21
22
(1) If a demand for production does not specify a form or forms for producing a type of
23
electronically stored information, you shall produce the information in the form or
24
forms in which it is ordinarily maintained or in a form that is reasonably usable; and
25
(2) You need not produce the same electronically stored information in more than one
26
form, unless it is non-identical as set forth in paragraph 1, above.
27
If necessary, at the reasonable expense of the demanding party, you shall, through detection
28
devices, translate any data compilations included in the demand into reasonably usable form.
7
1 18. If electronically stored information produced in discovery is subject to a claim
2 of privilege or of protection as attorney work-product, you may notify any party that received
3 , the information ofthe claim and the basis for the claim. After being notified of a claim of
4 privilege or of protection as attorney work-product, a party that received the information shall
5
6
immediately sequester the information and either return the specified information and any
7
copies that may exist or present the information to the court conditionally under seal for a
determination ofthe claim.
8
9
10
follows:
11
12
1. The complete personnel file maintained by you on plaintiff, ETNYRE,
13
14
reports, application for employment, selection and evaluation summaries, pattern interview
15
forms, written employment agreement(s), letters proposing or offering employment
16 evaluations, appraisals, and performance reviews, job proficiency reviews, salary history,
awards and honors, and the like.
17
18 2. All personnel files maintAined by you 04 or in relation to, plaintiff during the
19 relevant period whether said personnel files are complete, summarized, segregated and
20 whether maintained by you at any branch or regional office, headquarters, your home or other
21 corporate office, or by any employee, officer, director or agent of yours.
23 evidence, or tend to evidence, your reasons for placing plaintiff, ETNYRE, on administrative
24 leave on or about September 26,2007.
26 evidence, or tend to evidence, any progressive discipline or warnings leading up to plaintiff
28
5. All writings which you, or anyone acting on your behalf, believe concern or
-8-
.
1 evidence, or tend to evidence, your reasons for placing plaintiff, ETNYRE, on a performance
2 improvement plan ['TIP"] in or about October 2007.
5 being placed on a PIP in or about October 2007.
6
7 evidence, or tend to evidence, refer, relate or pertain, to expenses incurred by your Patent
8 Department or Group for so-called "team-building" events during the period December 2004
to
9 through December 31, 2007, in particular events that your Patent Department or group
11
organized and held, e. g. company-sponsored social events, dinners, "happy hours," tour(s) of
12
various wineries, and the like, designed to promote comradery within the Patent Department,
13 ' orwhiencouraged
ch your empltooattend,
yees ofthe Patent Department i n cl u di n g pl a i n ti f f, ETNYRE, were
including but not limited to expense reports, requisitions or requests,
i n vi t ed
14
15
summaries, description of events, approvals and proofs of payment or reimbursement.
17 evidence, or tend to evidence, refer, relate or pertain, to expenses incurred by plaintiff,
18 ETNYRE, or defenrignt, MINHAS, in relation to their travels to and from New Jersey on your
19 business during the period January and February 2006, including but not limited to expense
20 reports, requisitions or requests, summaries, description of events, approvals and proofs of
21 payment or reimbursement for food, travel, lodging, purchases, taxis, and the like.
23 evidence, or tend to evidence, refer, relate or pertain, to your fraternization or nepotism
24 Policies during the relevant period.
26 evidence, or tend to evidence, refer, relate or pertain, to your policies relative to sexual
27 relations between your employees, e.g., between co-worker who are or were not married to
-9-
j
1
2
evidence, or tend to evidence, refer, relate or pertain, to your reasons for not promoting
3
plaintiff, ETNYRE, during the period December 2004 through and including the present.
4
12. Your personnel policy manuals and employee handbooks or other statement of
5
employment policies issued by you during the relevant period.
6
7
to evidence, refer, relate, pertain or concern your personnel policies or practices, including but
8
not limited to employee performance improvement plans, administrative leaves or suspension,
9
progressive discipline, including warnings whether verbal or written, discrimination,
10
11
14.
Any and all your publicly issued annual financial reports or statements during
12
the relevant peried.
13
15.
All correspondence, including but not limited to, letters, memoranda, or other
14
writings, between or among MINHAS and YOU, including notes of any conversations,
15
relating to plaintiff, and in particular any alleged discrimination, retaliation or harassment of

16

17
18
to evidence, refer, relate, pertain or concern to your investigation into the alleged sexual or
19
other assault ofplaintiff, ETNYRE, by defendant MINHAS, including but not limited to
20
voice recordings, emails, statements, correspondence, and the like.

21
22
17.
All writings which you, or anyone acting on your behalf, believe evidence, tend
23
to evidence, refer, relate, pertain or concern to your investigation into plaintiffs allegations of
24
harassment, retaliation or discrimination based on sex or gender or disability during the
relevant period.
25
28 retaliation or discrimination based on sex/gender or disability during the relevant period in
-10-
1
j
1 your Patent Department or group.
3 to evidence, refer, relate, pertain or concern to your investigation of any complaint or charge
4 of harassment retaliation or discrimination whether based on sex/gender or disability during
5 the relevant period in your Patent Department or group.
6
7
to evidence, refer, relate, pertain or concern any complaint whatsoever against, or relating to,
8 plaintiff, ETNYRE, including but not limited to her duties as Senior Patent Prosecution
9 Paralegal/Project Manager or Patent Prosecution Senior Paralegal/Project Manager, or
10
11
12
21. All writings between you, on one part, and any other person, on the other part,
13
that refer, directly or indirectly, to plaintiff, ETNYRE, including but not limited to
communications with, or involving, any of the following persons:
14
Barbara Agnihotri
15
Avneesh Agrawal
16
Jane Baker
17
Nancy Barnhart
18
Charles Bergen
19
Steven Colb
20
Joanne Conway
21
Deborah Dean
22
23
Brett Gahagan
24
25
Sandy Godsey
Albert Harnois
26
David Huffaker
27
Artie Kane
28
-11-
1
Kate Lane
2
Lou Lupin
3
Kyong Macek
4
Judith Matson, Ph.D.
5
Michelle Maybaum
6
Dmitry Milikovsky
7
Sandip ("Mickey") Minhas
8
Nan Moser
9
10
Milan Patel
11
Arlene Pollard
12
Tami Procopio
13
Thomas Rouse
14
Bill Sailer
15
Janet Sana
16
Kelly Scanlan
17
Susie Simsik
18
Michael Straub
19
Mary Stewart
20
Dan Sullivan
21

22
Harris Teague
23
Phil Wadsworth
24
Edith Watson
25
26
DeeAnn Wong, M.D.
22.
27 All writings which you, or anyone acting on your behalf, believe evidence, tend
28 to evidence, refer, relate, pertain to your announcing, mentioning or discussing the
-12-
.
1 administrative leave or suspension ofplaintiff, ETNYRE's, employment during the relevant

2 period.
3 23.
4 to evidence, refer, relate, pertain to you policy with respect to conduct between your
5 employees, discrimination retaliation and harassment based on gender/sex or disability,
6 including accommodation of any employee experiencing a disability, maintained by you
7 during the relevant period.
8
24.
9 to evidence, refer, relate, pertain or concern plaintiffs unsatisfactory, inadequate or poor job
10
performance, including work demeanor or attitude, during the relevant period.

11
25.
The written job descriptions for the positions of Senior Patent Prosecution
12
Paralegal/Project Manager and Patent Prosecution Senior Paralegal/Project Manager, or

13
14
26.
Please provide records or writings which reflect the name, address and
15
16
17
complaint or charge against you, either through your procedures or any state or federal agency,
18
based on alleged gender/sex or disability, including the date the complaint was made and the
19
27.
20
Please provide the records or writing which reflect the name, address and
21 telephone number of every person who has filed a lawsuit against you, alleging discrimination
22 retaliation or harassment, based on alleged gender/sex or disability, the date the complaint was
23 filed, and if applicable and not subject to any confidentiality agreement, disposition ofthe
24 lawsuit, and even if there was a confidentiality agreement or order, then documents or writings
25 that reflect resolution of the action or matter.
28.
26 All writings which you, or anyone acting on your behalf, believe evidence, tend
27 to evidence, refer, relate, pertain to your investigation of plaintiffs claims, and in particular
-13-
1 and otherwise) calendars concerning the suspension, Performance Improvement Plan C'PIP"
2 and administrative or disability leave, and your accommodation ofplaintiffs disability, during
3 the relevant period.
4
29. Any and all tape or other electronic recordings, or transcripts ofrecordings, of
5.any conversations, meetings, interviews or discussions that evidence, tend to evidence, refer,
6 relate, pertain or concern plaintiffs discrimination, retaliation, harassment assault or other
7
Claimq, or your suspension ofplaintiff, her administrative leave, PIP, and transfer to other
8
9
30.
10
to evidence, refer, relate, pertain or concern any of your affirmative defenses or expected
11
affirmative defenses to the complaint herein.
12
31.
Any writings which you, or anyone acting on your behalf, believe evidence,
13
14
tend to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to any complaints of improper behavior by defendant
MINHAS, during the relevant period.
15
32.
16
Any writings which you, or anyone acting on your behalf, believe evidence,
17
tend to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to any complaints ofimproper behavior relative to
18
alleged gender or sex discrimination retaliation or harassment, by any persons within your
19
20
21 to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to statements made by defendant, SANDIP MIl*IAS,
22 regarding plaintiff, ETNYRE, to the effect that he wanted to "get in her (ETNYRE)."
24 to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to threatening, abusive and/or harassing statements made
25.by defendant, MINHAS, to plaintiff, ETNYRE.
28 Milikovsky, to plaintiff, ETNYRE, to the effect of "you (ETNYRE) know what your problem
-14-
.
1 is? Your inability to effectively use latex.", or words to the effect ofthe foregoing, and your
4 to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to statements made Senior Director of Human Resources,
5 Jane Baker, to Tami Procopio, to the effect of"What can you tell me about Courtney's affair
6 with Mickey?", or words to the effect,ofthe foregoing, and your investigation, if any, into said
9 to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to plaintiff, ETNYRE' s, requests to you, or anyone acting
11
v on your behalf, to seek other employment opportunities within QUALCOMM and outside her
department.
12
13
14
to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to reasons plaintiff, ETNYRE's, requests for other
15
16
to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to plaintiff, ETNYRE's, application for worker's
18 ,
19
21 to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to the reasons for denial of plaintiff, ETNYRE's, worker's
compensation claim.
22
25 ["DFEH"] Complaint filed on or about February 23,2007 by plaintiff, ETNYRE, bearing case
26 number E200607-D-0961-00-se, including but not limited to your investigation of, or
27 response, to that complaint
-15-
j
1
to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to the DFEH Complaint filed on or about February 23,
2
2007 by plaintiff, ETNYRE, bearing case number E200607-D-0961-01-s, including but not
3
4
43.
All writings which you, or anyone acting in your behalf, believe evidence, tend
5
to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to the DFEH Complaint filed on or about September 27,
6
2007 by plaintiff, ETNYRE, bearing case number E200708-D-0400-00-rse, including but not
7
8
9
to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to the DFEH Complaint filed on or about December 5,
10
11
12
13
to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to the decision and direction by you and defendant
14
MINHAS, to plaintiff, ETNYRE, to travel to New Jersey for your company or corporate
15

16
46.
17
to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to your knowledge of any and all inappropriate physical
18
19
touchings, including assaults or batteries, ofyour employees, "uninvited kisses", "fondling",
20
having buttocks or private parts of one's body grabbed, and "attempted sexual activity,"
21
especially within your Patent Department or group, including plaintiff, ETNYRE, by
22
23
47.
24 to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to your investigation(s) of each and every inappropriate
25 physical touching, including assaults or batteries, of your employees, '*uninvited kisses",
26 "fondling" having buttocks orprivateparts ofone's body grabbed, and "attempted sexual
28 defendAnt, MINHAS, during the relevant period.
-16-
1 48.
All documents and writings evidencing any statements by, or written or oral
2
communications with, any present or former employee of QUALCOMM concerning any of
3
the matters alleged in the complaint herein.
4
49. Any Mtements, declarations or affidavits (draft or final, signed or unsigned)
5
received by you or anyone acting on your behalf from any person with knowledge of the
6
matters alleged in the complaint herein.
7
50. All documents and writings relating to any charge(s), or claims against you that
8
you, or anyone acting on your behalf, have filed with administrative agencies, including the
9
DFEH, the California Equal Employment Development Department, the United States Equal
10
Employment Opportunity Commission, or the National Labor Relations Board relative to any
11
12
acting on your behalf, during the relevant period.
13
51.
All documents and writings relating to any complaints(s) against you that you,
14
or anyone acting on your behalf, have filed in a court of law, including the Superior Court of
15
California, a similar state court in another state, or any U.S. District Court, relative to any
16

17
acting on your behalf, during the relevant period,
18
52. All documents and writings relating or referring to any sexual interaction
19
between defendant, MINHAS, and plaintiff either before or after the sexual events alleged to
20
have occurred on or about February 22,2006.

21
22
to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to your training ofpersonnel within your Patent
23
24
Department or group relative toyour discrimination, retaliation or harassment policies during

25
26
27
to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to Bill Sailer's communications with plaintiff, ETNYRE,
28 during the relevant period, including but not limited to notes, e-mails, calendars,
-17-
.
1
correspondence, and the like, whether written in hard copy or electronically.
2
55.
3
to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to your investigation into any claims or charges of
4
harassment retaliation or discrimination based on gender/sex or disability, within your Patent

5
Department or group, during the relevant period.
6
56. All writings which you, or anyone acting in yourbehalf, believe evidence, tend
7
to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to plaintiff, ETNYRE, consenting to defendant, MINHAS,

8
having sexual relations with her, in particular disclosures by defendant, MINHAS, ofhis
9
romantic, intimate or sexual relationship(s) to you, either in advance or concurrent with any of
10
those types of relationship between plaintiff and defendant MINHAS.
11
12
13
to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to your communications with Charles Nelson, Ph. D.,
14
15
16
to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to the Kelley 0 Tany v. Madill, civil action filed in the
17
above-entitled court, bearing civil case no. GIC 868143 [hereinafter the"O'Patty Action'l,
18 including pleadings, discovery (including depositions, interrogatories, requests for admission
19
and the like), investigation reports and' notes by you.
20
H. Paul Kendrick,
21
22 Dated: December 23,2009 A. Syl'y-44

23 H. Paul Kondrick, Esq.
24
25
26
27
28
-18-
.
EXHIBIT B Mi
Page l ofl
Paul Konddck
From: "Paul Kendrick" <kondrick@msn.com>

TO: "Michael Sullivan" <msullivan@paulplevin.corn>
CC: <mklick@paulplevin.com>
Sent:
Friday, January 22, 2010 3:43 PM
Subject: C. Etnyre v. Minhas & QUALCOMM
Mike,
Can you bring me up to date on QUALCOMM's document production7 If you

don't have all the dog just produce what you client has. My assistan:, Candice
Caufield, phoned Deborah Baranowski leaving a message on her
voicemail, around 10:30 am today to follow up on the document production;
however, we have yetto receive any reply. Thanks for your prompt reply.
-Paid Kendrick
EXHIBIT B. 14*
EXHIBIT C *Ill
Page l of 2
0 1 0
Paul Kondrick
From: "Paul Kondrick" <kondrick@msn.com>

To: "Melissa Klick" <mklick@paulplevin.com>; " Michael Sullivan" <msullivan@paulplevin.com>
Melissa,
First, thank you for taking time this afternoon (Saturday) to drop ojf the
I've now spent the better part of 2 hours this afternoon reviewing the disk.
First, I am unable to open theme named "DATA" containing 142 kb of data or
information. The error message continued to appear that both the "DAT" &
"OPT" subjiles or files were damaged or "not supported" In the event that
the "DATA" file on the QUALCOMM contains intended information as part of
the document production, then pls. inform our ofBce of the program or method
to open the "DATA"flic
In relation to the "IMAGES" file folder, I opened the 1697 pages oftif
formatted dox. I reviewed those pages. We have, of course, not
received QUALCOMM written response to plaintiffs 1st request for production
of documents so we can't be sure if the documents produced on the cd
constitute QUALCOMM's complete document production, but if the 1697 pages
ARE QUALCOMM's full & complete intended document production, then we
have a serious discoveryproblem.
Sub-jile 00 (464 pages) consists of what could be characterized as a partial

personnel fle, e.g. pay records, SOME performance evaluations, hiring info,
including some standard QUALCOMM forms or agreements, including
policies, some emails & correspondence pertaining to Ms. Etnyre's disability
leave of absence, termination, return to work & some benefits info pretty much
consisting of Tracy Lawson emails (including some redacted pages, pp. 312-
316). In ny estimation, the bulk of the materials on the cd, approximately
1300+ pages, consist of QUALCOMM's "Policies & Procedures" manual or
publication.
Referring to Plaintijfs Requestfor Production of Documents propounded to

your client, it appears that your client has NOT produced any documents or
writings whatsoever relative to plaintiffs document categories 3-581
I look forward to receipt of the hard copies of the documents on Monday, Jan
25th, to perhaps better evaluate whether my initial impressions of
QUALCOMM's cd/electronic document production are in error. In addition,
EXHIBII C , 14
1/23/2010
Page 2 of 2
.
just to make sure we're all on the same page, I still expect to inspect the originals of
QUALCOMM's fles & documents & writings at a mutually convenient time. I also
look for the QUALCOMM's document production response so that we are fully
informed as to whether the present documents being produced, in fact, include all
writings responsive to the 58 document production categories
As alinal comment, that is for you & Mike Sullivan to seriously consider, ph
understand that IF QUALCOMM is not producing ali requested documents at this
and discrimination claims, then it is highly unlikely that Ms. Etnyre's deposition will
proceed on Thursday. I lookforward to taking these matters up with you & Mike
-Paul Kondrick
1/23/2010
.
EXHIBIT D *I
. Pagelof 1
Paul Kondrick
From:
TO:
*Paul Kondrick' <kondrick@msn.com>
CC:
"Michael Sullivan" <msullivan@paulplevin.com>
Sent:
"Lonny Zilberman" <LZilberman@WPKT.com>
Tuesday, January 26, 2010 3:17 PM
Subject: C. Etnyre v. Minhas, QUALCOMM
Mike,
It's urgent we speak nit noon Wednesday (1/27) relative to the QC dox
production, or rather non-production, & whether Ms. Etnyre's depo will
proceed on Thursday. If we can't come to an immediate resolution on the
production of the QC dox, then the depo will not proceed. Thank you.
-Paul
EXHIBIT D *64 d
.
D
EXHIBIT E .ria
r
LAW OFFICES
H. PAUL KONDRICK
'aa.
Monday, February 1,2010
Via Facsimile and U.S. Mall
Michael G. Sullivan, 64 Leonid M. Zilberman, Esq.

Paul, Plevin, Sullivan & Connaughton, LLP Wilson Kosmo & Turner, LIP
401 B St., Tenth Floor 550 West C St., Suite 1050
San Diego, CA 92101 San Diego, CA 92101
k Courtney Etnyre v. Sandip C Mickey") Minhas and QUALCOMM,

Incomorated; San Diego Superior Court Civil Case No. 37-2009-
00101537-CU-OE-CTL
/
Dear Counsel:
First, thank you for taking time to meet and confer last Wednesday, January 27,
2010, in relation to the pending discovery disputes, namely the production or non-
<production of documents by defendant QUALCOMM.Incorporate r'QUALCOMM"] to
plaintiffs earlier prdductionrequest and an appropriate date for the deposition of our
client Courtney Etnyre. Second, in ourphone conversation, I indicated that our office
would proceed in securing an ex pam hearing date from the court. To that extent, this
letter is intended to serve as exparte notice ofthat hearing and expected issues.
Plaintiff, Courtney Etnyre, will proceed, on aii exparte basis, this Wednesday,
February 3,2010, at 8:30 ak, in Department C-75 ofthe San Diego Supen& Court
located at 330 W. Broadway, San Diego, California. At the exparte headng, plaintiff
Courtney Etnyre, will request that the Court (a) set a deadline fof defendant
QUALCOMM, to produce documents responsive to plaintiffs December 23,2009
request for production of documents; and (b) stay the taking of plaintiffs deposition until
defendant QUALCOMM, especially produces tho* documents salient to the alleged
sexual assault and battetY, and sexual discrimination harassment and retaliation.
,
At the ex pmle hearing, the parties may also want to explore with the Court
defenklants' expressed intention to take.plaintiff's deposition for more than one (1) day.
Mr. Zilberman mentioned this potential. In that regard, this office has strong
reservations.
To be clear in relation to Ms. Etnyre's deposition, while our office objected to her
deposition going forward without QUALCOMM's producing its most pertinent
documents requested in her request for production of documents, she has not insisted that
defendant, QUALCOMM produce all documents pertaining to her earlier request, nor
does she refused to appear for deposition. To be specific, plaintiff, Courtney Etnyte,
'requests; and expects, only that the more significant documentation pertaining, for
instance, to herpersonnel file, QUALCOMM's investigati6n into the alleged sexual
assault and battery, harassment discrimination and retaliation, including witness
statements, ind the like„be produced for her immediate review. In that regard, I invite
your attention to document category numbers 1 through 8, 15,16,17,24,28,33-36,39-
45,47-49 and 56, that should specifically be qddressed. In our view, the foregoing
E)011811 E
3130 FOURTH AVENUE 1 SAN DIEGO, CA 92103-5803 2 (619) 291-2400 : FAx .(6193 291-7123
r
.
.
Sullivan-Zilberman
Re: Emyre v. Minhas, etc.'
February 1, 2010
Paae' 2
document cettegory numbers essentially go to defendant QUALCOMM, making * ,

available to plaintiff those specific materials available that would permit her to refresh
' her recollection appropriately in advance for deposition, as she timely requested in her
document production request. As you know, the pertinent events occurred about four (4)
years ago. ,
While defeidant, QUALCOMM, to our understanding, is'unable to presently

provide any specific deadline by which most if not all, its responsive documents will be ,
produced, we invite your offices to attempt to come to agreement with us as to a
reasonable time and deadline for QUALCOMM to at least produce the more important or
mlevant documentation so that at m appropriate date for Ms. Etnyre's deposition can
within as short as a few days after the date on which QUALCOMM produces its
documentation, gg for*aid. .
Thank you for your anticipated cooperation. Should any of you have any
questions whatsoever, please don't hekitate to contact me. Iam;
/
Very truly yours,
4 *-1 X/1/
H. Paul Kondrick,
A Professional Corporation
HPK: pk
cc: Melissa Listug Klick, Esq. (Via Facsimile)
-
.
.
HP LaserJet 3050
Fax Call Report invent
H PAUL KONDRICK APC

6192917123
Feb-1-2010 4:53PM
Job Date Time Type Identification Duration Pages Result
2072 2/ 1/2020 4:45:36PM Send 16196150700 3:19 3 OK

2073
1:08 3 OK
2/ 1/2010 4:49:00PM Send 16192369669
2074 2/ 1/2010 4:50:13PM Send 16196150700
3:19 3 OK
H. Pm:1 Kendrick
A MWCm,emtion
3130 Fon*b Avenue
Sio Dic,4 California 921034603
Fic•imil,Tra=miltil
To: Mdi=ali#ug Klick, E,q. From: H. Paul Kood:Ick, Esq.

L«mid M Zilbmnam. 84
Michael 0. Sullivan. Esq.
Company. Paul, PlcviA Sullivan, cti Date: Decemli=2251609-

Willon. Petty.Kosmo *Tumer
RD'*ry 4 146
PauL Plevin, Sullivan, etc.
RANumber: 619·615-0700
Total Na Pap including Cover: 3
619·236·9669
619413-0700
Phon©Number: 619•237-5200 Sender's Phooe Number: 619-2914400

619-236-9600
619444-3635
Re:EtioN v. QUALCOMAC IxaMinhcu Sender's F=Number. 619-291-7123
URGENT OFORYOURWOBMA,ZONANDPILES OPLEASEDEPLY OPERYOURREQUEST
An.rhl is aoopyof the Kond,ick·Sul}anZnberman letterdated Febnmzy 1, 2010.
CON,mmrnAL·mA,emnoN
t. '-' 1 Efyamhs¥•m,El,ed
Telephone: 619-237-5200
4 Facsimile: 619-615-0700
FEB 02 '10 AHO9:44

6
7
8
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
9
COURTNEY S. ETNYRE, CASE NO. 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL
10
Plaintiff, PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING
11 DEFENDANT'S EXPARTE APPLICATION
V. TO COMPEL DEPOSITION OF PLAINTIFF
12 COURTNEY S ETNYRE
SANDIP ("MICKEY") MINHAS,
13 individually, QUALCOMM Incorporated, a
Delaware corporation and DOES 1 through Date: February 3,2010
Time: 8:30 a.m.
14 40, inclusive,
Dept: 75
Defendants. Judge: Richard E.L. Strauss
15
16
17
18 Based upon the exparte application ofDefendant Qualcomm Incorporated the Court finds
19 good cause to set the deposition of Plaintiff Courtney Etnyre for February 4, 2010.
ORDER
20
21 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED FOR GOOD CAUSE APPEARING:
22 The deposition of Plaintiff Courtney Etnyre shall take place on February 4, 2010 frem the
23 hours of 9:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. at the law offices of Paul, Plevin, Sullivan & Connaughton LLP,
24 401 B Street, Ste 1000, San Diego, CA 92101 and shall continue at mutually agreeable dates
25 until completed.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
*)59- 52 GL-
26
Dated: .2010
27 HONORABLE RICHARD #.L. STRAUSS
28
PAUL, PLEVIN, 1
[Proposed] Order
SULLIVAN &
CONNAUGHTON LLP
.

3 Telephone: (619) 291-2400
Facsimile: (619) 291-7123
5
FEB 02 810 AM10:43
6
9
10
Plaintiff, [PROPOSEDI EXPARTE ORDER
11 ) DIRECTING THAT THE TIMING
V.
OF PLAINTIFF'S DEPOSITION BE
12 CONDITIONED ON DEFENDANT,
SANDIP ("MICKEY") MINHAS, individually, ) QUALCOMM INCORPORATED,
13 QUALCOMM Incorporated, a Delaware PRODUCING DOCUMENTS TO
corporation, and DOES 1 through 40, inclusive, ALLOW PLAINTIFF TO REFRESH
14 HER RECOLLECTION
)
15 Defendants. ) Date: February 3, 2010
Time: 8:30 a.m.
16 Department: DC-75
Judge: Hon. Richard E.L. Strauss
17
19 Based upon the exparte application ofplaintiff, COURTNEY S. ETNYRE
20 ["ETNYRE"], in the above-entitled matter, and good cause appearing therefor,
21 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
22 Defendant, QUALCOMM Incorporated, will produce its documents and writings

23 requested in plaintifs first request for production of documents not later than
24 and
25 Plaintiff, COURTNEY ETNYRE's, deposition will proceed
26 . on the condition that defendant produces its documents.
27 Dated: February 3, 2010 i

Judge ofthe Supenor Court
28
-1- Ex Parte Order

.8 +4'F« #**f 1/'

3
4
San Diego, California 921101-4232
Telephone: 61'9-237-5200
Facsimile: 619-615-0700
4444/4 20
FEB 9\ COU't
4 2 2010
4:/4.
Sve#Vmey£Z 0**
Qualcomm, Incorporated
6

8
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

9

INCORPORATED'S EXPARTE
12 V.
APPLICATION TO COMPEL DEPOSITION
OF PLAINTIFF COURTNEY ETNYRE;
13 SANDIP ("MICKEY") MINHAS, MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND
individually, QUALCOMM Incorporated, a AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT THEREOF;
14 Delaware corporation and DOES 1 through DECLARATION OF MELISSA LISTUG
KLICK AND ACCOMPANYING EXHIBITS
40, inclusive,
15
IN SUPPORT THEREOF
Defendants.
16
Date: February 3, 2010
Time: 8:30 a.m.
17
Dept: 75
Judge: Richard E.L. Strauss

18
19
20
21
22
23
24 '91
rn
133
25 R
1. J.
26 '0
0
27 .9.
,rk,
'C>
28
PAUL, PLEVIN,
Ex Parte Application
ORIGINAL
SULLIVAN &
CONNAUGHTON LLP
. .
2 Defendant Qualcomm Incorporated hereby submits this application for an order
3 compelling the deposition of Plaintiff Courtney Etnyre on February 4, 2010.
4 This application is based en the declaration of Melissa Listug Klick and accompanying
exhibits and the attached memorandum of points and authorities. Plaintiffs counsel was given
6 notice of this application on January 27, 2010.

8 CONNAUGHTON LLP
10
BY:
11 L . S LIVAN
LIS A LISTUG KLICK
12 Att ys for Defendant
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PAUL, PLEVIN, 1
CONNAUGHTON LLP
. .
1 I.
2 INTRODUCTION
3 Plaintiff Courtney Etnyre has refused to appear for her properly noticed deposition until
4 she receives extensive document discovery frem defendant Qualcomm Incorporated in response
5 to demands that she served almost a month after Qualcomm noticed her deposition. Because this
6 is the only asserted justification for her refusal to appear, and it is an improper basis to withhold
7 discovery from Qualcomm, defendant respectfully requests that the Court compel Ms. Etnyre's
8, attendance for deposition on February 4,2010 - a date that all parties are admittedly available.
9 II.
10 BRIEF BACKGROUND
11 On November 2,2009, Plaintiff Courtney Etnyre filed the instant lawsuit against
12 IDefendants, Qualcomm Incorporated and Sandip Minhas. She alleges sexual harassment, sexual
13 battery, discrimination, and retaliation, among other claims. Qualcomm was served on December
14 2, 2009, and noticed Ms. Etnyre's deposition the next day for January 28,2010. (Listug Klick
15 Decl. 112; Exh. 1 [Deposition Notice].) At that time, Qualcomm also sent Ms. Etnyre's counsela
16 letter offering a modification of the date to accommodate any scheduling conflicts. (Exh. 2
17 ,[Letter dated December 3, 2009].) In response to the notice, Etnyre did not serve any objections
18 and actually confirmed with Qualcomm's counsel that she was available and planning to go
19 forward as noticed. (Listug Klick Decl. 112.)
20 Three weeks later, at the close of business on December 23,2009, Etnyre personally
21 served an expansive Request for Production on Qualcomm, with 58 separate document categories.
22 (Listug Klick Decl. 3; Exh. 3 [Plaintifs Request for Productionl.) As Etnyre knows (she is a
23 current Qualcomm employee), December 24,25,30 and January 1 were company holidays and all 11
24 employees were encouraged to take December 27-29 as vacation. Thus, Qualcomm could only
25 begin to review and determine appropriate responses on January 4, 2010.1 On January 18, after
26 i
On January 4, 2010 Etnyre requested, and Qualcomm agreed without hesitation, an extension oftime to
27 serve her responses and documents to Qualcomm. (Listug Klick Decl. 11 4.)
28
PAUL, PLEVIN, 2
CONNAUGHTON LLP
.
1 detennining that Etnyre's document requests would involve performing electronic searches of at
2 least a dozen Qualcomm witnesses and interviewing and gathering files from additional
3 custodians, Qualcomm requested a reasonable extension of time in order to serve responses and
4 documents, (Listug Klick Decl( 11 5.) Etnyre denied the request. (Listug Klick Decl. 115.) Thus,
5 Qualcomm timely served its responses and objections to Etnyre's Requests for Production and
6 produced an initial production of documents, including Etnyre's employment files. (Listug Klick
7 Decl. 11 6; Exh. 4 [Letter dated January 22, 20101:) To make the document search as efficient as
8 possible, Qualcomm proposed, and requested Etnyre's input on, a listof search terms to be used
9 to search for the electronic documents. (Exh. 4; Listug Klick Decl. 116.) Etnyre provided' no
10 input to the list. (Listug Klick Decl. 116.) Therefore, Qualcomm is performing the search using
11 its proposed search term list. (Listug Klick Decl. 1 6.)
12 After receiving Qualcomm's responses and initial production of documents, Etnyre's
13 counsel emailed Qualcomm (and later confirmed in a conference call with counsel), asserting that
14 Ms. Etnyre would not appear at the noticed date for the deposition because all documents
15 requested had not been produced. (Listug Klick Decl. 117; Exhs. 5 [January 23, 2010 Email with
16 i Response]; 6 [Letter dated January 27, 2010].) Specifically, Etnyre refuses to appear until she
17 has had the opportunity to "refresh her recollection" of the events alleged in her complaint by
18 reviewing documents gathered by Qualcomm related to her claims. (Listug Klick Decl. 117.)
19 Accordingly, on January 27,2010, Qualcomm notified Etnyre that it would seek the
20 instant exparte relief. (Exh. 6 [Letter dated January 27, 2010]; Listug Klick Decl. 116.)
21 In.
22 GOOD CAUSE EXISTS FOR REQUIRING PLAINTIFF'S APPEARANCE AT
23 DEPOSITION
24 Code of Civil Procedure section 2025.450 provides:
25
If, after service of adeposition notice, a party to the action...fails to...proceed
with it...the party giving the notice may move for an order compelling the
26 deponent's attendance and testimony.
27 (Code Civ. Proc. §2025.450(a).)
28
PAUL, PLEVIN, 3
CONNAUGHT0N LLP
.
1 Under this section, this Court may order Etnyre to appear and participate in her deposition.
2 Further, as a plaintiff alleging graphic sexual harassment, sexual' battery, discrimination, and other
3 claims, Etnyre's testimony - and credibility - is critical to this litigation. Consequently,

4 Qualcomm must immediately obtain Etnyre's testimony in order to proceed with its defense ofthe
5 case. Qualcomm promptlyand diligently served discovery and noticed Etnyre's deposition. It
6 should not now be prejudiced by Etnyre's own delay in serving discovery.
7 Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure sections 2025.220(a) and 2025.270(a), Qualcomm
8 noticed Etnyre's deposition on December 3,2009. (Exh. 2.) Etnyre has not objected to the
9 notice. (Listug Klick Decl. 112.) To the contrary, Etnyre's counsel specifically confirmed the
10 date. (Listug Klick Decl. 11'2.)2 Nonetheless, less than one week prior to the date set for
11 deposition, Etnyre's counsel indicated that Etnyre would not appear at her deposition solely
12 because Qualcomm's document production, pursuant to requests served three weeks after the
13 deposition was noticed, is ongoing. (Listug Klick Decl. 11 7; Exhs. 5,6.)
14 Etnyre's unilateral cancellation ofthe deposition is not permitted by the California
15 Discovery Act. Indeed, the law is clear: "the fact that a party is conducting discovery, whether by
16 depositionoranothermethod, shall not operate to delay the discovery ofanyotherparty." (Code
17 Civ. Proc. §2019.020(a) [emphasis added].) Put simply, a party cannot dictate their chosen
18 sequence of discovery in order to ostensibly gather information before providing relevant
19 testimony that is necessary in order to understand a plaintiff s claims and begin discovery into
20 those allegation.3
21 Therefore, given there is no legally recognizable basis for Etnyre to refuse to appear for
22 her deposition, noticed almost two months ago and three weeks before Etnyre served any
23 discovery, this Court's intervention is requested. The parties, including Etnyre and her counsel,
24
25
1 2 Indeed, Mr. Minhas, a co-defendant, changed his travel plans to accommodate the date because Ms.
Etnyre wanted to proceed as noticed. (Listug Klick Decl. 11 2.)
26
3 An inherent flaw in plaintiffs reasoning is that by definition, a defendant is allow to pursue discovery
before a plaintiff. Thus, there is no right to a certain amount of"refreshed recollection" discovery.
27
28
PAUL, PLEVIN, 4
CONNAUGHTON LLP
.
1 have indicated they are available for Ms. Etnyre's deposition on February 4, 2010. Accordingly,
2 Qualcomm has served an amended notice on Etnyre and requests this Court compel her
3 appearance.
4 V.
CONCLUSION
5
6 For the foregoing reasons, Qualcomm Incorporated respectfully requests this Court grant
7 this exparte application to compel Plaintifs deposition on February 4, 2010.

9 CONNAUGHTON LLP
10
11
12 4*AEIC. SULLIVAN
C/IMEIASSA LISTUG KLICK
13 Attgfneys for Defendant
Fralcomm Incorporated
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PAUL, PLEVIN, 5
CONNAUGHTON LLP
.
1 DECLARATION OF MELISSA LISTUG KLICK IN SUPPORT OF EXPARTE
2 APPLICATION
3 I, Melissa Listug Klick, declare as follows:
4 1. Iam an associate in the law office of Paul, Plevin, Sullivan and Connaughton LLP,
5 counsel of record for defendant Qualcomm Incorporated. I have personal knowledge of the
6 following facts, and could competently testify to the following:
7 2. I served a notice of deposition on Courtney Etnyre on December 3,2009 for January
8 28,2009. Attached as Exhibit 1 is a true and, correct copy of that notice. In addition, I sent a
9 letter with the deposition notice, a true and correct copy ef which is attached as Exhibit 2. I
10 subsequently followed up with Paul Kondrick, Ms. Etnyre's counsel, and, he confirmed that he
11 and his client were available for her deposition as noticed and planned to appear. I received no
12 objection to the deposition notice. Indeed, Mr. Minhas, a co-defendant, changed his travel plans
13 to accommodate the date because Ms. Etnyre wanted to proceed as noticed.
14 3. According to the usual and customary practices at my firm, when a decument is
15 personally served a notation is made on the document with the time and date of service.
1*6 According to this practice, at 4:57 p.m. on December 23,2009, we were personally served with
17 Plaintiff Courtney S. Etnyre's, Request for Production of Documents to Defendant, Qualcomm
18 Incorporated [Set No. One (1)] on behalf of Qualcomm. A true and correct copy of this discovery
19 is attached as Exhibit 3.
20 4. On January 4, 2010, my assistant informed me that Mr. Kondrick's office had called
21 and requested an extension to discovery from Qualcomm that had' been served with the deposition
22 notice on December 3,2009. I immediately authorized the requested extension and informed my
23 assistant to communicate to Mr. Kondrick's office that his request was granted.
24 5. On January 18, 2010, I asked my assistant to contact Mr. Kondrick and request a one
25 i week extension to respond to Ms. Etnyre's Request for Production to Qualcomm. I did so,
26 because we determined that Ms. Etnyre's document requests would involve performing electronic
27 searches of at least a dozen Qualcomm witnesses and interviewing and gathering files from
28 additional custodians. I was informed that the request was denied on January 19, 2010.
PAUL, PLEVIN,
SULLIVAN & Ex Parte Application 6
CONNAUGHTON LLP
.
1 6. On January 22, 2010, I served responses and objections to Ms. Etnyre's discovery.
2 Further, we sent Mr. Kondrick a letter explaining that Qualcomm's production would take
3 additional time to complete and that only a partial production was being provided. A true and
4 correct copy ofthis letter is attached as Exhibit 4. I personally delivered, at Mr. Kondrick's
5 request, a copy of the CD with responsive document (his requested production format and the one
6 he used for Qualcomm) to his office on Saturday, January 23, 2010. Included in the production
7 were Ms. Etnyre's employment files. In addition, we provided a proposed list of search terms to
8 be used to search electronic documents and sought Mr. Kendrick's input. We received no
9 response regarding the search terms. In response to Qualcomm's document production, Mr.
10 Kondrick sent an acerbic email to me and Michael Sullivan threatening to refuse to produce Ms.
11 Etnyre for her deposition because Qualcomm's production was not complete.
12 7. On January 25, 2010, Michaell Sullivan informed Mr. Kondrick that the production
13 was incomplete, Qualcomm was diligently working on producing additional documents, and that
14 the process would take some time. A true and correct copy ofMr. Kondrick's January 23 email
15 and Mr. Sullivan's response is attached as Exhibit 5.
I6 8. On January 27, 2010, only one day prior to the January 28,2010 scheduled deposition,
17 counsel in the matter had a conference call. In the call, Mr. Kondrick confirmed to defense
18 ceunsel that Plaintiff would not appear at her deposition. Qualcomm then gave notice ef this ex
19 parte to Mr. Kondrick both telephonically and in a letter. A true and correct copy of that letter is
20 attached as Exhibit 6 notifying him of this ex parte application to be heard at the ex parte hearing
21 scheduled for February 3,2010 at 8:30 a.m. This letter also confirms that Mr. Kondrick is
22 available on February 4, 2010. Accordingly, I also had a notice of deposition served for that date.
23 In response, Mr. Kondrick has indicated he also intends to make an exparte application to the
24 Court on the same date.
25 9. Plaintiff's testimony is most certainly critical to this litigation as Qualcomm has a right
26 to discover the facts which Plaintiff believes substantiate her claims. Thus, Qualcomm has good
27 cause to compel Plaintiff s attendance at deposition. Should this deposition not immediately go
28 forward, Qualcomm would be severely hindered and prejudiced in its defense.

PAUL. PLEVIN, 7
CONNAUGHTON LLP
.
1 I declare under penalty of peKjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed at San
2 Diego, California on February 2, 2010.
4 ELI LISTUG KLICK
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PAUL, PLEVIN, 8
CONNAUGHTON LLP
EXHIBIT 1
4,
.

3 San Diego, California 921'01-4232
Telephone: 619-237-5200
4 Facsimile: 619-615-0700

Qualcomm Incorperated
6

10 COURTNEY S. ETNYRE, CASE NO. 37-2009-00.101537-CU-OE-CTL
11 Plaintiff, NOTICE OF TAKING VIDEOTAPED

DEPOSITION OF PLAINTIFF COURTNEY
12 ETNYRE

40, inclusive,
15
Defendants.
16
17
18
19
2025.010 et seq., defendant Qualcomm Incorporated will take the deposition ofplaintiff Courtney
20
Etnyre on January 28,2010 at 9:30 a.m. at the law offices of Paul, Plevin, Sullivan &
21
Connaughton LLP, 401 B Street Tenth Floor, San Diego, California.
22
23
administer an oath AND WILL BE VII)EOTAPED. If, for some reason, the deposition is not
24
25
26
27
attorney who is present wishes to be connected to the court reporter's system, it is your obligation
28
PAUL, PLEVIN,
SULLIVAN &
NOTICE OF TAKING VIDEOTAPED DEPO OF 1
CONNAUGHTON LLP PLAINTIFF COURTNEY ETNYRE
.
1
to contact Hutchings Court Reporters, LLC at 800-697-3210 to make arrangements for their
2
technical support personnel to contact you regarding your software needs and' to ensure that the
Dated: December 3,2009 PAUL, PLEVIN, SULLIVAN &

5
CONNAUGHTON LLP
8
8 l<_z,
- *HAEL C. SULLIVAN
MEEISSA LISTUG KLICK
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PAUL, PLEVIN,
SULLIVAN & NOTICE OF TAKING VII:)EOTAPED DEPO OF 2
CONNAUGHTON LLP PLAINTIFF COURTNEY ETNYRE
.

401 B Street Tenth Floor
Telephone: 619-237-5200
4 Facsimile: 619-615-0700

6
10
COURTNEY S. ETNYRE, CASE NO. 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL
11 Plaintiff, PROOF OF SERVICE
12 V.
Dept: 66
13 SANDIP ("MICKEY") MINHAS, Judge: Charles R. Hayes
14 Delaware corporation and DOES 1 through Tdal Date: None Set
40, inclusive,
15
Defendants.
16
17
I, the undersigned, certify and declare that I am a citizen of the United States, over the age
18
of eighteen, employed in the County of San Diego, State of California, and not a party to the
19
within-entitled action. My business address is 917 West Grape Street, San Diego, CA 92101.
20
On December 3,2009, I served a true copy of the within:

21
• NOTICE OF TAKING VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF PLAINTIFF

22 COURTNEY ETNYRE
23
• FORM INTERROGATORIES - GENERAL (SET ONE)
24
FORM INTERROGATORIES - EMPLOYMENT LAW (SET ONIE)
25
26
27 • DECLARATION FOR ADDITIONAL DISCOVERY
28
PAUL, PLEVIN,
SULLIVAN & PROOF'OF SERVICE 1
CONNAUGHTON LLP
1 by delivering for personal service to the following:
2
H. Paul Kondrick
3 H. Paul Kondrick, a Professional Corporation

3130 Fourth Avenue
Telephone: (619) 291-2400
5
Facsimile: (619) 291-7123
6
E-Mail: kondrick@msn.com
Attorney for Plaintiff
7
I hereby certify that I am employed by Calexpress San Diego, California, at whose
8
direction the personal service was made.
9
Executed this 3rd day of December 2009, at San Diego, California.
10
11
12 Calexpreis
Messenger
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
2I
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PAUL, PLEVIN,
PROOF OF SERyICE 2
SULLIVAN &
CONNAUGHTON LLP
. .

2
PROOF OF SERVICE
3
4 to this action. I am employed, or ama resident of, the County of San Diego, California, and my
business address is: Paul, Plevin, Sullivan & Com)aughton LLP, 401 B Street, Tenth Floor, San
5 Diego, California 921'01.
6 On December 3,2009, I caused to be served the followingdocument(s):
7 • NOTICE OF TAKING VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF PLAINTIFF COURTNEY

ETNYRE
8
• FORM INTERROGATORIES - GENERAL (SET ONE)
9
• FORM INTERROGATORIES - EMPLOYMENT LAW (SET ONE)
10
11
12
• DECLARATION FOR ADDITIONAL DISCOVERY
13
14 on the interested party (ies) in this action by placing a true copy thereof and addressed as follows
Wilson, Petty, Kosmo & Turner, LLP

17 Telephone: (619) 236-9600
Facsimile: (619) 236-9669
18 E-Mail: 1zilberman@wnkt.com
Attorneys for Defendant Sandip Minhas
19
0 (By MAIL SERVICE) I then sealed eachenvelope and, with postage thereon fully
20 prepaid postage, I placed each for deposit with United States Postal Service, this same day,
at my business address shown above, following ordinary business practices.
21
0 (State) I declare under penalty of peKiury under the laws of the State of California that the
23 0 (Federal) I declare that I am employed by the office ofa member of the bar Of this court at
24
Executed December 3,2009, at San Diego, California.
25
26
Deborah Baranowski
27
28
PAUL, PLEVIN,
PROOF OF SERVICE
3
SULLIVAN &
CONNAUGHTON up '
EXHIBIT 2
fP PAUL, PLEVIN,
401 B 51-REET, TENTH FLOOR, SAN DIEGO; CA 92101
PHONE 619 ·237·5200 | FAX 619·615 ·0700 | WWW.PAULPLEVIN.COM

SULLIVAN & MELISSA LISTUG KUCK
(619) 243.1561 mklick@paulplevin.com
CONNAUGHTON LLP
December 3,2009
Paul Konddck
3130 Fourth Avenue
San Diego, CA 92103
Re: Etnyre v. Qualcomm Incorporated
Dear Mr. Kondrick:
You will notice that there is a deposition notice for your Client's deposition
enclosed for January 28, 2010. If this date is not convenient for your client, please
provide us with alternate dates for your client's deposition and we will work witb
you to reschedule.
Also, as stated in the instructions for each set of discovery, the documents
Qualcomm seek include electronically stored information. Thus, Kelly expects any
such documents in Ms. Etnyre's control - even if through an online account, or
that she must request - will ibe produced or an appropriate objection and'
explanation provided so that we are able to further discuss the documents not
produced.
Sincerely,

& Connaughton LLp
By: %475,6
,/ Me Listug Klick
MLK
Enclosures
CC: Leonid M. Zilberman

EXHIBIT 3
1
H. Paul Kondrick, Esq., State Bar No. 88566
H. Paul Kendrick, A.P.C.
2
3130 Fourth Avenue
Telephone: (619) 291-2400
4
Facsimile: (619) 291-7123 .
5
6
8
9

10
12
Plaintiff, ) PLAINTIFF, COURTNEY S.
13
) ETNYRE'S, REQUEST FOR
v. ) PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS TO
SANDIP ("MICKEY") MlNHAS, individually,) INCORPORATED [SET NO. ONE (1)1
16
)
17 Defendants. )
)
18
19
Propounding Party: Plaintiff, COURTNEY S. ETNYRE
Responding Party: Defendant QUALCOMM Incorporated
20
Set No.: One (1)

21
22
TO: All Parties by and through their attorneys of record:
23 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that plaintiff, Courtney S. Etnyre ["ETNYRE"], requests

24 that defendant QUALCOMM Incorporated, r'QUALCOMM'7, produce on January 22, 2010,
25 at 10:00 a.m., at the law offices of H. Paul Kondrick, A Professional Corporation, located at
26 3130 Fourth Avenue, San Diego, California 92103, the documents and writings set forth with
27 particularity in Exhibit "A" hereto, including to inspect, copy, test, or sample electronically
28 stored information in the possession, custody, or control of defendant, QUALCOMM.
-1-
1
.-NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN that within thirty (30) days after service of this notice
2
and demand for production and inspection and photocopying of documents and other tangible
3
things, which period is extended by five (5) dayswhere service was made by mail, you shall
4
serve the original ofyour response(s) to the demand of production and inspection of
5
documents and other tangible things on the party making this demand. You shall respond
6
separately to each item or category by statement that you will comply with a particular demand
7
for inspection and any related activities, a representation that you lack the ability to comply
8
with the demand for inspection of a particular item or category, or an objection to the
9
particular item. RAr.h statement of compliance, each representation, and each objection in the
+0
respense shall bear the game number and' be in thesame sequence as the corresponding item or
category in the demand, but the text ofthat item or category need not be repeated.
12
A statement that the party to whom an inspection has beendirected will comply with
13
14
the particular demand shall state that the production, inspection, and related activity demanded
will be allowed, either in whole or impart and thatall documents or things in the demand
15
16
category that are in the possession, custody, or control ofthat party and to which no objection
17
is being made will be included in the production. A representation of inability to comply with
18
a particular demand for inspection shall affirm that a diligent search and a reasonable inquiry
19
has been made in an effort to comply with that demand. The statement shall also specify
20
whether the inability to comply is because the particular item or category has never existed,
21
has been destroyed, has been lost, misplaced, or stolen, or has never been, or is no longer in
22 the possession, custody or control ofthe responding party. The statement shall set forth the
23 name and address of any natural person or organization known or believed by that party to
24
have posse5sion, custody or control of that item or category of item.
25 If only part of an item or category of item in an inspection demand is objectionable, the

26 response shall contain astatement of compliance, or a representation ofinability to comply
27 with respect to the remainder ofthat item or category. If the responding party objects to the
28 demand for inspection of an item or category of item, the response shall (a) identify with
-2-
1
particularity any document, tangible thing, or land, faIling within any category of item
2
in the demand to which an objection is being made and (b) set forth clearly the extent of,
3
and the specific ground for, the objection. If an objection is based on a claim ofprivilege,
4
the particular privilege invoked shall be stated. If an objection is based on a statement that the
5
information soul is protected under Code of Civil Procedure, 5 2018.010, et. seq, that claim.
6
shall be expressly asserted.
7
You shall sign the response under oath unless the oath contains only objections. Ifyou
8
are a public or private corporation or parlnership or association or governmental agency, one
9
of your officers or agents shall sign the response under oath on your behalf. The response
10
shall comply fully with Code Of Civil Procedure, #2031.010, et. seq..
11
If the production and photocopying, as necessary, of the requested documents is not
12
completed on the aforementioned date, the production thereofwill be continued from day-to-
13
day thereafter at the same time and place, Saturdays, Sundays and holidays excepted„until
14
completed, and in the event of any scheduling conflict ofthe persons designated to so produce
15
the documents, parties orcounsei, then to the earliest mutually convenient date, time and
16
17
location. The documents or other things requested may be produced hereunder otherwise
subject to mutual agreement by the parties, through their counsel.
18
H. Paul Kondrick,
19
20 A Professional Corpora
21 Dated: December 23,2009 2-J 69744
H. Paul Kondrick
22
Attorney for Plaintiff, Courtney S. Etnyre
23
24
25 ,
26
27
28
-3-
.
1
EXHIBIT"A"
2
DEFINITIONS
3
4
reference:
5
1. . As used herein, the term «writing" or **writings" or "document" or
6
"documents" shall be defined to include any,kind of handwriting, typewriting, printing,
7
photostating, photographing, recording, and every other means of recording upon any tangible
8
thing, any form of communication or representation, including letters, words, pictures,

9
symbols or sounds, or combinations thereof, however printed, produced, reproduced, coded or
10
stored, of any kind or description whether sent or received or not including originals, copies,
11
reproductions, facsimiles, drafts, both sides ofany such item, including writings, drawings,
12
graphs, charts, photographs, phone-records, and other data compilations from which
13
information can be obtained, translated ifnecessary, through detection devices into

14
reasonably usable form, and further including, without limitation, all objects or tangible things
15
16
such as computer tapes or disks, compact discs C'CD's" or '*CD Roms") magnetic tapes,
17
punchcards, computer readouts, microfilms, microfiche, and all other records kept by
18
lectronie, photographic or mechanical means, and anything similar to the foregoing, however
19
denominated by you, including but not limited to electronically stored information in the
possession custody, or control ofyog or anyone acting on your behalf.
20
21
If a document has been prepared in more than one copy, and any copy was not
22
identical and is no longer identical with the original by reason ofa subsequent notation or
23 other notification of any kind whatsoever, including without limitation, notes or modifications
24 on the margins or back pages thereof, each non-identical copy is considered a separate
25 document for purposes of this document request, and it is to be made available hereunder.
26 '*Writings" further includes all drafts and notes, whether typed, printed, handwritten, or
27 otherwise, made in connection with such document or writing, whether used or not
28 Plaintiff further requests that any electronically stored information be produced in CD,
-4-
.
1
CD Roms or thumb drive form.
2
2. Each request contained herein for production of documents extends to any
3
documents in the possessian, custody or control of defendant QUALCOMM Incorporated
4
[hereinafter"QUALCOMM"]. A document is construed to be in its possession, custody or
5
control, if it is in its physical custody, gr if it is in the physical custody of any other person,
6
and defendant QUALCOMM: (a) owns such document in whole or in parti (b) has a right by
7
contract statute or otherwise to use, inspect examine or copy such document on any terms;
8
(c) has any understanding, express or implied, that defendant may use, inspect examine or
9
copy such document on any terms; or (d) has, as a practical matter, been able to use, inspect
10
11
writings shall include, without limitation, documents that are in the custody ofdefendant's
12
13
3. The term "you" or *'your" refers to QUALCOMM Incorporated, or any of its

14
predecessors-in-interest or successors-in-interest, and anyone acting on its behalf.

15
4. Whenever u5ed herein, the singular shall'include the plural and vice-versa
16
5. Whenever used herein, "and" may be understood to mean "or," and vice-versa,
1'7
wheneversuch instruction results in a broader request for information.

18
19
6. With respect to each document to which a claim of privilege is asserted,
20
separately, whether in a privilege log or otherwise, state the following:
(a) The type of document or writing;
21
(b) Its date, in particular any date set forth on the document or writing evidencing
22
23
the date on which it was signed or drafted;
24 (c) The name, business address, and present position of its originator(s) or
author(s);
25
26 (d) The position ofits originator(s) or author(s) at the time the document was
27
prepared;
28 (e) The name, business address and present position of each recipient of the
-5- Request for Production - QUALCOMM

.
1
document;
2
(f) The position of each recipient at the time the document was prepared and the
3
4
(g) A general,description of the subject matter of the document sufficient so that
5
the document may bebrought to the Court's attention for means ofa motion for
6
order compelling the production ofthe document;
7
(h) The bases of any claims of privilege; and
8
(i) If work-product privilege or immunity is asserted, the proceeding for which the
9
10
7. The term "acting on your behalf' includes, but is not limited to, your
11
investigators, agents, employees, and representatives, and your attorneys and their
12
13
8. The term"person" means any naiural person, partnership, firm, receiver,
14
corporation including federal corporation, association, trustee, group, organization, or any

15
entity of any nature.
16
9. The words '*concern" or"concerning" include referring to, alluding to,

17
responding to, relating to, connected with, commenting on, in respect of, about regarding,
18'
discussing, showing, describing, mentioning, reflecting, analyzing, constituting, evidencing, or

19
pertaining to.
20
21
10.
The term "policy" meRng each rule, procedure, or directive, formal or informal,
22
and each common understanding or course of conduct which was recognized as such by you or
23
any third person, or your agents, or other persons acting or purporting to act on your behalf.
24
11.
The singular number and masculine or feminine gender as used herein shall
25
embrace, and be read as applied as, the plural or masculine or feminine or the neuter, as
26
circumstances may make appropriate.
27 12. The term "relevant period" shall unless otherwise specified, be defined as
28 March 1, 2003 to the present unless otherwise defined.
-6-
. .
1
13. "Plaintiff' refers to Courtney S. Etnyre [hereinafter also sometimes referred to
2
as 'TINYRE"l.
3
14. "MINHAS" refers to defendant SANDIP C'MICKEY") MINHAS.
4
15.. '*Complaint" means the complaint filed herein by Courtney S. Etnyre on or
5
about November 2,2009 in the San Diego Superior Court bearing Civil Case No. 37-2009-
6
00101537- CU-OE-CTL.
7
16, Ifyou object to the discovery of electronically stored information on the
8
grounds that it is from a source that is not reasonably accessible because of undue burden or
9
expense and that the you will not search the source in the absence of an agreement with the
10
demanding party or court order, then you shall identify in yourresponse the types or categories
11
of sources of electronically stored information that you assert are not reasonably accessible.
12
By objecting and identifying information of a type or category of source or sources that are not
13
reasonably accessible, you will still preserve any objections you may have'relating to that
14
electronically stored informaion pumuant to Code of Civil Procedure, §2031.210(d), and

15
otherwise.
16
17
17. If in responding to a demand for production of electronically stored information
18
you object to a specified form for producing the inforination, or if no form is specified in the
19
demand, you shall state in you response the form in which you intend to produce each type of
20
information. Unless the parties otherwise agree or the court otherwise orders, the following
shall apply:
21
22 (1) Ifademand for production does not specify a form or forms for producing a type of
23 electronically stored information, you shall produce the information in the form or
24 forms in which it is ordinarily maintained or in a form that is reasonably usable; and
25 (2) You need not produce the same electronically stored information in more than one
26 form, unless it is non-identical as set forth in paragraph 1, above.
27 If necessary, at the reasonable expense of the demanding party, you shall, through detection
28 devices, translate any data compilations included in the demand into reasonablyusable form.
-7- Request for Production - QUALCOMM

.
18. If electronically stored information produced in discovery is subject to a claim

2 ofprivilege or of protection as attorney work-product, you may notify any party that received
3 the information ofthe claim and the basis forthe claim. After being notified of aclaim of
4 privilege or ofprotection as attorney work-product, aparty that received the information shall
5 immediately sequester the information and either return the specified information and any
6 copies that may exist or present the information to the court conditionally under seal for a
7 detern'ination of the claim.
8
9
130
follows:
1,1 ,
1. The complete personnel file maintained' by you on plaintiff, ETNYRE,
12
13
! reports, application for employment, selection and evaluation summaries, pattern interview
14
forms, written employment agreement(s), letters proposing or offering employment

15
evaluations, appraihts, and performance reviews, job proficiency reviews, salary hiStOly,
16
awards and honors, and the like.

17
18
2. All personnel files maintained by you on, or in relation to, plaintiffduring the
19
relevant period whether said personnel files are complete, summarized, segregated and
20
whether maintained by you at any branch or regional office, headquarters, your home or other
21
corporate office, or by any employee, officer, director or agent ofyours.
22
23
evidence, ortendto evidence, your reasons forplacihgplaintiff, ETNYRE, on administrative
leave on or about September 26,2007.
24
28 5. All writings which you, or anyoneacting on your behalf, believe concern or
-8-
. .
1
evidence, or tend to evidence, your reasons for placing plaintiff, ETNYRE, on a performance
2
improvement plan ['*PIf'"1 in or about October 2007.
3
6. All writings which you, oranyone acting on your behalf, believe concern or
4
evidence, or tend to evidence, any progressive discipline or warnings leading up to plaintiff
5
being placed on a PIP in or about October 2007.
6
7
evidence, or tend to evidence, refer, relate or pertain, to expenses incurred by your Patent
8
Department or Group for so-called "team-building" events during the period December 2004
9
through December 31, 2007, in particular events that your Patent Department or group
10
organized and held, e.g. company-sponsored social events, dinners, "happy hours," tour(s) of
11
various wineries, and the like, designed to promote comradely within the Patent Department,
12
which your employees ofthe Patent Department, includingplaintiff, ETNYRE, were invited
13
or encouraged to attend, including but not limited to expense reports, requisitions or requests,
14
summaries, description of events, approvals and proofs ofpayment or reimbursement.

15
16
evidence, or tend to evidence, refer, relate or pertain, to expenses incurred by plaintiff,

17
ETNYRE, or defendAnt, MINHAS, in relation to their travels to and from New Jersey on your
18
19
business during the period January and February 2006, including but not limited to expense
20
reports, requisitions or requests, stimmaries, description of events, approvals and proofs of
21
payment or reimbursement for food, travel, lodging, purchases, taxis, and the like.
22
23
evidence, or tend to evidence, refer, relate or pertain, to your fraternization or nepotism
policies during the relevant period.
24
26 evidence, or tend to evidence, refer, relate or pertain, to your policies relative to sexual
27 relations between your employees, e.g., between co-worker who are or were not married to
-9-
Request f6r Production - QUALCOMM
.
1
11.
All writings which you, or anyone acting on your behalf, believe concern or
2
evidence, or tend to evidence, refer, relate or pertain, to your reasons for not promoting
3
plaintiff, EFNYRE, during the period December 2004 through and including the present.
4
12. Your personnel policy manuals and employee handbooks or other statement of
5
employment policies issued by you during the relevant period.
6
113. All.writings which you, or anyone acting on your behalf, believe evidence, tend
7
to evidence, refer, relate, pertain or concern your personnel policies or practices, including but
8
not limited to employee performance improvement plans, administrative leaves or suspension,
9
progressive discipline, including warnings whether verbal or written, discrimination,
10
11
14.
Any and all your publicly issued annual financial reports or statements during
12
13
15.
All correspondence, including but not limited to, letters, memoranda, or other
14
writings, between or among MINHAS and YOU, including notes of any conversations,
15
relating to plaintiff, and in particularany alleged discrimination, retaliation or harassment of

· 16
17
18
toevidence, refer, relate, pertain or concern to your investigation into the alleged sexual or
19
20
other assault ofplaintiff, ETNYRE, by defendant MINHAS, including but not limited to
voice recordings, emails, statements, correspondence, and the like.
21
22
17.
23
to evidence, refer, relate, pertain or concern to your investigation into plaintiffs allegations of
24
harassment retaliation or discrimination based on sex or gender or disability during the
relevant period.
25
28 retaliation or discrimination based on sex/gender or disability during the relevant period in
-10-
.
1
your Patent Department or group.
2
3
to evidence, refer, relate, pertain or concern to your investigation of any complaint or charge
4
of harassment retaliation or discrimination whether based on sex/gender or disability during
5
the relevant period in your Patent Department or group.
6
7
to evidence, refer, relate, pertain or concern any complaint whatsoever against, or relating to,
8
plaintiff, ETNYRE, including but not limited to her duties as Senior Patent Prosecution
9
Paralegal/Project Manager or Patent Prosecution Senior Paralegal/Project Manager, or
10
11
21. All writings ,between you, on one part, and any other person, on the other part,
12
that refer, directly or indirectly, to plaintiff, ETNYRE, including but not limited to
13
communications with, or involving, any ofthe following persons:
14
Barbara Agniholri
15
Avneesh Agrawal
16
Jane Baker
17
Nancy Barnhart
18
Charles Bergen
1;9
Steven Colb
20
Joanne Conway
21
Deborah Dean
22

23
Brett Gahagan
24
Sandy Godsey
25
Albert Harnois
26
David Huffaker
27
Artie Kane
28
-11- Request ft,r Production - QUALCOMM

. .
1
Kate Lane
2
Lou Lupin
3
Kyong Macek
4
Judith-Matson, PhI).
5
Michelle Maybaum
6
Dmitty Milikovsky
7
Sandip ('Mickey") Minhas
8
Nan Moser
9
10
Milan Patel
11
Arlene Pollard
12
Tami Procopio
13
Thomas Rouse
14
Bill Sailer
15
Janet Sana
16
Kelly Scanlan
17
Susie Simsik
18
Michael Straub
19
Mary Stewart
20
Dan Sullivan
21

22
Harris Teague
23
Phil Wadsworth
24
Edith Watson
25
DeeAnn Wong, M.D.

26
27
22. All writings which you, or anyone acting on your behalf believe evidence, tend
28
to evidence, refer, relate, pertain to your announcing mentioning or discussing the
-12-
.
1
administrative leave or suspension ofplaintiff, ETNYRE's, employment during the relevant
2
period.
3
23.
4
to'evidence, refer, relate, pertain to you policy with respect to conduct between.your
5
employees, discrimination retaliation and harassment based on gender/sex or disability,
6
including accommodation of any employee experiencing a disability, maintained by you
7
8
24.
9
to evidence, refer, relate, pertain or concern plaintiffs unsatisfactory, inadequate or poor job
10
performance, including work demeanor or attitude, during the relevant period.
11
25. The writtenjob descriptions forthe positions of Senior Patent Prosecution
12
ParalegaVProject Manager and Patent Prosecution Senior Paralegal/Project Manager, or
13
14
26.
Please provide records or writings which reflect the name, address and
15
16
complaint or charge against you either through your procedures or any state or federal agency,
17
based on alleged gender/sex or disability, including the date the complaint wasmade and the
18

19
27.
Please provide the records or writing which reflect the name, address and
20
21
telephone number of every persen who has filed a lawsuit against you, alleging discrimination
22
retaliation or harassment based on alleged gender/sex or disability, the date the complaint was
23
filed andif applicable and not subject to any confidentiality agreement, disposition ofthe
24 lawsuit, and even ifthere was a confidentiality agreement or order, then documents or writings,
that reflect resolution of the action or matter.
25
27 to evidence, refer, relate, pertain to your investigation of plaintiffs claims, and in particular
-13-
.
1
and otherwise) calendars concerning the suspension, Performance Improvement Plan ('*PIP'D,
2
and administrative or disability leave, and your accommodation ofplaintifs disability, during
3
4
29.
Any and all tape or other electronic recordings, or transcripts ofrecordings, of
5
any conversations, meetings, interviews or discussions that evidence, tend to evidence, refer,
6
relate, pertain or concern plaintiff s discrimination, retaliation, harassment assault or other
7
claims, or your suspension of plaintiff, her administrative leave, PIP, and transfer to other
8
9
10
to evidence, refer, relate, pertain or concern any of your affirmative defenses or expected
11
affirmative defenses to the complaint herein.
12
31.
Any Writings which you, or anyone acting on your behalf, believe evidence,
13
tend to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to any complaints of improper behavior by defendant
14
MINHAS, during the relevant period.
15
32. Any writings which you, or anyone acting on your behalf, believe evidence,
16
tend to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to any complaints of improper behavior relative to
17
alleged gender or sex discrimination, retaliation or harassment, byany persons within your
18

19
20
to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to statements made by defendant SANDIP MINHAS,

21
regarding plaintiff, ETNYRE, to the effect that he wanted to *'get in her (ETNYRE). "
22
23
34. A]1 writings which you, or anyone acting in your behalf, believe evidence, tend
24
to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to threatening, abusive and/or harassing statements made
by defendant, MNHAS, to plaintiff ETNYRE.
25
26
35.
28 Milikovsky, to plaintiff, ETNYRE, to the effect of"you (ETNYRE) know what your problem
-14-
. .
1. is? Yourinability toeffectively use latex.", or words to the effect of the foregoing, and your
4 ®evidence, refer, relate or pertain to statements made Senior Director of Human Resources,
5 Jane Baker, to Tami Procopio, to the effect of "What can you tell me about Courtney's affair
6
with Mickey?", or words to the effect ofthe foregoing, and your investigation, if any, into said' ,
8 37.
9 to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to plaintiff, ETNYRE's, requests to you, or anyone acting
10
on your behalf, to seek other employment opportunities within QUALCOMM and outside her
11
department.
12
38. All writings which you, or anyoneacting in your behalf, believe evidence, tend
13
to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to reasons plaintiff, ETNYRE's, requests for other
14

15

16
17
39. All writings which you, or anyone acting in your behalf: believe evidence, tend
18
to evidence, refer, relateor pertain to plaintiff, ETNYRE's, application for worker's
19
40.
20
21
to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to the reasons for denial ofplaintiff, ETNYRE's, worker's
compensation claim.
22
41.
23 All writings which you, or anyone acting in your behal£ believe evidence, tend
25 ["DFEH"l Complaint filed on or about February 23,2007 by plaintifc ETNYRE, bearing case
26 number E200607-D-0961-00-se, including but not limited to your investigation of, or
27 response, to that complaint
42.
28 All writings which you, or anyone acting in your behalf, believe evidence, tend
-15
. .
1
to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to the DFEH Cemplaint filed on orabout·February 23,
2
2007 by plaintiff, ETNYRE, bearing case number E200607-D-0961-01-s, including but not
3
4
43.
5
to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to the DFEH Complaint filed on or about September 27,
6
2007 by plaintiff, ETNYRE, bearing case number E200708-D-0400-00-rse, including but not
7
8
9
to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to the DFEH Complaint filed on or about December 5,
10
11
limited to your investigation of, or response, to that complaint

12
13
toevidence, refer, relate or pertain to the decision and direction by you and defendant
14
MINHAS, to plaintiff, ETNYRE, to travel to New Jersey for your company or corporate
15

16
17
46. - All writings which you, or anyone acting in your behalf, believe evidence, tend
18
to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to your knowledge of any and all inappropriate physical
19
touchings, including assaultsor batteries, ofyour employees, "uninvited kisses", "fondling",
20
having buttocks or private parts ofone's body grabbed, and "attempted sexual activity,"
21
especially within your Patent Department or group, including plaintiff, ETNYRE, by
22
23
47.
24 to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to your investigation(s) of each and every inappropriate
25 physical touching, including assaults or batteries, ofyour employees, "uninvited kisses",

26 "fondling", having buttocks or private parts ofone's body grabbed, and"attempted sexual
28 defendant MINHAS, during the relevant period.
-16-
.
1
48.
All documents and.writings evidencing any statements by, or written or oral
2
communications with, any present or former employee of QUALCOMM concerning any of
3
the matters alleged in the complaint herein.
4
49. Any statementsr declarations or affidavits (draft or final, signed or unsigned)
5
received by y6u or anyone acting onyourbehalffrom anyperson with knowledge ofthe
6
matters alleged in the complaint herein.
7
50. All documentsand writings relating toany charge(s) or claims against you that
8
you, or anyone acting on your behalf, have filed with administrative agencies, including the
9
DFEH, the California Equal Employment Development Department, the United States Equal
10
Employment Opportunity Commission, or the National Labor Relations Board relative to any
11
12
acting on your behalf, during the relevant period.
13
51. All documents and writings relating to any complaints(s) against you that you,
14
or anyone acting on your behalf, have filed in a court oflaw, including the Superior Court of
15
California, a similar state court in another state, or any U.S. District Court relative to any
16

1'7
acting on your behalf, during the relevant period,

18
52. All documents and writings relating or refening to any sexual interaction
19
20
between defendant, MINHAS, and plaintiff either before or after the sexual events alleged to
have occurred on orabout February 22,2006.
21
53.
22
23
to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to your training of personnel within your Patent
24 Department or group relative to your discrimination, retaliation or harassment policies during

25
54.
26 All writings which you, or anyone acting in your behalf, believe evidence, tend
27 to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to Bill Sailer's communications with plaintiff, ETNYRE,
28 during the relevant period, including but not limited to notes, e-mails, calendars,
-17-
.
1 correspondence, and the like, whether written in hard copy or electronically,

3 to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to your investigation into any claims or charges of
-4 harassment retaliationordiscrimination based on gender/sex or disability, within your Patent
5 Department or group, during the relevant period.
56. All writings which you, or anyone acting inyour behalf, believe evidence, tend
7
to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to plaintiff, ETNYRE, consenting to defendant MINHAS,
8 having sexual, relations with her, in particular disclosures by defendant MINHAS, of his
9 romantic, intimate or sexual relationship(s) to you, either in advance or concurrent with any of
10
those types of relationship between plaintiff and defendant MINHAS.
11
12
to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to your communications with Charles Nelson, Ph. D.,
13
14
58. All writings which you, or anyone acting in your behalf, believe evidence, tend ,
15
to evidence, refer, relate or pertain to the Kelley 0'Parly v. Madill, civil action filed in the
16
above-entitled court bearing civil case no. GIC 868143 [hereinafter the "0'Patry Action"],
17
including pleadings, discovery (including depositions, interrogatories, requests for admission

18
and the like), investigation reports and notes by you.

19
H. Paul Kondrick,
20
?1..M1 Y-*(
21
23
H. Paul Kondrick, Esq. .--
Attorney for Plaintiff, COURTNEY S. ETNYRE-
24
25
26
27
28
-18-
. .
1
2
H. Paul Kondrick, A.P.C.
3130 Fourth Avenue
Telephone: (619) 291-2400
4
Facsimile: (619) 291-7123
5
6
8
9

10

)
)
13 V.
14 )
SANDIP C'MICKEY") MINHAS, individually,)
15
QUALCOMM Incorporated, a Delaware )
16
)
17 Defendants. )
)
18
L Candice E. Caufield, declare that:

19
20 I am, and was, at the times of the service hereinafter mentioned, over the age of 18
21
and not a party to the within action; I am employed in the County of San Diego, California
22
where the service occurs; and my business address is 3130 Fourth Avenue, San Diego,
23
California.
24
25
On December 23,2009, I served the foregoing document(s) described as:
26
1. AMENDED NOTICE OF PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR ORDER
27
28
EMPLOYMENT, AND TO AWARD MONETARY SANCTIONS;
-1-
Proof of Service
1
2. MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF
2 PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR ORDER QUASHING OR MODIFYING
3
4
3. DECLARATION OF H. PAUL KONDRICK IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF'S
5 MOTION FOR ORDER QUASHING OR MODIFYING DEFENDANT'S
6 TO AWARD MONETARY SANCTIONS;
7
4. SEPARATE STATEMENT OF SUBPOENAED BUSINESS RECORDS IN
8 DISPUTE IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR ORDER
QUASHING OR MODIFYING DEFENDANT'S CIVIL SUBPOENAS
9
PERTAINING TO HERPRIOR EMPLOYMENT, AND TO AWARD
10
MONETARY SANCTIONS'LRULES OF COURT, RULE 3.1345(a)];
5.
11 PLAINTIFF, COURTNEYS. ETNYRE'S, REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION
OF DOCUMENTS TO DEFENDANT, QUALCOMM INCORPORATED
12 [SET NO. ONE (1)]; and
13
6. PLAINTIFF, COURTNEY S. ETNYRE'S, REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION
14 OF DOCUMENTS TO DEFENDANT, SANDIP (*'MICKEY'D M[NHAS
[SET NO. ONE (1)].
15
16
on all interested parties to this action by placing true copies thereof enclosed in, sealed
17 envelopes addressed' as follows:

Wilson Cosmo & Turner LLP
19
550 West "C" Street Suite 1050
Telephone: (619) 236-9600
21
Facsimile: (619) 236-9669
22
Attorneys for Defendant, Sandip C'Mickey'D Minhas
23
24 Melissa L. Klick, Esq.
25
401 "B" Street Tenth Floor
Telephone: (619) 237-5200
27
Facsimile: (619) 615-0700
28
-2-
Proof of Service
.
1 BY U.S. MAn. (AS INDICATED ABOVE): I placed the originals ofthe described
2
documents in a seated envelope addressed to the parties as indicated above on December 23,
3
4 2009. I am familiar with the firm's practice of collection and processing correspondence for
5 mailing. I personally deposited' the claim in the United States post ofEce or in a mailbox,
6 substation, mail chute, or other like facility regularly maintained by the government ofthe
8
9
X BY PERSONAL SERVICE: Ipersonallygathered atrue copyof the above
11 5:00 P.m on December 23,2009 will file the originalproofofpersonal service with the Court
12 upon request
13 BY FEDERAL EXPRESS/OVERNIGHT MAIL (as indicated above): Iplaced a

14
15
true copy in a sealed' envelope addressed to the parties as indicated above, on December 23,
16 2009. I personally caused it to be deposited with Federal Express on the same day in the
18 BY FACSIMIT:E (as. indicated above): By use of facsimile machine number, (619)

19
291-7123, I faxed a true copy(ies) ofthe document(s) listed above to the parties, on December
20
21
23,2009, at their fax numberslisted above as indicated by their names. The document(s)
22 were/was trAnRmitted by facsimile transmission and the transmission was reported as
24 facsimile machine. A copy ofthe transmission report will be attachedto the proofof service
25 .
mdicating ths,f the documents were transmitted properly, as necessary, in the future.
26
Ill
27
28
-3-
Proof of Service
.
1
I declare under penalty ofpedury under,the laws ofthe State of California that the
2
foregoing is true and correct Executed, this 234 day ofDecember, 2009.
3
4
Cal@ice E. Caufield
5
1
8
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ProofofService
EXHIBIT 4
..
PAUL, PLEVIN, PHONE 619 ·237·5200 FAX 619·615·0700'| WWWPAULPLEVIN.COM
St SULLIVAN &
CONNAUGHTON LLP
MICHAEL C SULLIVAN (619) 744-3655 msullivan@paulplevin.com
January 22, 2010
Paul Kondrick
3130 Fouth Avenue
San Diego, CA 92103
Re: Subpoenas to Previous Employers

Dear Paul:
Enclosed are Qualcomm's Responses to Ms. Etnyre's First Request for Production of
Documents. I was disappointed to learn that you had denied our request for an
extension to produce responsive documents and respond to the broad and extensive
document demand that you had personally served on December 23,2009. After
having given you many, many extensions to your tolling agreement, often on the last
day, and having, granted your request for an extension to respond to discovery, I must
say that your decision was an unpleasant surprise. I hope that does not portend a
trend in the future.
A few comments on the requests and responses are in order. In addition to the sheer
number of requests, many of your requests were overbroad in the extreme, making it
very difficult to respond. Moreover, some of the requests sought unduly burdensome
electronic discovery. ,lf you wish to discuss some reasonabletailoring of those
reqwests, we would be happy to meet with you to discuss.
In addition, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 2031.280, Qualcomm objects

to the place and manner of requested production. In addition to the responses, we are
also producing almost 2000 pages of documents to your office on a CD. Given the
breadth of your requests, the search for and processing of responsive documents is
ongoing and we will produce the remainder of the documents when they are ready for
production, along with a privilege log.
Finally, to respond to the requests, Qualcomm is forensically collecting, and searching

the electronic media of more than a dozen employees. Becawse of the nature of the
search, we plan to use defined search terms to uncover potentially responsive
..
Case No. 37-2009-00101'537-CU-OE-CTL
Sandlp
Courtney
Etnyre
oetnyre
Micky
harass!
retaliat!
O'Patry
Madill
Erin
Madill
Kelley
battery
emotion!
discrimin!
sex!
"New Jersey"
"bloody nose"
physical
threat!
abus!
"happy hour"
touch!
grop!
butt
promiscuity
"so fucking beautiful"
"so fucking intelligent"
"get in her"
latex
condom
CE
kiss
naked
nude
invit!
fondll
harassment
sex
love
intimate
interview
job
affair
apply
application
romance
confidential
conference
consult
dialogue
meeting
..
Case No. 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-Crl
private
passion
accommodat!
position
Minhas
Mickey
offensive
inappropriate
rape
assault
flirt
disability
injury
damage
EXHIBIT 5
Page 1 of 3
. .
Melissa Listug Klick
From: Mike Sullivan,
Sent: Monday, January 25, 2010 8:55 AM

To: 'Paul Kondrick'
Subject: RE: Courtney Etnyre v. Minhas & QUALCOMM
Attachments: Microsoft Word - Kondrick Itr 1-22-10 re discovery.pdf
Paul,
Based on your email below, it appears that you have yet received my letter that accompanied our
responses to your document demands. I have attached a copy for your review.
As noted in my letter, I was disappointed that you refused to agree to any extension of time for
Qualcomm to produce documents In response to Ms. Etnyre's voluminous discovery requests. This is
especially troublesome since we have readily agreed to many courtesies throughout this matter. in
addition, the requests were served on December 23 - a time at which Ms. Etnyre was aware that all
Qualcomm employees were encouraged to take vacation until the new year started.
Nevertheless, we did timely provide our responses and almost 2,000 pages of documents. Expecting
that every single document be produced within the truncated time provided is patently unreasonable.
For example, we anticipate having to search and review electronic documents for several custodians.
These documents must then be reviewed for responsiveness and privilege, and then processed for
tracking and production. This process is extensive and time-consuming, and Qualcomm is pursuing it
diligently. in addition, as you see from my letter enclosing the response to the document request, we are
seeking your input into the search terms used to search the electronic records of the custodians, to
avoid inefficient and unnecessary disputes as to the scope of search made.
Regarding your statement that you intend to inspect the "originals" of Qualcomm documents is puzzling,
as most of the documents are electronically stored. Why don't we discuss what you're seeking to
accomplish and seek an appropriate resolution.
As to Ms. Etnyre's deposition, we expect it to go forward on Thursday, as it was noticed in early

December weeks before Ms. Etnyre served any discovery. As you know, the fact that our production of
documents is ongoing is not a proper basis for refusing to produce your client for her validly-noticed
deposition. This deposition has been properly noticed for almost two months, and will go forward as
scheduled.
Paul, l would hope that the discovery process in this case will proceed in a professional and constructive
manner. The signs so far in the case (refusing to have your client sign a consent for documents that you
concede are relevant and properly produced, personally serving discovery requests just
before Christmas, refusing to agree to reasonable extensions to respond to discovery requests) are not
encouraging, and I hope that you and I can work through these kinds of issues in the future in a
professional and constructive manner.
Regards,
Mike
From: Paul Kendrick [mailto:kondrick@msn.com]

To: Melissa Listug Klick; Mike Sullivan
Melissa,
2/2/2010
Page 2 of 3
First, thank you for taking time this afternoon (Saturday) to drop off the
I've now spent the better part of 2 hours this afternoon reviewing the disk. First, I am
unable to open the jile named "DATA"
containing 142 kb of data or information. The
error message continued to appear that both the "DAT" & "OPT" subjiles or files
were damaged or "not supported." Inthe event that the "DATA" jile on the
QUALCOMM contains intended information as part of the document production, then
pls. inform our office of the program or method to open the "DATA" jile.
In relation to the "IMAGES" jilefolder, I opened the 1697 pages oftifformatted don
I reviewed those pages. We have, of course, not received QUALCOMM
written response to plaintiffs lst request for production of documents so we can't be
sure if the documents produced on the cd constitute QUALCOMM's complete
document production, but if the 1697 pages ARE QUALCOMM's full & complete
intended document production, then we have a serious discovery problem.
Sub-file 00 (464 pages) consists of what could be characterized as a partial personnel

file, e.g. pay records, SOME performance evaluations, hiring info, including some
standard QUALCOMM forms or agreements, including policies, some emails &
correspondence pertaining to Ms. Etnyre's disability leave of absence, termination,
return to work & some benefits info pretty much consisting of Tracy Lawson emails
(including some redacted pages, pp. 312-316). In my estimation, the bulk of the
materials on the cd, approximately 1300+ pages, consist of QUALCOMM's "Policies
& Procedures" manual or publication.
Referring to Plaintgrs Request for Production of Documents propounded to your

client, it appears that your client has NOT produced any documents or writings
whatsoever relative to plaintiffs document categories 3-58!
I Lookforward to receipt of the hard copies of the documents on Monday, Jan. 25th, to
perhaps better evaluate whether my initial impressions of QUALCOMM's
cd/electronic document production are in error. In addition, just to make sure we're
all on the same page, I stil! expect to inspect the originals of QUALCOMM's files &
documents & writings at a mutually convenient time. I also look for the
QUALCOMM's document production response so that we are fully informed as to
whether the present documents being produced, in fact, include atl writings responsive
to the 58 document production categories.
As a final comment, that is for you & Mike Sultivan to seriously consider, pls
understand that IF QUALCOMM is not producing all requested documents at this
and discrimination claims, then it is highly unlikely that Ms. Etnyre's deposition witt
2/2/2010
Page 3 of 3
.
proceed on Thursday. 1 look forward to taking these matters up with you & Mike
-Paul Kondrick
2/2/2010
EXHIBIT 6
401 B STREEr, TENTH FLOOR, SAN Di,CA 9.2 101
P PHONE 619·237·5200 | FAX 619·615·0700 | WWWPAULPLEVIN.COM
PAUL, PLEVIN,
SULLIVAN & MICHAEL C. SULLWAN (619) 744-3655 msullivan@paulplevin.com
C CONNAUGHTON LLP
Janwary 27, 2010
Paul Kondrick
3130 Fourth Avenue
Re: plaintiffs Attendance at ,Deposition

Dear Paul:
Based on owr telephone conversation, you informed us that Ms. Etmyre will not appear
for her deposition tomorrow, January 28, 2010. As you know, Ms. Etnyre's deposition
was properly noticed almost two months ago on December 3,2009, weeks before you
served any discovery. Based on your emails and our conver*ations, you
acknowledged that we are entitled to the deposition and that the only basis for her not
to appear is Qualcomm's ongoing document production. Specifically, you assert that
you are entitled to review all responsive documents before your client is asked about
any issues addressed in any documents that remain to be produced. However, as we
have discussed, this is not an appropriate basis for her failure to appear.
Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure §2019.020(a), "the fact that a party is conducting
discovery, whether by deposition or another method, shall not operate to delay the
discovery of any other party." Your cliemt did not object to the deposition notice, and
the date and location have been confirmed with your office. The Supreme Court of
California has confilmed that the ostensible disadvantage of being deposed :before
obtaining such discovery is not good cause for changing the timing of discovery, "nor
does it justify a conclusion that such timing will result in 'annoyance, embarrassment
or oppression."' (Rosemont v. Sup. Ct. (1964) 60 Cal.2d 709,714.) Indeed, the
Supreme Court explained, "it is inherent tin such proceedings that the party who
secures discovery first may derive advantages by securing information from an
adversary before he or she is required to reciprocate by divulging information to him."
Cid) Additionally, the Rosemont Cowrt instructed that "[plarties should be encouraged
to expedite discovery and should not needlessly be deprived of the advantages that
normally flow from prompt action." (/d.)
Here, Qualcomm properly served discovery and a deposition notice weeks before Ms.
Etnyre propounded any discovery. Even Ms. Etynre needed additional time to
respond to discovery, which Qualcomm granted. Qualcomm's reciprocal need -
especially given the intervening holidays and expansive demands - should not be
Paul, Plevin, Sullivan|onnaughton LLP
Paul Kondrick
January 27, 2010
Page Two
surprising amd provides Ms. Etnyre with no legal basis to fail to appear at her
dePosition.
Nonetheless, Qualcomm agreed not to utilize any documents in Ms. Etnyre's

deposition as exhibits that have not previously been produced. You declined this
compromise (which is not required) and will only agree to allow questioming on the
"transactions" covered by the documents already produced by Qualcomm. Indeed, it
is your position that Qualcomm cannot ask Ms. Etynre questions even about the
documents sbe has already produced if there may be otlner docwments not yet found
that address the same subject.
Given your refusal to produce Ms. Etnyre for her deposition tomorrow, Qualcomm will
appear ex parte on Wedmesday, February 3,2010, at 8:30 a.m. before Judge Strauss
seeking an order for Ms. Etmyre to appear at her deposition, or in the alternative, for,an
order shorteming time om such a motion, and for appropriate sanctions.
This will also confirm that we discussed your availability for deposition on Thursday,
February 4, 2010, and you agreed that you were available that date. Mr. Zilberman
imdicated that,he would attempt to be available that date.
Please contact me by 2:00 p.m. today if you have changed your mind and' Will agree to
produce yowr client tomorrow. Thank you.
Sincerely,
& Connaughton Li-i' ,7
By..
/* i 91106
Michael d{ 6iOari- -

William B. Sailer, Esq.
. . P. 1
TRANSMISSION REPORT
(WED) JAN 27 2010 13:33

USER NAME iDOCUMENT# 5112646-378
DESTINATION 92917123 TIME STORED 13:32, 1/27
DEBT. NUMBER 92917123 TIME SENT 13:32, 1/27
F CODE DURATION 48sec
MODE ECM
PAGES 3 sheets
RESULT : 'OK
P 401 8 STREET, TENTH FLOOR, SAN DIff]O, CA 92101
93
€
PAUL, PLEVIN,
SULLIVAN &
CONNAUGHTON LLP
PHONE.619·237·6200 | FA)(619·615-0700 | WWW:PAULPLEVIN.COM
TO See distribution list below NO OF PAGES 3, i nduding this page

FROM Michael C. Sullivan PHONE NO (61 9) 243-1561
RE Qualcomm/Etnyre
O URGENT C FOR REVIEW O PLEASE COMMENT O PLEASE REPLY O FOR YOUR INFORMATION
Name Fax No. Phone No.

Paul Kondrick (619) 291-7123 (619) 291-2400
Lonny Zilberman (619) 236-9669 (619) 236-9600

UP
. P. 1
TRANSMISSION REPORT
(WED) JAN 27 201.0 13:37

USER NAME DOCUMENT# 5112646-379
DESTINATION 92369669 TIME STORED 13:32, 1/27
DEBT. NUMBER 92369669 TIME SENT 13:33, 1/27
F CODE
DURATION 37sec
MODE ECM
PAGES 3 sheets
RESULT 0K
P 401 B STREET. TENTH 1:LOOR. SAN,DIEGO, CA 92101
SE
PAUL, PLEVIN, PHONE 619·237·5100 | FA)(69·615·0700 | WWW.PAULPLEviN.COM
SULLIVAN &
CONNAUGHTON Lip
TO See distribution list below NO OF PAGES 3, induding this page

FROM Michael C. Sullivan PHONE NO (619) 243-1561
RE Qualcomm/Etnyre
O URGENT O FOR REVIEW O PLEASE COMMENT O PLEASE REPLY

P FOR YOUR INFORMATION
1
1
Name Fax No. Phone No.

Paul Kondrick (619) 291-7123 (619) 291-2400
Lonny Zilberman (619) 236-9669 (619) 236-9600

UP
U-
1
2610 FEB -2 PM 2: 27
2
3130 Fourth Avenue

Telephone: (619) 291-2400
4 FEB 2'10 PM 1:54
Facsimile: (619) 291-7123
5
6
8
9
10

11
)
)
13
V. )
)
14
16
)
17
Defendants. )
)
18

19
20
I am, and was, at the times of the service hereinafter mentioned, over the age of 18
21 and not a party to the within action; I am employed in the County of San Diego, California
22
23
California.
24
On February 2, 2010, I served the foregoing document(s) described as:

25
1. PLAINTIFF'S EXPARTE APPLICATION FOR ORDER DIRECTING THAT

26
THE TIMING OF PLAINTIFF'S DEPOSITION BE CONDITIONED ON
27 DEFENDANT, QUALCOMM INCORPORATED, PRODUCING
DOCUMENTS TO ALLOW PLAINTIFF TO REFRESH HER
28
RECOLLECTION; and

. .
1
2. [PROPOSED] EXPARTE ORDER DIRECTING THAT THE TIMING OF
PLAINTIFF'S DEPOSITION BE CONDITIONED ON DEFENDANT,
2
QUALCOMM INCORPORATED, PRODUCING DOCUMENTS TO
3 ALLOW PLAINTIFF TO REFRESH HER RECOLLECTION
4
5
6

7 Wilson Cosmo & Turner LLP
550 West"C" Street, Suite 1050

8
San Diego, CA 92101
9 Telephone: (619) 236-9600
Facsimile: (619) 236-9669
10
11
Attorneys for Defendant Sandip ("Mickey") Minhas
12

13
14
Telephone: (619) 237-5200
16
Facsimile: (619) 615-0700
17
Attorneys for Defendant, QUALCOMM Incorporated
18
BY U.S. MAIL (AS INDICATED ABOVE): I placed the originals or copies ofthe
19
20 described documents, as appropriate, in a sealed envelope addressed to the parties as indicated
21 above on February 2, 2010. I am familiar with the firm's practice of collection and processing
22
correspondence for mailing. I personally deposited the claim in the United States post office
23
or in a mailbox, substation, mail chute, or other like facility regularly maintained by the
24
government of the United States, in a sealed envelope, properly addressed with postage paid.
25,
26 BY PERSONAL SERVICE: I personally gathered a true copy of the above
28
5:00 p.m. on February 2, 2010 will file the original proof of personal service with the Court

. .
1
uponjrequest.
2
BY FEDERAL EXPRESS/OVERNIGHT MAIL (as indicated above): I placed a
3
true copy in a sealed envelope addressed to the parties as indicated above, on February 2,
4
5
7
X BY FACSIMILE (as indicated above): By use of facsimile machine number, (619)
8
291-7123, I faxed a true copy(ies) ofthe document(s) listed above to the parties, on February
9
2, 2010, at their fax numbers listed above as indicated by their names. The document(s)
10
11 were/was transmitted by facsimile transmission and the transmission was reported as
13
facsimile machine. A copy ofthe transmission report will be attached to the proof of service
14
indicating that the documents were transmitted properly, as necessary, in the future.
15
I declare under penalty of pegury under the laws ofthe State of California that the
16
17 foregoing is true and correct. Executed this 2nd day of February, 2010.
18 IC=*1-
Candice E. Caufield
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

|PERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNI
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO :
MINUTE ORDER
Date: 02/02/2010 Time: 03:06:13 PM Dept: C-60
Judicial Officer Presiding: Judge Yuri Hofmann

Clerk: Grachelle Macedo
Bailiff/Court Attendant: n/a

ERM:
Reporter: Not Reported
Appearances:
The Court recuses itself for the following reason: Qualcomm's general counsel is a personal friend.

Dept: C-60 Calendar No.:
.
F,
1 H. Paul Kondrick, Esq. (State Bar No. 88566) (*404,0 L eD
H. Paul Kendrick, a Professional Corporation
Superior Court
2
3
3130 Fourth Avenue
San Diego, CA 92103-5801,
Telephone: (619) 291-2400 i
JAN 2 f 2010
BY: 4 '.-
Facsimile: (619) 291-7123
4 Attorney for Plaintiff, COURTNEY S. ETNYRE -44'10 PM 240
5
9
COURTNEY S. ETNYRE, individually , ) Case No. 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL
10 )
Plaintiff, ) SECOND AMENDED NOTICE OF
11 PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR
12 ) MODIFYING DEFENDANT'S CIVIL
SANDIP ("MICKEY") MINHAS, individually, ) SUBPOENAS FOR PRODUCTION
13 QUALCOMM Incorporated, a Delaware ) OF BUSINESS RECORDS
corporation, and DOES 1 through 40, inclusive, PERTAINING TO HER PRIOR
14 ) EMPLOYMENT, AND TO AWARD
MONETARY SANCTIONS
15 Defendants. )
) Date: March 12, 2010
16 Oral Argument: March 19,2010 ,*/
Time: 1:30 p.m.
Judge: Hon. Richard fi L. Strauss
18
19
To: Defendants, QUALCOMM Incorporated and SANDIP ("MICKEY") MINHAS, by

20
and through their respective attorneys of record herein, Paul, Plevin, Sullivan & Connaughton,
21
LLP, and in particular attorney Michael C. Sullivan thereof, and Wilson, Cosmo & Turner LLP,
22
and in particular attorney Leonid M. Zilberman:
23
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that for purposes ofthis motion, and in particular filing
24
pleadings, on March 12, 2010, at 1:30 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, in
25
Department DC-75 ofthe above-entitled Court, located at 330 West Broadway, San Diego,
26
California 92101, plaintiff, COURTNEY S. ETNYRE ["ETNYRE"], will move the Court for an
27
order quashing or otherwise modifying the five (5) Civil Deposition Subpoenas for Production
28
of Business Records pertaining to her prior employment issued by defendant, QUALCOMM

. .
1 Incorporated ["QUALCOMM"] variously dated December 3,4 and 8,2009, directed to

2 plaintiffs former employers, namely law firms Casey, Gerry, Schenk, Francavilla, Blatt &
.
7 monetary sanctions. In the event that the parties, or any ofthem, request oral argument on this
8 imotion, in particular after the Court issues its tentative ruling pursuant to its local court rules,
9 then oral argument on this motion will proceed on March 19, 2010, at 1:30 p.m., or as soon
10 thereafter as the matter may be heard, in Department DC-75 of the abeve-entitled Court, located
11 at 330 West Broadway, San Diego, California 92101. This Amended Notice corrects plaintiffs
12 earlier notice of this motion which indicated incorrect dates for the hearing and oral argument,
13 referring in particular to the incorrect year.
16 and things by plaintiffs former employers seeking plaintiffs personnel and employment records
20 a. The Court limits the scope of records or documents that plaintiff s former

. .
4

10 discovery, and that the matter sought to be discovered is relevant to the subject matter of the
11 'above-entitled action and reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence
12 based on a showing that shall be made by a noticed motion, accompanied by a meet and confer
13 declaration under Code Of Civil Procedure, #2016.040, and shall not be made or considered by
14 the court at an ex pam hearing, in accordance with Code of Civil Procedure, 4201 7.220(a).
22 The motion will be made on thegrounds that the Subject Subpoenas are, in some
23 instance, defective, and seek plaintiffs employment and personnel records from her previous
25 substantial justification; the Subject Subpoenas improperly invade or infringe on plaintiff s right
28 these discovery matters. The motion will be based on this notice of motion and the

. .
1 accompanying Declaration of H. Paul Kondrick in Support of Plaintiffs Motion for Order
2 Quashing or Modifying Defendant's Civil Subpoenas Pertaining to Her Prior Employment, and
3 to Award Monetary Sanctions, Separate Statement of Subpoenaed Records in Dispute, and
4 memorandum ofpoints and authorities, served and filed herewith, and on the records and files
5 herein, and on such evidence as may, be presented at the hearing of the motion, and oral
6 argument.
H. Paul Kondrick,
9 Dated: January 20, 2010

H. Paul Kondrick
10 Attorney for Plaintiff, CO TNEY
S. ETNYRE
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2
1
H. Paul Kendrick, Esq., State Bar No. 88566
JAN 2 1- 2010
3130 Fourth Avenue
3 San Diego, California 91103-5803 /.4 414

Telephone: (619) 291-2400
4
Facsimile: (619) 291-7123
5
6
8
9
10

11
)
13 V. )
14
16
Defendants. )
17
)
18
19
20
I am, and was at the times of the service hereinafter mentioned, over the age of 18 and
21
not a party to the within action; I am employed in the County of San Diego, California where
22
23
the service occurs; and my business address is 3130 Fourth Avenue, San Diego, California.
24 On January 20, 2010, I served the foregoing document(s) described as:
25 1. SECOND AMENDED NOTICE OF PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR ORDER
26
27 EMPLOYMENT, AND TO AWARD MONETARY SANCTIONS
28

.
1 envelopes addressed as follows:

2
3 Wilson Petty Kosiho LLR
550 West "C" Street, Suite 1050
4
San Diego, CA 92101
5
Telephone: (619) 236-9600
Facsimile: (619) 236-9669
6
Attorney for Defendant, Sandip ("Mickey") Minhas
7
8
9 Paul, Plevin, Sullivan & Connaughton, LLP
11
Telephone: (619) 237-5200
Facsimile: (619) 615-0700
12
Attorney for Defendant, QUALCOMM Incorporated

13
14
X BY U.S. MAIL (AS INDICATED ABOVE): I placed the originals ofthe described
15 documents in a sealed envelope addressed to the parties as indicated above on January 20,
16
2010. I am familiar with the firm's practice of collection and processing correspondence for
17
18
substation, mail chute, or other like facility regularly maintained by the government of the
19
21 BY PERSONAL SERVICE: I personally gathered a true copy ofthe above
22
23
5:00 p.m. on January 20, 2010 will file the original proof of personal service with the Court
24
upon request.
25
27 true copy in a sealed envelope addressed to the parties as indicated above, on January 20, 2010.
28
I personally caused it to be deposited with Federal Express on the same day in the ordinary

.
1
course of business for delivery the next business day.
2
BY FACSIMILE (as indicated above): By use of facsimile machine number, (619) 291-
3
7123, I faxed a true copy(ies) ofthe document(s) listed above to the parties, on January 20,
4
5
2010, at their fax numbers listed above as indicated by their names. The document(s) were/was
6 transmitted by facsimiletransmission and thetransmission was reported as complete and
7
without error. The transmission report was properly issued by the transmitting facsimile
8
machine. A copy ofthe transmission report will be attached to the proof of service indicating
9
that the documents were transmitted properly, as necessary, in the future.

10
11
I declare under penalty of pegury under the laws of the State of California that the
12 foregoing is true and correct. Executed this 208 day of January, 2010.
----
13
Candice E. Caufield
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

.
4,
CIVILCENTRAL
BUSINESSDIVISION
OFFICE 21*
1
2
H. Paul Kondrick, Esq. (State Bar No. 88566)
3130 Fourth Avenue
2909 DEC 28 AM 2: 48
, -,-cotth'R COUET
San Diego, CA 92103-5803 rit-/P,-3401-14*·*
3 Telephone: (619) 291-2400 SAM
Facsimile: (619) 291-7123

10 )
Plaintiff, ) AMENDED NOTICE OF
11 PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR
12 MODIFYING DEFENDANT'S CIVIL
SANDIP ('*MICKEY") MINHAS, individually, SUBPOENAS FOR PRODUCTION

13 QUALCOMM Incorporated, a Delaware OF BUSINESS RECORDS
corporation, and DOES 1 through 40, inclusive, ) PERTAINING TO HER PRIOR
14 EMPLOYMENT, AND TO AWARD
MONETARY SANCTIONS
15 Defendants. )
4/7
I)ate: March 12, 2010
16 Oral Argument: March 19, 2010
Time: 10:30 a.m.
Judge: Hon. Richard E. L. Strauss

18
19
To: Defendants, QUALCOMM Incorporated and SANDIP C'MICKEY") MINHAS, by

20
and through their respective attorneys ofrecord herein, Paul, Plevin, Sullivan & Connaughton,
21
LLP, and in particular attorney Michael C. Sullivan thereof, and Wilson, Cosmo & Turner LLP,
22
and in particular attorney Leonid M. Zilberman:

23
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that for purposes of this motion, and in particular filing
24
pleadings, on March 12,2010, at 10:30 a.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, in
25
Department DC-75 of the above-entitled Court located at 330 West Broadway, San Diego,
26
California 92101, plaintiff, COURTNEY S. ETNYRE ["ETNYRE"1, will move the Court for an
27
orderquashing or otherwise modifying the five (5) Civil Deposition Subpoenas for Production
28
of Business Records pertaining to her prior employment issued by defendant, QUALCOMM
1 Incorporated[**QUALCOMM"]. variously dated December 3,4 and 8,2009, directed to
7 monetary sanctions. In the event that the parties, or any of them, request oral argument on this
8 motion, in particular after the Court issues its tentative ruling pursuant to its local court rules,
9 then oral argument on this motion will proceed on March 19, 2010, at 10:30 a.m., or as soon
10 thereafter as the matter may be heard, in Department DC-75 of the above-entitled Court, located
11 at 330 West Broadway, San Diego, California 92101. This Amended Notice corrects plaintiffs
12 earlier notice of this motion which indicated incorrect dates for the hearing and oral argument,
13 referring in particular to the incorrect year.
16 and things by plaintiffs former employers seeking plaintiffs personnel and employment records
28 plaintiffs former employers as presently sought by the Subject Subpoenas;

.
't

7 defendant, SANDIP ("MICKEY") MINHAS r'MINHAS"], including any claims of sexual
13 declaration under Code ofcivil Procedure, #2016.040, and shall not be made or considered by
14 the court at an ex parte hearing, in accordance with Code of Civil Procedure, §201 7.220(a).
17 attorneys' fees [4.5 total hoursl, including an additional 1.5 hours, anticipated to attend the
23 instance, defective, and seek plaintiff's employment and personnel records from her previous
25 substantial justification; the Subject Subpoenas improperly invade or infringe on plaintiffs right

.
1 accompanying Declaration of H. Paul Kondrick in Support of Plaintifs Motion for Order
4 memorandum of points and authorities, served and filed herewith, and on the records and files
6 argument.
H. Paul Kondrick,

H. Paul Kondrick
S. ETNYRE
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

FILED
CIVIL BUSINESS OFFICE 21
CENTRAL DIVISION
1
H. Paul Kondrick, Esq., State Bar No. 88566 2069 DEC 28 AM 2: 48
2
3130 Fourth Avenue CLERK-SUPERIOR COURT
SAN DIEGO COUNTY. CA
Telephone: (619) 291-2400
4
Facsimile: (619) 291-7123
5
6
8
9
10

11
)
)
13
V. )
14
16
Defendants. )
17
18

19
20
I am, and was, at the times of the service hereinafter mentioned, over the age of 18
21 and not a party to the within action; I am employed in the County of San Diego, California
22
23
California.
24
On December 23,2009, I served the foregoing document(s) described' as:

25
1. AMENDED NOTICE OF PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR ORDER

26
27 PRODUCTION OF BUSINESS RECORDS PERTAINING TO HER PRIOR

28
-
.
1 2. MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF

PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR ORDER QUASHING OR MODIFYING
2
4 3. DECLARATION OF H. PAUL KONDRICK IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF'S

MOTION FOR ORDER QUASHING OR MODIFYING DEFENDANT'S
5
6 TO AWARD MONETARY SANCTIONS;
7 4. SEPARATE STATEMENT OF SUBPOENAED BUSINESS RECORDS IN

DISPUTE IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR ORDER
8
QUASHING OR MODIFYING DEFENDANT'S CIVIL SUBPOENAS
9 PERTAINING TO HER PRIOR EMPLOYMENT, AND TO AWARD
MONETARY SANCTIONS \RULES OF COURT, RULE 3.1345(aA;
10

11
OF DOCUMENTS TO DEFENDANT, QUALCOMM INCORPORATED
12 [SET NO. ONE (1)1; and
13
14
OF DOCUMENTS TO DEFENDANT, SANDIP ("MICKEY") MINHAS
[SET NO. ONE (1)1.
15
16
17

Wilson Cosmo & Turner LLP
19
550 West"C" Street Suite 1050
20
San Diego, CA 92101
Telephone: (619) 236-9600
21 Facsimile: (619) 236-9669
22
Attorneys for Defendant, Sandip ("Mickey") Minhas
23
24 Melissa L. Klick, Esq.
25

Telephone: (619) 237-5200
27 Facsimile: (619) 615-0700
28
2- Proof of Service
1
BY U.S. MAIL (AS INDICATED ABOVE): I placed the originals ofthe described
2
documents in a sealed envelope addressed to the parties as indicated above on December 23,
3
2009. I am familiar with the firm's practice of collection and processing correspondence for
4
5
6 substation, mail chute, or other like facility regularly maintained by the government of the
7
United States, ina sealed envelope, properly addressed with postage paid.
8
X BY PERSONAL SERVICE: I personally gathered atrue copy ofthe above
9
10
11 5:00 p.m. on December 23,2009 will file the original proof ofpersonal service with the Court
12 upon request.
13
BY FEDERAL EXPRESS/OVERNIGHT MAIL (as indicated above): I placed a
14
true copy in a sealed envelope addressed to the parties as indicated above, on December 23,
15
16
18 BY FACSIMILE (as indicated above): By use of facsimile machine number, (619)
19
291-7123, I faxeda true copy(ies) ofthe document(s) listed above to the parties, on December
20
23,2009, at their fax numbers listed above as indicated by their names. The document(s)
21
were/was transmitted by facsimile transmission and the transmission was reported as

22
24 facsimile machine. A copy of the transmission report will be attached to the proof of service
25
indicating that the documents were transmitted properly, as necessary, in the future.
26
ill
27
ill
28

.
.
1
I declare under penalty ofperjury under the laws ofthe State of California that the
2
foregoing is true and correct. Executed this 23rd day of December, 2009.
3
4 CaAilice E. Caufield
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

CM-110
-11 .FLP
9 ATTORNEY OR PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY (Name, State Bar number, and addmss)
Phillips and Pelly,

ZIVIL BUSf!65 6*1'feE(Ely
CENTRAL DIVISION
- Robert J. Reynolds -
12520 High Bluff Drive Suite 380
San Diego, CA 92130
2609 DEC 28 PM 12: 56
TELEPHONE NO.:
(858)720-9141 FAX NO. (Ophona/): (858)720-9142 - t rn,n
COURT
CLERK-SUPL:Ul,u,i,.r,1/ r a
E·MAIL ADDRESS (Opbonal).
SAN DIEGO l, UU n. i •
ATTORNEY FOR (Name) Leiza Duckworth
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF San Diego

CITY AND ZIP'CODE:
San Diego, 921101
BRANCH,NAME: Hall' of Justice
PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER: LEIZA DUCKWORTH
DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT: EL INDIO SHOPS, INCORPORATED, et. al.
0 CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT CASE NUMBER:
UNLIMITED CASE ILIMITED CASE 37-2009-00093840-CU-PO-CTL

X) (Check one):
(Amount demanded (Amount demanded is $25,000
exceeds $25,000) or less)
0
A CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE is scheduled as follows:
Date:January 15,2010 Time:10:0Oa.m. Dept.: C-75 Div.: Room:
Address of court (if different from the address above):
E-7 Notice of Intent to Appear by Telephone, by (name):
INSTRUCTIONS: All applicable boxes must be checked, and the specified information must be provided.
1. Party orparties (answer one):
a. 7 This statement is submitted by party (,lame):Plaintiff, Leiza Duckworth

b. /3' This statement is submitted jointly by parties (names):
2. Complaintand cross-complaint (to be answemdby plainti#s and cess-complainants only)

a. The complaint was filed on Mate):07/14/09
b. |7 The cross-complaint, if any, was filed on (date):
3. Service (to be answered by plaintiffs and cross-complainants only)

a. All parties named in the complaint and cross-complaint have been served, or have appeared, or'have been dismissed.
b. The following parties named in the complaint or cross-complaint
(1) have not been served (speci* names and explain why not):
(2) |33 have been served but have not appeared and have not been dismissed (speci* names).
(3) EJJ] have had a default entered against them (speci* names):
c. j The following additional parties may be added (speci* names, nature of invo/vement in case, and the date by which
they may be served):
4. Description of case
a. Type of case in FX| complaint F1, cross-complaint (Describe, including causes of action)
Negligence/Personal Injury
Page 1 of 4
Form Adopted for Mandatory Use Cal. Rules of Court,

Judicial Council of California
CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT rules 3.720-3.730
CM-110 [Rev. January 1, 2009] www. courtinfo. ca. gov

CM410
_ PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER: LEIZA DUCKWORTH '

CASE NUMBER:
37-2009-00093840-CU-PO-CTL
' DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT: EL IND<O SHOPS, INCORPORATED, et. al.
4. b. Provide a brief statement of the case, induding any damages. (#personal injug damages are sought, speci* the injug and
damages claimed, including medical expenses to date [indicate source and amount], estimated future medical expenses, lost
earnings to date, and estimated future lost earnings. If equitable relief is sought, describe the nature of the relief.)
Plaintiff sustained significant dental injuries after biting dewn and into a foreign object served at El Indo on
July 23,2007.
E\ Of more space is needed, check this box and attach a.page designated as Attachment 40.)
5. Jury or nonjury trial

The pally or parties request F*| a jury trial F7 a nonjury trial. (lf more than one pady, provide the name of each party
requesting a jury trial):
6. Trial date
a. The trial has been set for Mate):

b. EX| No trial date has been set. This case will be ready for trial within 12 months of the date of the filing of the complaint (if
not, explain):
c. Dates on which parties or attorneys will not be available for trial (specih dates and exp/ain reasons for unava#abi/ity):
Counsel herem has multiple trials set in the comingmonths, however, counsel herein requests that the
matter be set in accordance with the Courts usual trial setting time-frame.
7. Estimated length of trial
The party or parties estimate that the trial will take (check one):
a. 1-xl days (speci number)..3 -5 days
b. Fl hours (short causes) (spec#Y):
8. Trial representation (to be answered for each pafty)

The party or parties will be represented at trial. F-1 by the attorney or party listedinthecaption F7 by the following:
a. Attorney:
b. Firm:
c. Address:
d. Telephone number:
e. Fax number:
f. E-mail address:
g. Party represented:
|1 Additional representation isdescribed in Attachment 8.
9. Preference
F7 This case is entitled to preference (speci& code section):
10. Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)

a. Counsel 71 has £ has not provided the ADR information package identified in rule 3.221 to the dient and has
reviewed ADR options with the dient.
b. All parties have agreed to a form of ADR. ADR will be completed by Mate):
c. The case has gone to an ADR process (indicate status)
CM-110 [Rev. January 1, 2009] Page 2 of 4

CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT
. . CM-110
' PLAINTIFF/PETrrIONER: LEIZA DUCKWORTH CASE NUMBER:
37-2009-00093840-CU-PO-CTL
-DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT: EL INDIO SHOPS, INCORPORATED, et. al.
10. d. The party or parties are willing to participate in (check all'that app/y):
(1) |ZE Mediation
(2) EZ| Nonbinding judicial arbitration under Code of Civil Procedure section 1141.12 (discovery to dose 15 days before
arbitration under Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.822)
(3) E| Nonbinding judicial arbitralon under Code of Civil Procedure section 1141.12 (discovery to remain open until 30 days
before trial; order required under Cal. IRules of Court, rule 3.822)
(4) EZ] Binding judicial arbitration
(5) Binding private arbitration
(6) 'Fl Neutral case evaluation
(7) F] Other (spec/64
e. [3 This matteris subject to mandatory judicial arbitration because the amount in controversy does not exceed
the statutory limit.
f. F-1 Plaintiff'elects to refer this case to judicial arbitration and agrees to limit recovery to the amount specified in Code of Civil
Procedure section 1141.1,1.
g. E-7 This case is exempt from judicial arbitration under rule 3.811 of the California Rules of Court (speci* exemption).
11. Settlement conference
7 The party or'parties are willing to participate in an early settlement conference (speci* when):
At the Courts convenience, but not sooner than 60 days from todays date based upon availability of a Settlement Conference Officer.
12. Insurance
a. [33 Insurance carrier, if any, for party filing this statement (name):
b. Reservation of rights: |3 Yes No

c. F7 Coverage issues will significantly affect resolution of this case (explain):
13. Jurisdiction
Indicate any matters that may affect the court's jurisdiction or processing of this case, and describe the status.
Bankruptcy Other (specly):
Status:
14. Related cases, consolidation, and coordination

a. F1 There are companion, underlying, or related cases.
(1) Name of case:
(2) Nameof court:
(3) Case number
(4) Status:
ET| Additional cases are described in Attachment 148.
b. E| A motion to /3 consolidate 0 coordinate will be filed by (name parly).
15. Bifurcation
The party or parties intend to file a motion for an order bifurcating, severing, or coordinating the following issues or causes of
action (specify moving party, type of motion, and reasons):
16. Other motions
The party or parties expect to file the following motions before trial (specify moving party, (ype of motion, and issues):

.
. CM-110
CASE NUMBER:
' PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER: LEIZA DUCKWORTH
37-2009-00093840-CU-PO-CTL
-6EFENDANT/RESPONDENT: EL INDIO SHOPS„ INCORPORATED, et. al.
17. Discovery
a. E31 The party or parties have completed all discovery.
b. Ihe following discovery will be completed by the date specified Mescribe a# an#cipated discove/y):
Description Date
E[ty
Our Client Written Discovery Within 60 days
Our Client Party Depositions and Witness Depositions Within 90 days
c. Fl The following discovery issues are anticipated (speci&).
18. Economic litigation

a. F-7 This is,a limited dvil case (i.e., the amount demanded is $25,000 or less) and the economic litigation procedures in Code
of Civil Procedure sections 90 through 98 will apply to this case.
b. 1 This Is a limited civil case and a motion to withdraw the case from the economic litigation procedures or for additional
discovery w\\\ be filed (if checked, explain specifically why economic'litigation procedures relating to discovery or trial
should not apply to this case):
19. Other issues
£ The party or parties request that the following additional matters be considered or'determined at the case management
conference (speci&).
20. Meet and confer
a. The party or,parties have met and conferred with all parties on all subjects required by rule 3.724 of the Califomia Rules
of Court (ff not, explain):
b. After meeting and conferring as required by rule 3.724 of the California Rules of C6urt, the parties agree on the following:
(specify):
21. Total number of pages attached (,7 any):
I am completely familiar with,this case and will be fully:prepared to discuss the status of discovery and ADR, as well as other issues
raised by this statement, and will possess the authority to enter'into stipulations on these issues at the time of the case management
conference, induding the written authority of the party where required.
Date: December 22,2009
Robert J. Reynolds )
BYPE OR PRINT NAME) (SIGNATURE OF'PARTY OR ATTORNEY)
(TYPE OR PRINT NAME) (SIGNATURE OF PARTY OR ATTORNEY)
F-1 Additional signatures are attached.
Page 4 of 4
CM-110[Rev. January 1, 20091
'J
STATF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SOFFICE 21
PROOF OF SERVICE
CENTRAL DIVISION
--9.f'!>- 02
1013a and 2015.5 C.C.P.
zu09 DEC 28 PM 12: 56

CLERK-SUPERJOR COPRT
SAN DIEGO COU)]TY. CA
I am a resident of the United States and employed in the County of San Diego, over the age
of eighteen years and not a party to the within action or proceedings, that my business address is
12520 High BluffDrive, Suite 380 San Diego, CA 92130. On the date this declaration is dated, I
served a copy of the paper to which this proof of service by mail is attached, the within
1. CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT
in the following manner:
[x] BY MAIL, by depositing the original or true copy thereof in a sealed envelope with postage
thereon in the United States mail at San Diego, California. I am readily familiar with the firm's
practice of collection and processing correspondence and documentation for mailing. Under
thatpractice it is deposited with the United States postal Service on the same day in the
ordinary course of business. I 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 the stated
date of deposit for mailing;
[ ] BY PERSONAL DELIVERY, by delivering such envelope by hand to the addressee;
[ ] BY FACSIMILE, by causing such document to be sent by facsimile machine to the addressee

at the facsimile number indicated as follows;
addressed to the following attorney:
SEE ATTACHED SERVICE LIST
[x] STATE: I declare under penalty ofperjury under the laws ofthe state of California thatthe
[ ] FEDERAL: I declare that I am an employee inthe office ofa member ofthe bar ofthis court at
Executed on December 22,2009, at San Diego, California.
SHELBY A. WEST
1013a and 2015.5 C.C.P.

PROOF OF SERVICE
.
SERVICE LIST
Re: Case Name: Duckworth v. El Indio Shops,

Inc., et al
Case Number: 37-2009-00093840-CU-PO-CTL
Attorney for: SYSCO Food Services of San Diego, Inc.
Peter Doody, Esq.

401 West A. Street
Suite 2600
San Diego, CA 92101
Attorney for: Tapia Enterpriseses, Inc.
Kenneth A. Rutan, Esq.

Law Offices of Jefferi J. Hamilton
Pacific Canter
1455 Frazee Road
Suite 801
San Diego, CA 92108
Attorny for: C&F Food, Inc.
Kelly R. Elliott, Esq.

Law Offices of Osman & Associates
9325 Sky Park Court

Suite 230
San Diego, CA 92123
Attorney for: El Indio Shops Inc. and Ralph Pesquieria
William P. Harris III, Esq.

Austin, Brown & Cannon
525 B Street
Suite 1000
San Diego, CA 92101
.
.
CM-110
ATTORNEY OR PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY (Name, r number, and address): FOR COURT USE ONLY
' ELLIOTT N. KANTER (CSB#95054)

"LAW OFFICES OF ELLIOTT N. KANTER
2445 FIFTH AVENUE
SUITE 350
SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92101

TELEPHONE NO.(619) 231-1883 FAX NO. (Optiona/): (619)234-4553
F 1-LED
E-MAIL ADDRESS (Optional): Clerk ol the Superior Court
ATTORNEY FOR CName): CHRISTOPHER JEDRZEJEWSKI
DEC 2 8 2009
STREET ADDRESS: 330 WEST BROADWAY
MAILING ADDRESS: 330 WEST BROADWAY

By: E PETERSON, Deputy
CITY AND ZIP CODE: SAN DIEGO, CA 92101
BAANCH NAME: CENTRAL DIVISION
PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER:CHRISTOPHER JEDRZEJEWSKI
DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT:CHRISTOPHER JOHNSON
CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT CASE NUMBER:
(Check one): [73 UNLIMITED CASE F---1 LIMITED CASE 37-2009-00094022-CU-PA-CTL
(Amount demanded (Amount demanded is $25,000

exceeds $25,000) or less)
A CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE is scheduled as follows:
Date: January 8,2010 Time: 10:00 a.m. Dept.: 75 Div.: Room:
Address of court (if differentfrom the address above):
El Notice of Intent to Appear by Telephone, by (name):
INSTRUCTIONS: All applicable boxes must be checked, and the specifiedinformation must be provided.
1. Party or parties (answer one)
a. 171 This statement is submitted by party (name):Plaintiff Christopher Jedrzejewski

b. El This statement is submitted jointly by parties (names):
2. Complaint and cross-complaint (to be answered by plaintiffs and cross-complainants only)

a. The complaint was filed on Mate): July 13,2009
b. E-1 The cross-complaint, if any, was filed on (date):
3. Service (to be answered by plaintiffs and cross-complainants only)

a. E-1 All parties named in the complaint and cross-complaint have been served, or have appeared, or have been dismissed.
b. E-7 The following parties named in the complaint or cross-complaint
(1) -1 have not been served (speci* names and exp/ain why noO:
(2) El have been served but have not appeared and have not been dismissed (specny names):
(3) F-3 have had a default entered against them (specig names):
c. E-1 The following additional parties may be added (specify names, nature of involvement in case. and the date by which
they may be served):
4. Description of case
a. Type of case in f-x-1 complaint E-1 cross-complaint (Describe, including causes of action):
Motor vehicle accident - personal injury
Page 1 of 4
Form Adopted for Mandatory Use Cat. Rules of Court.
so5111
Judicial'.Council of California
CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT rules 3.720-3.730
CM-110[Rev. January 1, 20091

CM-110
CASE NUMBER:
PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER: CHRISTOPHER JEDRZEJEWSKI
37-2009-00094022-CU-PA-CTL
DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT: CHRISTOPHER JOHNSON
4. b. Provide a brief statement of the case, induding any damages. (/fpersonal injury damages are sought, specil* the injury and
damages claimed, including medical expenses to date [indicate source and amount], estimated future medical expenses, lost
earnings to date, and estimated future lost earnings. If equitable relief is sought, describe the nature of the relief.)
While plaintiff was driving his vehicle in heavy traffic going approx. 5 mph bumper to bumper, defendant, while driving his
vehicle approx 65 mph did not slow down for traffic conditions and collided with the rear of plaintiffs vehicle causing
damage to plaintiffs vehicle and bodily injuries to back and neck with the possibility of a future surgery needed.
F-\ (lf more space is needed, check this box and attach a page designated as Attachment 4b.)
5. Jury or nonjury trial

The party or parties request 1Fl a jury trial Fla nonjury trial. (lf more than one party, provide the name of each party
requesting a july trial):
6. Trial date
a. 7 The trial has been set for (date):
b. g-1 No trial date has been set. This case will be ready for trial within 12 months of the date of the filing of the complaint (if
not, explain):
c. Dates on which parties or atiomeys will not be available for trial (specify dates and exp/ain reasons for unava#abi/ity):
March 29 - April 2, 2010 Atty on vacation; the month of June and July - three trials scheduled
7. Estimated length of trial

The party or parties estimate that the trial will take (check one):
a. E] days (specify number): 2-3 days

b. F-7 hours (short causes) (specly):
8. Trial representation (to be answered for each party)

The party or parties will be represented at trial |3E1 by the attorney or party listed in the caption F-7 by the following:
a. Attorney:
b. Firm:
c. Address:
d. Telephone number:
e. Fax number:
f. E-mail address:
g. Party represented:
n Additional representation is·described in Attachment 8.
9. Preference
El This case is entitled to preference (speci* code section):
10. Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)

a. Counsel [73 has El has not provided the ADR information package identified in rule 3.221 to the client and has
reviewed ADR options with the client.
b. F-1 All parties have agreed to a form of ADR. ADR will be completed by (date):
c. E-7 The casethasgoneloan ADR process (indicate status):

CM-110
PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER: CHRISTOPHER JEDRZEJEWSKI CASE,NUMBER:
37-2009-00094022-CU-PA-CTL
DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT: CHRISTOPHER JOHNSON
10. d. The party or parties are willing to participate in (check a# that app/y):
(1) % Mediation
(2) E--7 Nonbinding judicial arbitration under Code of Civil Procedure section 1141.12 (discovery to close 15 days before
arbitration under Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.822)
(3) F---3 Nonbinding judicial' arbitration under Code of Civil Procedure section 1141.12 (discovery to remain open until 30 days
before trial; order required under Cal. Rules of Court,,rule 3.822)
(4) 1-3 Binding judicial arbitration
(5) [33 Binding private arbitration
(6) E-1 Neutral case evaluation
(7) Other (specig).
e. E--7 This matteris subject to mandatory judicial arbitration because the amount in controversy does not exceed
the statutory limit.
f. El Plaintiff elects to refer this case to judicial arbitration and.agrees to limit recovery to the amount specified in Code of Civil
Procedure section 1141.11.
g. |1 This case is exempt from judicial arbitration under rule 3.811 of the California Rules of Court (specify exemption):
111. Settlement conference
[Yl The party or parties are willing to participate in an early settlement conference (spec@ when)
12. Insurance
a. -1 Insurance carrier, if any, for party filing this statement (name):
b. Reservation of rights: E-1 Yes El No
c. 1-3 Coverage issues will significantly affect resolution of this case (explain):
13. Jurisdiction
Indicate any matters that may affect the court's jurisdiction or processing of this case, and describe the status.
F-7 Bankruptcy 5--1 Other (speci40:
Status:
14. Related cases, consolidation, and coordination

a. F-1 There are companion, underlying, or related cases.
(1) Name of case:
(2) Name of court:
(3) Case number:
(4) Status:
F-1 Additional cases are described in Attachment 14a.
b. Fl A motion to E-3 consolidate E-3 coordinate will be filed by (name party):
15. Bifurcation
E-7 The party or parties intend to file a motion for an order bifurcating, severing, or coordinating the following issues or causes of
acuon (specify moving party, type of motion, and reasons):
16. Other motions
E-3 The party or parties expect to file the following motions before trial (specil* moving pany, type of motion, and issues):
CM-110 [Rev. January 1, 2009] Page 3 014

1
CM-110
PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER: CHRISTOPHER JEDRZEJEWSKI CASE NUMBER:
DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT: CHRISTOPHER JOHNSON 37-2009-00094022-CU-PA-CTL
17. Discovery
a. E-7 The party or parties have completed all discovery.
b. [73 The following discovery will be completed by the date specified (describe a# anticipated discove,y):
Panv Descrintion Date
Plaintiff Discovery w/in next 90 days
Plaintiff Deposition of Defendant w/in next 90 days
c. F7 The following discovery issues are anticipated (specify):
18. Economic Litigation

a. Fl This is a limited civil case (i.e., the amount demanded is $25,000 or less) and the economic litigation procedures in Code
of Civil Procedure sections 90 through 98 will apply to this case.
b. El This is a limited civil case and a motion to withdraw the case from the economic litigation procedures or for additional
discovery w\\\ be med (if checked, explain specifically why economic litigation procedures relating to discovery or trial
should not apply to this case):
19. Other issues
E-7 The party or parties request that the following additional matters be considered or determinedat the case management
conference (speci44'
20. Meet and confer
a. Fi-1 The party or parties have met and conferred with all parties on all subjects required by rule 3.724 of the California Rules
of Court (if not, explain):
b. After meeting and conferring as required by rule 3.724 of the California Rules of Court, the parties agree on the following
(specify).
21. Total number of pages attached (if any):
I am completely familiar with this case and will be fully prepared to discuss the status.of discovery and,ADR, as well as other issues
raised by this statement, and will p6ssess the authority to enter into stipulations on-lbeae-jssues at the time of the case management
conference, including the written authority of the party where required.
t- N
Elliott N. Kanter "L->t

(TYPE OA PRINT NAME) (SIGNATURE OF PARTY OR ATTORNEY)
(TYPE OR PRINT NAME) / (SIGNATURE OF PARTY OR ATTORNEY)
Fl Additional signatures are attached.

. .
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA FOR COURT USE ONLY
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
Christopher Jedrzejewski v. Christopher Johnson
Elliott N. Kanter, Esq. (SBN 95054) (619) 231-1883 gel)

LAW OFFICES OF ELLIOTT N. KANTER (619) 234-4553 (Fax)
2445 Fifth Avenue, Suite 350
Attorney(s) for: Plaintiff Judge: Richard E.L. Strauss Case Number
Dept: 75 37-2009-00094022-CU-PA-CTL
Christopher Jedrzejewski
PROOF OF SERVICE
I, the undersigned, declare, I am employed'in the County of San Diego, State of California. I am over the age of
18 years and not a party to this action. My business address is 2445 Fifth Avenue, Suite 350, San Diego,
California 92101. On December 23,2009, I served a copy of the following document(s):
on the parties in this action:
Steven A. Tenacati, Es4.

BONNIE R. MOSS & ASSOCIATES
8989 Rio San Diego Drive, Suite 190

San Diego, CA 92108
(619) 542-2500/Fax (619)
Attorneys for Defendant CHRISTOPHER JOHNSON
by the following means:
(BY MAIL) I caused each such envelope to be sealed and placed for collection and mailing from my business
address. I amreadily familiar with the Law Offices of Elliott N. Kanter's practice forcollection and processing of
correspondence for mailing, said practice being that in the ordinary course of business mail is deposited with the
postage thereon fully prepaid in the United States Postal Service the same day as it is placed for collection. I am
aware that upon motion of the party served, service is presumed invalid if the postal cancellation date or postage
meter date on the envelope is more than one day after the date of deposit for mailing contained in this affidavit.
0 (BY FACSIMILE) This document was transmitted by facsimile transmission from (619) 234-4553 and the
transmission was reported as complete and without error. I then caused the transmitting facsimile machine to
properly issue a transmission report confirming the transmission.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California, that the foreg9ing e and correct.
5 Uda_V
Executed on December 23,2009, at San Diego, California.
Einily Vallarta
2
3130 Fourth Avenue
1 L E__ ©
CIViL BUSINESS OFFiCL

3
Telephone: (619) 291-2400
Facslmile: (619) 291-7123
*UU U.,lstl=Yl=ID, CA
5 SAN DIEGO SUPERICR COURT
6 D
7 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 0220 IL- 23 -O Z
Clork of the Court
Ey
Puty
9
COURTNEY S. ETNYRE, individually, Case No. 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL
10 )
Plaintiff, ) DECLARATION OF H. PAUL
11 KONDRICK IN SUPPORT OF
V. ) PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR
12 ORDER QUASHING OR
SANDIP ("MICKEY") MINHAS, individually, MODIFYING DEFENDANT'S CIVIL
13 QUALCOMM Incorporated, a Delaware SUBPOENAS PERTAINING TO HER
corporation, and DOES 1 through 40, inclusive, PRIOR EMPLOYMENT, AND TO
14 AWARD MONETARY SANCTIONS
)
15 Defendants. Date: March 12, 2009
) Oral Argument: March 19, 2009
16 Time: 10:30 a.m.
Department: DC-75
17 Judge: Hon. Richard E. L. Strauss
19 I, H. Paul Kondrick, declare as follows:
20 1. I am an attorney at law duly licensed to practice before all ofthe courts of the
21 State of California, and I am attorney ofrecord forplaintiff, COURTNEY S. ETNYRE
22 [hereinafter"ETNYRE"], in the above-entitled action.
23
2. I am familiar with the ple#dinlgs in the above-entitled matter, and in particular the
24 discovery relative to the above-entitled matter.
25 3. The Complaint in the above-entitled action alleges causes of action against
26 defendants, QUALCOMM Incorporated and SANDIP CMICKEY") MINHAS ["MINHAS"1

s DEC 23'09 PM 369
27 for battery, including sexual battery [Civil Code, #1708.51, assault, negligence and
28
-1- Kondrick Decl Re Motion to Quash

1 discrimination, retaliation and harassment based on gender/sex.
2 4. To my understanding, since March 2003, Plaintiff, ETNYRE, is employed in the
3 Patent Law Department or group of defendant, QUALCOMM, in various capacities, including
4 Senior Patent Prosecution Paralegal/Project Manager or Patent Prosecution Senior
5 Paralegal/Project Manager.
6 5. Plaintiff, ETNYRE, is still employed by defendant, QUALCOMM.
7 6. During the events set forth in the complaint herein, defendant, MINHAS, was
8 plaintiff' s direct supervisor.
9 7. The complaint herein generally alleges that:
10 a. In or about February 2006, as part ofher job responsibilities for defendant,
11 QUALCOMM, plaintiff, ETNYRE, was directed by defendants, MINHAS and
12 QUALCOMM, to travel to New Jersey for company business along with her"immediate
13 supervisor" defendant, MINHAS, also traveled to New Jersey as part of that same job
14 assignment [Allegation 11141;
15 b. On or about February 22,2006, while in New Jersey on the aforementioned
16 QUALCOMM company business, defendant, MINHAS, sexually assaulted and battered
17 plaintiff, Ms. ETNYRE [Allegation 11151;
18 c. Defendant, QUALCOMM,"condoned and openly promoted a polluted sexually
19 hostile work environment in particular for its paralegals working in its Patent
20 Department. For instance, in its Patent Department, defendant, QUALCOMM, planned,
21 sponsored and directed its employees to participate in so-called "team building" social
22 events, dinners, *'happy hours" and the like, openly exposing their female employees,
23 including plaintiff, ETNYRE, to overt and inappropriate sexual conduct, including
24 offensive touching, and language [Allegation 1125];
25 d. Defendant, QUALCOMM's, so-called '*team building" events typically
26
27 1 Since the filing ofthis lawsuit November 2,2009, plaintiff, Ms. Etnyre, received notice of her right to sue
br discrimination based disability, including failure to accommodate. Accordingly, she expects to amend her
28 ileading.

1 "promoted, condoned and sponsored the consumption of inappropriate amounts of
2 alcoholic beverages, contributing or otherwise leading to repeated instances of
3 demeaning conduct, discrimination, harassment and retaliation towards its female
4 employees, in particular in its Patent Department or Group. The foregoing conduct,
5 discrimination, harassment and retaliation of female employees, including but not
6 limited to plaintiff, ETNYRE, related but was not limited to promotions, positive
7 performance reviews, compensation; lewd, sexist remarks, including but not limited to
8 references to derogatory parts ofthe female anatomy, and the like; sexists jokes;
9 groping; sexual gestures; physical touching, including but not limited to uninvited
10 kisses, fondling, and the like; grabbing female employee buttocks; and attempted sexual
11 activity [Allegation 1146-1;
12 e. While attending defendant, QUALCOMM's, corporate sponsored events,
13 defendant, QUALCOMM's, "attorneys, supervisors, managing agents and corporate
14 officers improperly touched female employees in sexual manners. For instance, on
15 multiple occasions, they slid their hands up and down female employee's leg toward
16 their crotch; further attempted to kiss the female employees; caused the female
17 employees to raise their arms to try to fend offthe sexually aggressive, offensive
18 conduct. The female employees, including plaintiff, ETNYRE, were upset, visibly
19 shaken and distraught by these events" [Allegation 1154];
20 f. On"more than one such occasion, defendant, MINHAS, forcible groped,
21 fondled, touched and kissed [plaintiff, Ms. ETNYRE] [Allegation 1155-1; and
22 g. When plaintiff, ETNYRE, complained either within defendant, QUALCOMM,

23 or to governmental entities come including but not limited to the California Department
24 of Fair Employment and Housing rDFEH"], she was subjected to: claims of
25 inappropriate conduct or misconduct; insubordination; poor performance; placed on a
26 Performance Improvement Plan ['TIP"] ; and suspended or placed on administrative
27 leave [Allegation 11471.
28 8. In early-December 2009, our office was served with defendant, QUALCOMM's,

.
1 Notices to Consumer or Employee that it was seeking her employment and other records from
2 five (5) of plaintiff, ETNYRE's, former employers. The Notices to Consumer or Employee
3 included copies ofthe Deposition Subpoenas for the Production of Business Records from those
4 prior employers, all either law offices or corporate law departments, dating back to 1997,
5 including: (i) Casey, Gerry, Schenk, Francavilla, Blatt & Penfield (San Diego); (ii) Howrey LLP
6 (Los Angeles); Oii) Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP (Washington, D.C.);
7 (iv) Pfizer, Inc. (San Diego); and (v) Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP (San Diego).
8 True and correct copies of those Notices and attached Deposition Subpoenas for the Production
9 of Business Records are attached hereto as Exhibits "A" through "E," respectively.
10 9. The aforementioned five (5) Civil Deposition Subpoenas for Production of

11 Business Records pertaining to her prior employment issued by defendant, QUALCOMM
12 Incorporated ["QUALCOMM"l variously dated December 3,4 and 8,2009, directed to
17 plaintiffs former employers, namely Exhibits "A" through "E" hereto [hereinafter collectively
18 the "Subject Subpoenas"] all seek the following records pertaining to plaintiff, ETNYRE:
19 "All documents pertaining to Courtney S. Etnyre (SSN: 229-02-3132; DOB: 04/04/69),

for all dates of her employment at [your firm/company] ("employer") including, but not
20 limited to, any of the following: (1) her entire personnel file; (2) documents reflecting
her wage and/or salary history; (3) her applications for employment, resumes, letters of
21 reference and any reference or background checks; (4) documents related to her
interview and hiring; (5) offer letters and employment agreements; (6) job descriptions;
22 (7) performance evaluations; (8) written counselings, warnings or disciplinary actions;
(9) notes or other written records reflecting any oral counselings, warnings or
23 disciplinary actions; (10) any complaints about her from management co-workers or
third parties; (11) documents reflecting or relating to any investigation into any
24 complaints about her: (12) any documents reflecting the reason for her separation from
employment; (13) any documents regarding any complaints by Ms. Etnyre about other
25 employees or managers; (14) any documents reflecting an investigation or any other
response by the employer to Ms. Etnyre's complaints about others; (15) any records
26 reflecting or related to any complaints by Ms. Etnyre against the employer or any of its
employees asserted by the Equal Opportunity Commission, the Department of Labor, or
27 any other governmental agency; (16) any records reflecting any potential or actual legal
claims by Ms. Etnyre against the employer; and (17) any records constituting or
28 reflecting the employer's responses to any administrative or legal claims threatened or

.
1 asserted by Ms. Etnyre against the employer or any of its employees."
2 The Subject Subpoenas specifically request that plaintiffs former employers produce the
3 aforementioned categories of records or writings as further set forth in the accompanying
4 Separate Statement of Subpoenaed Business Records in Dispute in Support of Plaintiff s Motion
5 for Order Quashing or Modifying Defendant's Civil Subpoenas Pertaining to Her Prior
6 Employment, and to Award Monetary Sanctions [Rules ofCourt, Rule 3.1345(a)1.
7 10. On December 18, 2009, I sent a letter to defendant QUALCOMM's, counsel,
8 Michael Sullivan, indicating plaintiff s objection to the production of defendant's subpoenaed
9 business records. A true and correct copy of that letter is attached hereto as Exhibit "F."
10 11. On December 22, 2009, Mr. Sullivan and I conferred for approximately 45-
11 minutes in relation to his client's subpoenas(Exhibits "A" through"E") or plaintiffs personnel
12 records; however, we were unable to come to agreement, nor has defendant yet withdrawn or
13 otherwise recalled those subpoenas. At the end of the conversation, I mentioned to Mr. Sullivan
14 that our client would have to file her motion to quash by the following day in the event we were
15 unable to come to agreement relative to the Subject Subpoenas. Following our meet and confer
16 conversation, I sent a letter to Mr. Sullivan summarizing our phone call, to an extent, and further
17 stating that: "If we can't resolve the employment subpoenas by 10:30 a.m. tomorrow,
18 December 23,2009, then our office will have to commence drafting the motion to quash at
19 that time so that it will be timely served on the subpoenaed persons. Accordingly, we
20 appreciate your giving the employment subpoenas your immediate attention." A true and
21 correct copy ofthat letter dated December 22,2009 is attached hereto as Exhibit"G."
22 12. As of 3:00 p.m. today, our office had still not heard from opposing counsel
23 relative to the Subject Subpoenas. Therefore, in order to preclude the inadvertent production of
24 those writings, we promptly proceeded with the filing of this motion.
25 13. In relation to the pending motion to quash, or alternatively modify, the Subject
26 Subpoenas seeking plaintiff's personnel and employment records, I expended more than 3.0
27 hours reviewing the Subject Subpoenas and pertinent pleadings, notes and correspondence; and
28 drafting the present discovery motion. My standard hourly fee is $275 per hour. Accordingly,

.
1 plaintiff, ETNYRE, incurred, or will incur, the minimum sum of $1,277.50 in attorneys' fees
2 [4.5 total hoursl, including an additional 1.5 hours, anticipated to attend the hearing on the
3 pending motion, without taking into account any need to review any opposition to this motion or
4 to prepare additional reply papers, and a $40.00 filing fee for this motion. The foregoing
5 expenditure of time does not take into consideration any need to review any opposition to this
6 motion or to prepare additional reply papers.
7 14. If called as a witness in the above-entitled matter, I could and would testify to the
8 foregoing matters which are within my personal knowledge, except as to those matters stated on
9 information, belief or opinion, and as to those matters, I believe the same to be true.
10 I declare under penalty of peijury under the laws of the State of California that the
11 foregoing is true and correct. Executed this 23rd day 0f December, 2009, at San Diego,
12 1 California.
13
H. Paul Kondrick
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

.
EXHIBIT A M.
: ATTORNEY OR PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY (Name. .0.anda-* . FOR COURT USE ONLY
SUBP-025
Michael C. Sullivan (SBN 131817r

-Melissa Listug Klick (SBN 228476)
Paul Plevin Sullivan & Connaughton LLP
401 6 Streel 10th Floor
San Diego, CA 92101
TELEPHONE NO : 619-237-5200 FAX NO. (Optionao 619-615-0700
ENAIL ADDRESS (Op#ona/):
ATTORNEYFOR (Name): Defendant Qualcomm Incorporated

SUPERIOR COURT OF CAUFORNIA, COUNTY OF San Diego
MAILING ADDRESS:

BRANCH NAME Centra|
PLAINTIFF/ PETITIONER: COUrtney Etnyre CASE NUMBER
37-2009-00101537
DEFENDANT/ RESPONDENT: Sandlp ("Mickey") Minhas, Qualcomm Incorporated
NOTICE TO CONSUMER OR EMPLOYEE AND OBJECTION
(Code Civ. Proc., §§ 1985.3, 1985.6)
NOTICE TO CONSUMER OR EMPLOYEE
TO (name): Courtney Etnyre

1. PLEASE TAKE NOTICE THAT REQUESTING PARTY (name): Qualcomm Incorporated
SEEKS YOUR,RECORDS FOR EXAMINATION by the parties to this action on (specih date): December 24,2009
The records are described in the subpoena directed to witness (speci& name and address ofpemon or enti(y /mm whom records
are sought): Casey Gerry Schenk Francavilla Blatt & Penfield, 110 Laurel Street, San Diego, CA 92101
A copy of the subpoena is attached.
2. IFYOU OBJECT to the production of these records, YOU MUST DO ONE OF THE FOLLOWING BEFORE THE DATE SPECIFIED.
IN ITEM a. OR b. BELOW:
a. If you are a party to the above-entitled action, you must file a motion pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1987.1 to
quash or modify the subpoena and give notice of that motion to the witness and the deposition officer named in the subpoena
at least five days before the date set for production of the records.
b. If you are not a party to this action, you must serve on the requesting party and on the witness, before the date set for
production of the records, a written objection that states the specific grounds on which production of such records should be
prohibited, You may use the form below to object and state the grounds for your objection. You must complete the Proof of
Service on the reverseside indicating whether you personally served or mailed the objection. The objection should not be filed
with the court. WARNING: IF YOUR OBJECTION IS NOT RECEIVED BEFORE THE DATE SPECIFIED IN ITEM 1, YOUR
RECORDS MAY BE PRODUCED AND MAY BE AVAILABLE TO ALL PARTIES.
3. YOU OR YOUR ATTORNEY MAY CONTACT THE UNDERSIGNED to determine whether an agreement can be reachedin writing
to cancel or limit the scope of the subpoena. If no such agreement is reached, and if you are not otherwise represented by an
attorney in this action, YOU SHOULD CONSULT AN ATTORNEY TO ADVISE YOU OF YOUR RIGHTS OF PRIVACY.
Date: December.3,2009

(TYPE OR PRINT NAME)
l, / IpBNAURE OF r-3 REQUESTING PARTY 1-3E1 AITORNEY)

OBJECTION BY NON-PARTY TO PRODUTIONF RECORDS
1. E-1 I object to the production of all of my records specified:in the subpoenar
/
2. E31 I object only to the production of the following specified records:
3. The specific grounds for my objection are as follows:
Date:
(TYPE OR,PRINT NAME) (SIGNATURE)

(Proof of service on reverse)
Page 1 of 2
Form Adopted fot, Mandatory Use
NOTICE TO CONSUMER OR EMPLOYEE AND OBJECTION Legal Code of Civil,Procedure,
M5%212: 5,2!5 20()81 §§

Solucrons
1985.3, 1985.6,
EXHIBIT A *Il q Plus

2020.010-202.510
i
SUBP-010
ATTORNEYOR PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY (Name, number, and address): FOR COURT USE ONLY
. _Michael C. Sullivan (SBN 13181

*Melissa Listug Klick (SBN 22847 )
401 B Street, 10th Floor
San Diego, CA 92101
TELEPHONE NO.: 619-237-5200 FAX NO. (Optional): 619-615-0700
E-MAIL ADDRESS (Optional):
ATTORNEY FOR (Name): Defendant Qualcomm Incorporated

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF San DiegO
SmEET ADDRESS: 330 West Broadway
MAILING ADDRESS:

PLAINTIFF# PETITIONER: COUrtney Etnyre
DEFENDANT/ RESPONDENT : Sandip ("Mickey") Minhas, Qualcomm Incorporated

DEPOSITION SUBPOENA CASE NUMBER
FOR PRODUCTION OF BUSINESS RECORDS 37-2009-00101537
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, TO (name, address, and telephone number of deponent /fknown):
Casey Gerry Schenk Francavilla Blatt & Penfield, 110 Laurel Street, San Diego, CA 92101, 619-238-1811
1. YOU ARE ORDERED TO PRODUCE THE BUSINESS RECORDS described in item 3, as follows:
To (name of deposiNon officed: Copyscan, Inc.
On (date): December 24,2009 At (6me): 9:00 a.m.
Location (address): 1166 Columbia Street, San Diego, CA 92101, 619-235-8900
Do not release the requested records to the deposition officer prior to the date and time stated above.
a. Fl by delivering a true, legible, and durable copy of the business records described in item 3, enclosed in a sealed inner
wrapper with the title and number of the action, name of witness, and date of subpoena clearly written on it. The inner
wrapper shall then be enclosed in an outer envelope or wrapper, sealed, and mailed to the deposition officer at the
address in item 1.
b. E-7 by delivering a true, legible, and durable copy of the business records described in item 3 to the deposition officer at the
witness's address, on receipt of payment in cash or by check of the reasonable costs of preparing the copy, as determined
under Evidence Code section 1563(b).
c. [Yl by making the original business records described in item 3 available for inspection at your business address by the
attorney's representative and permitting copying at your business address under reasonable conditions during normal
business hours.
2. The records are to be produced by the date and time shown in item 1 (but not sooner than 20 days after the issuance of the
deposition subpoena, or 15 days after service, whichever date is later). Reasonable costs of locating records, making them
avaitable or copying them, and postage, if any, are recoverable as set forth in Evidence Code section 1563(b). The records shall be
accompanied by an affidavit of the custodian or other qualifed witness pursuant to Evidence Code section 1561.
3. The records to be produced are described as follows: See Attachment 3.
1-3-1 Continued on Attachment 3.
4. IF YOU HAVE BEEN SERVED WITH THIS SUBPOENA AS A CUSTODIAN OF CONSUMER OR EMPLOYEE RECORDS UNDER
CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE SECTION 1985.3 OR 1985.6 AND A MOTION TO QUASH OR AN OBJECTION HAS BEEN
SERVED ON YOU, A COURT ORDER OR AGREEMENT OF THE PARTIES, WITNESSES, AND CONSUMER OR EMPLOYEE
AFFECTED MUST BE OBTAINED BEFORE YOU ARE REQUIRED TO PRODUCE CONSUMER OR EMPLOYEE RECORDS.
DISOBEDIENCE OF THIS SUBPOENA MAY BE PUNISHED AS CONTEMPT BY THIS COURT. YOU WILL ALSO BE LIABLE
FOR THE SUM OF FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS AND ALL DAMAGES RESULTI FROM YOUR FAILURE TO OBEY.
Date issued: December 3,2009

Melissa Listua Klick
(TYPE OR PRINT NAME) RES 06PeRKN ISSUING SUBPOENA)
Attornevkfor Defendant Qualcomm Incoroorated

(TITLE)
(Proof of service on reverse) page 1 of 2

Form Adopted for Mandatory Use T -1 Code of Civil Procedure, §§ 2020.410-2020 440,
DEPOSITION SUBPOENA FOR PRODUCTION „ +'SES'u
Civil,Code, § 15(a)(e),
SUBP-010 [Rev January 1, 20071 OF BUSINESS RECORDS 2>°%:Rt]- Government Code § 68097.1
..
PETITIONER/PLAINTIFF: Courtney Etnyre CASE NUMBER:
RESPONDENT/DEFENDANT: Sandip ("Mickey") Minhas, Qualcomm Incorporated 37-2009-00101537
Attachment 3
All documents pertaining to Courtney S. Etnyre (SSN: 229-02-3132; DOB: 04/04/69), for all dates of her
employment at CASEY GERRY SCHENK FRANCAVILLA BLATT & PENFIELD LLP ("employer"),
including, but not limited to, any of the following: (1) her entire personnel file; (2) documents reflecting her
wage and/or salary history; (3) her applications for employment, resumes, letters of reference and any
reference or background checks; (4) documents related to her interview and hiring; (5) offer letters and
employment agreements; (6) job descriptions; (7) performance evaluations; (8) written counselings,
warnings or disciplinary actions; (9) notes or other written records reflecting any oral counselings, warnings
or disciplinary actions; (10) any complaints about her from management, co-workers or third parties; (11)
documents reflecting or relating to any investigation into any complaints about her; (12) any documents
reflecting the reason for her separation from employment; (13) any documents regarding any complaints
by Ms. Etnyre about other employees or managers; (14) any documents reflecting an investigation or any
other response by the employer to Ms. Etnyre's complaints about others; (15) any records reflecting or
related to any complaints by Ms. Etnyre against the employer or any of its employees asserted by the
Equal Opportunity Commission, the Department of Labor, or any other governmental agency; (16) any
records reflecting any potential or actual legal claims by Ms. Etnyre against the employer; and (1'7) any
records constituting or reflecting the employer's responses to any administrative or legal claims
threatened or asserted by Ms. Etnyre against the employer or any of its employees.
sog'*js
EXHIBIT B *Il
ATTORNEY OR PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY (Name, S number. and address)· FOR COURT USE ONLY
SUBP-025
Michael C. Sullivan (SBN 1318177-

Paul Plevin, Sullivan & Connaughton LLP
401 6 Street 10th Floor
San Diego, dA 92101
TELEPHONE NO.: 619-237-5200 FAKNO. (Opmnao 619-615-0700
E-MAIL ADDRESS (Op#ona/)
ATTORNEY FOR Fame). Defendant Qualcomm Incorporated

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF San Diego
MAILING ADDRESS:

PLAINTIFF/ PETmONER: COUitney Etnyre CASE NUMBER:
37-2009-00101537
DEFENDANT/ RESPONDENT: Sandip ("Mickey") Minhas, Qualcomm Incorporated
(Code Civ. Proc., §§ 1985.3, 1985.6)

SEEKS YOUR RECORDS FOR EXAMINATION by the parties to this action on (specify date): December 24,2009
The records are described In the subpoena directed to witness (speci* name and address ofperson orent/6, Rom whom records
are sought) Howrey LLP, 550 S. Hope Street, Suite 1100, Los Angeles, CA 90071
A copy of the subpoena Is attached.
2. IFINYOU OBJECT to the production ofthese records, YOU MUST DO ONE OF THE FOLLOWING BEFORE THE DATE SPECIFIED.
ITEM a. OR b. BELOW:
quash or modify the subpoenaand give notice of that motion to the witness and the deposition officer named in the subpoena
b. If you are not a party to this action, you must serve on the requesting party and on the witness, before the dateset for
prohibited. You may use the form below to object and state the grounds for your objection. You must complete the Proof of
Service on the reverse side indicating whether you personally served or mailed the objection. The objection should not be filed
3. YOU OR YOUR ATTORNEY MAY CONTACT THE UNDERSIGNED to determine whether an agreement can be reached in writing
attorney in this action, YOU SHOULD CONSULT AN ATTORNEY TO ADVISE YOU OF Y UR RIGHTS OF PRIVACY.
Melissa Listua Klick 33-7.65

(TYPE OR PRINT NAME) (81 NA R - REQUESTING PARTY 1-fl ATTORNEY)
OBJECTION BY NON-PARTY TO PRODUCTI OF RECORDS
1. [I| I object to the production of all of my records specmed in the subpoena.

2. El I object only to the production of the following specified records:
Date:

(SIGNATURE)
Page 1 of 2
Form Adopted for Mandatory Use
·Judicial Council of California NOTICE TO CONSUMER OR EMPLOYEE AND OBJECTION Legal Code of Civil Procedure,
SolutE-
§§ 1985.3, 1985.6,
SUBP-025 [Rev. January 1, 20081
EXHIBIT B M•
2020.010-202.510
SUBP-010
ATTORNEY OR PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY (Name, Stal and addmss) FORCOURT USEONLY
1 Michael C. Sullivan (SBN 131817'r
Melissa Listug Klick (SBN 228476)
401 B Street 10th Floor
San Diego, dA 92101
TELEPHONE NO: 619-237-5200 FAKNO. fop#onaO 619-615-0700
ATTORNEY FOR(Name): Defendant Qualcomm Incorporated

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF San Diego
MAILING ADDRESS:
Cr,YANDZIPCODE: San Diego, CA 92101

PLAINTIFF/:PETITIONER: COUrtney Etnyre
DEFENDANT/ RESPONDENT Sandip ("Mickey") Minhas, Qualcomm Ihcorporated

DEPOSITION SUBPOENA CASE NUMBER.
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, TO (name, address, and te/ephone number of deponent #known):
Howrey LLP, 550 S. Hope Street, Suite 1100, tos Angeles, CA 90071, 213-892-1800
To (name ofdeposition omced: Copyscan, linc.
On Mate): December 24,2009 At (mne): 9:00 a.m.
Location (address). 1166 Columbia Street, San Diego, CA 92101, 619-235-8900
Do not release the requested records to the deposition officer prior to the date and time stated above,
a. F-7 by delivering a true, legible, and durable copy of the business records described in item 3, enclosed in a sealed inner
wrapper with the title and number of the action, name of witness, and date of subpoena dearly written on it. The inner
wrapper shall then be endosed in an outer envelope or wrapper, sealed, and mailed to tbe deposition officer at the
address in item 1.
b. |7 by delivering a true, legible, and durable copy of the business records described in item 3 to the deposition officer at the
c. f-fl by making the original business records described in item 3 available for inspection at your business address by the
business hours.
deposition subpoena, or 15 days after service, whichever date is later). Reasonable costs of locating records, making them
available or copying them, and postage, if any, are recoverable as set forth in Evidence Code section 1563(b). The records shall be
accompanied by an affidavit of the custodian or other qualified witness pursuant to Evidence Code section 1561.
1-fl Continued on Attachment 3.
DISOBEDIENCE OF THIS SUBPOENA MAYBE PUNISHED AS CONTEMPT BY THIS COURT. YOU WILL ALSO BE LIABLE
FOR THE SUM OF FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS AND ALL DAMAGES RESULTING FROM YOUR FAILURE TO OBEY.
Date issued: December 3,2009 » 00 -rn A

Melissa Listug Klick . 7/ ' A) C J¥'
l / 1 VGNMRE OF PEADN ISSUING SUBPOENA)
7*ftornd¥_fol' Defendant Qualcomm Incorporated
(TrTLE)
Page 1 of 2
TA:ml Code
DEPOSITION SUBPOENA FOR PRODUCTION - of Civil Procedure, §§ 2020.410-2020.440,
SUBP-010 [Rev. January 1, 20071 Solutions- Civil Code, § 15(a)(e);
OF BUSINESS RECORDS Government Code § 68097.1
4 Mus
PETITIONER/PLAINTIFF: Courtntnyre CASE NUMBER:
RESPONDENT/DEFENDANT:
Sandip ("Mickey") Minhas, Qualcomm Incorporated 37-2009-00101537
Attachment 3
All documents pertaining to Courtney S. Etnyre (SSN: 229-02-3132; DOB: 04/04/69), for all dates of'her
employment at HOWREY LLP ("employer'), including, but not limited to, any of the following: (1) her
entire personnel file; (2) documents reflecting her wage and/or salary history; (3) her applications for
employment, resumes, letters of reference and any reference or background checks; (4) documents
related to her interview and hiring; (5) offer letters and employment agreements: (6) job descriptions; (7)
performance evaluations; (8) written counselings, warnings or disciplinary actions; (9) notes or other
written records reflecting any oral counselings, warnings or disciplinary actions; (10) any complaints about
her from management, co-workers or third parties; (11) documerits reflecting or relating to any
investigation into any complaints about her; (12) any documents reflecting the reason for her separation
from employment; (13) any documents regarding any complaints by Ms. Etnyre about other employees or
managers; (14) any documents reflecting an investigation or any other response by the employer to Ms.
Etnyre's complaints about others; (15) any irecords reflecting or related to any complaints by Ms. Etnyre
against the employer or any of its employees asserted by the Equal Opportunity Commission, the
Department of Labor, or any other governmental agency; (16) any records reflecting any potential or
actual legal claims by Ms. Etnyre against the employer; and (17) any records constituting or reflecting the
employer's responses to any administrative or legal claims threatened or asserted by Ms. Etnyre against
the employer orany of its employees.
..
So{*s
[Ik Plus
EXHIBIT C *.
SUBP-025
ATTORNEY 6R PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY (Name, Statelumber, and address) FOR COURT USE ONLY
p Michael C. Sullivan (SBN 131817)

Paul Plevin Sullivan & Connaughton LLP
401 6 Streel 10th Floor
San Diego, dA 92101
TELEPHONE NO.: 619-237-5200 FAKNO. copuonaO· 619-615-0700
E.MAIL ADDRESS (OptionaO
ATTORNEY FOR (Name): Defendant Qualcomm incorporated

STREETADDRESS: 330 West Broadway
MAILING ADDRESS:
CrrY AND ZIP CODE San Diego, CA 92101

PLAINTIFF/ PETITIONER: Courtney Etnyre CASE NUMBER.
37-2009-00101537
1 DEFENDANT/ RESPONDENT: Sandip ("Mickey") Minhas, Qualcomm'Incorporated
(Code Clv. Proc., §§ 1985.3,1985.6)

SEEKS YOUR RECORDS FOR EXAMINATION by the parties to this action on (specify date): January 7, 2010
The records are described in the subpoena directed to witness (spec/8, name and address ofperson or entity Rom whom records
are sought) Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP, 901 New York Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20001
A copy of the·subpoena is attached.
2. IF YOU OBJECT to the production of these records, YOU MUST DO ONE OF THE foLLOWING BEFORE THE DATE SPECIFIED.
Service on the reverse side indicating whether you personally served or mailed the objection. The objection should not be filed
attorney in this action, YOU 'SHOULD CONSULT AN ATTORNEY TO ADVISE YOU OF YOUR RIGHTS OF PRIVACY.
Date: December 8,2009 9 r -- -.0

(GNATURE OF 1 1 REQUESTING PART.Y I X I ATTORNEY)
OBJECTION BY NON-PARTY TO PRODUCTION OF RECORDS
1. I object to the production of all of my records specified In the subpoena.

2. [33 I object only to the production ofthe following specified records:
3. The specific gr6unds formy objection are as follows:
Date:
(TYPE OR PRINT NAME) (SIGNATURE)

(Proof of service on reverse) Page 1 of 2
Form Adopted for. Mandatory Use
Judicial Council of. California NOTICE TO CONSUMER OR EMPLOYEE AND OBJECTION TRml · Code of Civil Procedure,
§§ 1985.3, 1985.6,
soKERS
EXHIBIT C '* 4 q Plus
SUBP-025 [Rev. January 1, 20081 2020.010-202.510
SUBP-025
PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER: courtney .re SE NUMBER:
, DEFENDAm/RESPONDENT: Sandip r'MiEkey") Minhas, Qualcomm Incorporate 1 -37-2009-00101537
PROOF OF SERVICE OF NOTICE TO CONSUMER OR EMPLOYEE AND OBJECTION
(Code Civ. Proc., §§ 1985.3, 1985.6)
Fl Personal Service 1fl Mail
1. At the timeof service I was at least 18 years of age and not a party to this legal action.
2. I served a copy of the Notice to Consumer or Employee and Objection as follows (check either a or b):
a. Fl Personal service. I personally delivered the No#ce to Consumer or Emp/oyee and Objection as follows:
(1) Name of person served: (3) Date served:
(2) Address where served: (4) Time served:
b. fX-1 Mail. I deposited the Notice to Consumer or Emp/oyee and Objection in the United States mail, in a sealed envelope
with postage fully prepaid. The envelope was addressed as follows:
(1) Name of person served: H. Paul Kondrick (3) Date of mailing: December 8,2009
(2) Address: H. Paul Kondrick, a Professional Corporation, (4) Place of mailing (city and state): San
3130 Fourth Avenue, San Diego, CA 92103 Diego, CA
(5) I am a resident of oremployed in the county where the Notice to Consumer orEmp/oyee and Objection was mailed.
c. My residence or business address is (speci¥: Paul, Plevin, Sullivan & Connaughton, 401 B St. 10th Fl, San Diego, CA 92101
4. My phone number is (speci*) 619-237-5200
I dedare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. ,
Pamela L.'Kina Brtridn <-19, 5-ec

(TYPE OR PRINT NAME OP PERSON WHO.SERVED) (SIGNATURE-P-ESON,WHO SER» / 1
PROOF OF SERVICE OF OBJECTION TO PRODUCTION OF RECORDS
(Code Civ, Proc., §§ 1985.3,1985.6)
E-7 Personal Service E-7 Mail
1.
At the time of service I was at least 18 years of age and not a party to this legal action.
2.
I served a copy of the Objection to Production of Records as follows (comp/ete either a orb):
a. ON THE REQUESTING PARTY
(1) Fl Personal service. I personally delivered the Objection to Production of Records as follows:
(i) Name of person served: (ili) Date served:
(ii) Address where served: (iv) Time served:
(2) gl Mail. I deposited the Objection to Production of Records in the United States mail, in a sealed envelope with
postage fully prepaid. The envelope was addressed as follows:
(i) Name of person served: (iii) Date of mailing:
(ii) Address: (iv) Place of mailing (city and state):
(v) I am a resident of or employed in the county where the Objection to Production of Records was mailed.
b. ON THE WITNESS
(1) 11 Personal service. I personally delivered the Objection to Production of Records as follows:
(i) Name of person served: (ili) Date served:
Oi) Address where served: (iv) Time served:
(2) -1 'Mail. I deposited the Objection to Production of Records in the United States mail, in a sealed envelope with
postage fully prepaid. The, envelope was addressed as follows:
(i) Name of person served: (ili) Date of mailing:
3. My residence or business address is (speci60:
4. My phone number is (specih/):
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.
Date:
(TYPE OR PRINT NAME OF PERSON WHO SERVED) (SIGNATURE OF PERSON WHO SERVED)
NOTICE TO CONSUMER OR EMPLOYEE AND OBJECTION Page 2 of 2
SUBP-010
ATTORNEY OR PARTY WITHOUTATTORNEY flvame, Sta and address) FOR COURT USE ONLY
_Michael C. Sullivan (SBN 131817)
San Diego, CA 92101
TELEPHONE NO.: 619-237-5200 FAX NO. (Optiona). 619-615-0700
Al-rORNEY FOR (Name): Defendant Qualcomm Incorporated

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF San DiegO
MAILING ADDRESS:
CllYANDZ,P CODE: San Diego, CA 921,01

BRANCH NAME: |
PLAINTIFF/ PETITIONER: Courtney Etnyre

DEPOSITION SUBPOENA CASE NUMBER
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, TO (name, address, and telephone number of deponent if known):
'Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP, 901 New York Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20001,
202-408-4000
1 To (name of depom#on omcer): Copyscan, Inc.
On (date): January 7, 2010 At (time): 9:00 a.m.
a. Fl by delivering a true, legible, and durable copy of the business records described in item 3, endosed in a sealed inner
wrapper with the title and number of the action, name of witness, and date of subpoena clearly written on it. The inner
address in item 1.
b. Ffl by delivering a true, legible, and durable copy of the business records described in item 3 to the deposition officer at the
c. 'F-7 by making the original business records described in item 3 available for inspection at your business address by the
business hours.
2. The records am to be produced by the date and time shown in item 1 (but not sooner than 20 days after the issuance of the
deposition subpoena, or 15 days afterservice, whichever date is later). Reasonable costs oflocating records, making them
available orcopying them, and postage, ifany, am recoverable as setforth in Evidence Code section 1563(b). The records shall be
accompanied by an affidavit of the custodian orotherqualified witness pursuant to Evidence Code section 1561.
f-fl Continued on Attachment 3.
DISOBEDIENCE OF THIS SUBPOENA MAYBE PUNISHED AS CONTEMPT BY THIS COURT. YOU WILL ALSO BE LIABLE
FOR THE SUM OF FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS AND ALL DAMAGE RESULNG FROM YOUR FAILURE TO OBEY.
Melissa Listua Klick C Flvi lr<UOUC)/0--I-
1.Ul (SIGNATURE OF PERSON ISSUING SUBPOENA)
Attorndv for Defendant Qualcomm Incorgorated
(TITLE)
Page 1 of 2
Judicial Council of California DEPOSITION SUBPOENA FOR PRODUCTIONeI aml
, .-Code of Civil Procedure, §§ 2020.410-2020.440;
SUBP-010[Rev January 1, 2007] 00111ul0ng Civil Code, § 15(a)(e);
OF BUSINESS RECORDS Government Code.§ 88097.1
4.Plus
..
RESPONDENT/DEFENDANT: Sandip ("Mickey") Minha, Qualcomm Incorporated 37-2009-00101537
Attachment 3
employment at FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW, GARRETT & DUNNER LLP ("employef'),
including, but not limited to, any of the following: (1) her entire personnel file; (2) documents reflecting her
wage and/or salary history; (3) her applications for employment, resumes, letters of reference and any
reference or background checks; (4) documents related to her interview and hiring; (5) offer letters and
employment agreements; (6) job descriptions; (7) performance evaluations; (8) written counselings,
warnings or disciplinary actions; (9) notes or other written records reflecting any oral counselings, warnings
or disciplinary actions; (10) any complaints about her from management, co-workers or third parties; (11')
related to any complaints by Ms. Etnyre against tbe employer or any of its employees asserted by the
Equal Opportunity Commission, the Department of Labor., or any other governmental agency; (16) any
records reflecting any potential or actual legal claims by Ms. Etnyre against the employer; and (17) any
records constituting or reflecting the employefs responses to any administrative or legal claims
threatened or asserted by,Ms. Etnyre against the employer or any of its employees.
Soid?Els
4 Pius
.
f.
EXHIBIT D *4 *
ATTORNEY OR PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY Ovame, S number, and ***ess): FOR COURT USE ONLY
SUBP-025
- Michael C. Sullivan (SBN 131817)

--Melissa Listug Klick (SBN 228470)
_SRn Piegg, dA 92101
TELEPHNE-E.:819237-5200- --- - -FA)686 07666 61>94315-0700-
E-MAIL ADDRESS (Optiona/):
ATTORNEY FOR (Name) Defendant Qualcomm Incorporated

MAILING ADDRESS:

PLAINTIFF/ PErmONER: Courtney Etnyre CASE NUMBER
37-2009-00101537
DEFENDANT/ RESPONDENT: Sandip ("Mickey") Mjnhas, Qualcomm Incorporated
(Code Civ. Proc., §§ 1985.3, 1985.6)

SEEKS YOUR RECORDS FOR EXAMINATION by the parties to this action:on (specify date): December 29,2009
The records are described in the subpoena directed to witness (speci/y name and address ofperson or entity from whom records
are sought): Pfizer'Inc., 10555 Science Center Drive, CB-10, San Diego, CA 92121
2. IFYOU OBJECT to the production of these records, YOU MUST DO ONE OF THE FOLLOWING BEFORE THE DATE SPECIFIED.
a. If you are a party to the above-entitled action, you must fle a motion pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1987.1 to
Service on the reverse side indicating whether you personally served or mailed the objection: The objection should not be filed
attorney in this action, YOU SHOULD CONSULT AN ATTORNEY TO ADVISE-YOU DF YOUR RIGHTS OF PRIVACY.
A \
Melissa 'Listua Klick
(TYPE OR PRINT NAME) L_-/ 18**R6F EU REQUE;iLG Pm 1--fl ATTORNEY)

1. E3 I object to the production of all of my records specified in the subpoena.

2. 1-3 I object only to the production of the following specified records:
Date:

(SIGNATURE)
Page 1 of 2
·Judicial NOTICE TO CONSUMER OR EMPLOYEE AND OBJECTION Legal §§
Code of Civil Procedure,
Council of California
SO*Er
1985.3,1985.6,
SUBP-025[Rev. January 1, 2008]
EXHIBIT D,a
2020.010-202.510
PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER: COUrtnevyre fEASE NUMBER:
SUBP-025
-DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT: Sandip ("Mi6key") Minhas, Qualcomm Incorporate 1 37-2009-00101537

PROOF OF SERVICE OF NOTICE TO CONSUMER OR EMPLOYEE AND OBJECTION
(Code Civ. Proc., §§ 1985.3, 1985.6)
E-3 Personal service FR-1 Mail
1. At th@ firndbf 66,Viee 1 -Wad -at lia-st 18 years of age and not a party to this legal actiod.
2. I served a copy of the Notice to Consumer or Emp/oyee and Objection as follows (check either a orb)
a. Fl Personal service. I personally delivered the No#ce to Consumer or Emp/oyee and Objection as follows:
(1) Name of person served: (3) Datetserved:
(2) Address where served: (4) Time served:
b. FYI Mail. I deposited the Notice to Consumer orEmp/oyee and Objection in the United States mail, in a sealed envelope
with postage fully prepaid. The envelope was addressed as follows:
(1) Name of person served: H. Paul Kondrick (3) Date of mailing: December 4,2009
(2) Address: H. Paul Kondrick, a Professional Corporalon, 3130 (4) Place of mailing (city and state): San
Fourth Avenue, San Diego, CA 92103 Diego, CA
(5) I am a resident of oremployed in the county where the No#ce to ConsumerorEmp/oyee and Objec#on was mailed.
c. My residence or business address is (speci60: Paul, Plevin, Sullivan & Connaughton, 401 B St. loth Fl, San Diego, CA 92101
d. My phone number is (spec/80: 619-237-5200
I dedare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct,
Pamela L. King
I Puyrin A A 780
(TYPE OR PRINT NAME OF PERSON WHO SERVED) (SIGNATURE OF PERSON WHO SERVED)
PROOF OF SERVICE OF OBJECTION TO PRODUCTION OF RECORDS

(Code Civ. Proc., §§ 1985.3, 1985.6)
17 Personal Service F7 Mail
1.
At the time of service I was at least 18 years of age and not a party to this legal action.
2.
I served a copy of the Objec#on to Production of Records as follows (comp/ete either a orb):
a. ON THE REQUESTING PARTY
(1) 1-1 Personal service. I personally delivered the Objection to Pmduction of Records as follows:
(i) Name of person served: (iii) Date served:
(11) Address where served:
(iv) Time served:
(2) F| Mail. I deposited the Objec#on to Production of Records in the United States mall, in a sealed envelope with
(i) Name of person served: (iii) Date of mailing:
(ii) Address: Ov) Place of mailing (city and state)
(v) I am a resident of or employed In the county where the Objection to Pmduction of Records was mailed.
b. ON THE WITNESS
(1) E--1 Personal service. I personally delivered the Objec#on to Production of Records as follows:
(i) Name of person served:
(iii) Date served.
(ii) Address where served: (iv) Time served:
(2) f--1 Mail. I deposited the Objection to Production of Records in the United States mail, in a sealed envelope with
(D Name of person served:
(iii) Date of mailing:
3. My residence or business address is (specih)
4. My phone number is (speci60:
IDate:
dedare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.
(TYPE OR PRINT NAME OF PERSON WHO SERVED)

(SIGNATURE OF PERSON WHO SERVED)
SUBP-025[Rev January 1, 20081
NOTICE TO CONSUMER OR EMPLOYEE AND OBJECTION Page 2 of 2
SUBP-010
ATTORNEY OR PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY (Name, Stt number. end address): FOR COURT USE ONLY
_Michael C. Sullivan (SBN 131817)
401 6 Street 1Oth Floor
San Diego, dA 92101
TELEPHONE NO.: 619-237-5200 FAXNO. copionaO 619-615-0700
ATTORNEY FOR(Name): Defendant Qualcomm Incorporated

MAILING ADDRESS:
CITYANO ZIP CODE: San Diego, CA 92101

BRANCH NAME: Cenka|
DEFENDANT/ RESPONDENT: Sandip ("Mickey') Minhas, Qualcomm Incorporated

DEPOSITION SUBPOENA CASE NUMBER:
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, TO (name, address. and telephone number of deponent if known):
Pfizer Inc., 10555 Science Center Drive, CB-10, San Diego, CA 92121, 858-622-8845
To (flame of deposition omced: Copyscan, Inc.
On Mate): December 29,2009 At (mne): 9:00 a.m.
Do not release the requested records to the deposition officerfprior to the date and time stated above.
a. [-7 by delivering a true, legible, and durable copy of the business records described in item 3, enclosed in a sealed inner
wrapper with the title and number of the action, name of witness, and date of subpoena clearly written on lit. The inner
address in item 1.
b. Fl by delivering a true, legible, and durable copy of the business records described in item 3 to the deposition officer at the
c. 1-xl by making the original business records described in item 3 available for inspection at your business address by the
business hours.
deposition subpoena, or 15 days after service, whichever date is later). Reasonable costs oflocating records, making them
available or copying them, and postage, if any, are recoverable as set forth in Evidence Code section 1563(b). The records shall be
Ffl Continued on Attachment 3.
4. IF YOU HAVE BEEN SERVED WITH THIS SUBPOENA ASA CUSTODIAN OF CONSUMER OR EMPLOYEE RECORDS UNDER
FOR THE SUM OF FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS AND ALL DAMAGES RESULTI FROM YOUR FAILURE TO OBEY.

Melissa Listug Klick _) 1*fl n / 021
_4 )s<GNATURE OF PERSON ISSUING SUBPOENA)
AttoFAe**or Defendant Qualcomm Incorgorated

(TITLE)
(Proof of service on reverse) Page 1 of 2
DEPOSITION SUBPOENA FOR PRODUCTION„ 111 Code of Civil Procedure, §§ 2020.410-2020.440;
Civil Code, § 15(a)(e);
30(% ADE
OF BUSINESS RECORDS Government Code § 68097.1
..
'RESPONDENT/DEFENDANT: Sandip ("Mickey") Minhas, Qualcomm Incomorated 37-2009-00101537
Attachment 3
employment at PFIZER INC. ("employer"), including, but not limited to, any of the following: (1) her entire
personnel file; (2) documents reflecting her wage and/or salary history; (3) her applications for
employment, resumes, letters of reference and any reference or background checks; (4) documemts
related to her interview and hiring; (5) offer letters and employment agreements; (6) job descriptions; (7)
performance evaluations; (8) written counselings, warnings or disciplinary actions; (9) notes or other
written records reflecting any oral counselings, warnings or disciplinary actions; (10) any complaints about
her from management, co-workers or third parties; (11) documents reflecting or relating to any
investigation into any complaints about her; (12) any documents reflecting the reason for her separation
from employment; (13) any documents regarding any complaints by Ms. Etnyre about other employees or
managers; (14) any documents reflecting an investigation or any other response by the employer to Ms.
Etnyre's complaints about others; (15) any records reflecting or related to any complaints by Ms. Etnyre
against the employer or any of its employees asserted by the Equal Opportunity Commission, the
Department of Labor, or any other governmental agency; (16) any records reflecting any potential or
actual legal' claims by Ms. Etnyre against tbe employer; and (17) any records constituting or reflecting the
employefs responses to any administrative or legal claims threatened or asserted by Ms. Etnyre against
the employer or any of its employees.
So]6*s
tik Plus
EXHIBIT E *I
SUBP-025
' ATTORNEY OR PARTY WrTHOUT ATTORNEY (Name, S||r number, end addmss,: FOR COURT USE ONLY
Michael C. Sullivan (SBN 1318171'

= Paul Plevin, Sullivan & Connaughton LLP
San Diego, dA 92101
TELEPHONE NO.: 619-237-5200 FAX NO. (Optionao: 619-615-0700
E-MAIL ADDRESS (OptionaO
ATTORNEY FOR (Namet Defendant QUALCOMM Incorporated

MAIUNG ADDRESS:
CITY ANDZIPCODE: San Diego, CA 92101

BRANCH NAME: Cental
PLAINTIFF/ PETITIONER: Courtney Etnyre CASE NUMBER:
37-2009-001'01537
(Code Civ. Proc., §§ 1985.3, 1985.6)

SEEKS YOUR RECORDS FOREXAMINATION by the parties to this action on (spec/4, date): December 24,2009
The records are described in the subpoenadirected to witness (speci* name and address of pemon or entity Rom whom records
are sought): Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP, 501 W. Broadway, 1,9th Floor, San Diego, CA 92101
2. IF YOU OBJECT to the production of these records, YOU MUST DO ONE OF THE FOLLOWING BEFORE THE DATE SPECIFIED.
quash or modify the subpoena and give notice of that motion to the witness and the deposition officer named'in the subpoena
production of the records, a written objection that states the specific grounds on which production ofsuch records should be
prohibited. You may use the form below to objectand state the grounds for your objection. You must complete the Proof of
Service on the reverse side indicating whether you personally served or mailed the objection. The objection should notfbe filed
3. YOU OR YOURATTORNEY MAY CONTACT THE UNDERSIGNED to determine whether an agreement can be reached in writing
attorney in this action, YOU SHOULD CONSULT AN ATTORNEY TO ADVISE YOU OF YOUR RIGHTS OF PRIVACY.
Date: December 3,2009 A ,
Melissa Listug Klick K x //*-/\L/V fli---*-

IGNAi,oll f--1 REQUESTING PARTY [-3E1 ATTORNEY)
1. EE] I object to the production of all of my records specified in the subpoena.

2. [33 I object only to the production of the following specified records:
Date:
(TYPE OR PRINT NAME) (SIGNATURE)

Page 1 of 2
Form 4dopted for Mandat6ry Use
. Judicial Council of California NOTICE TO CONSUMER OR EMPLOYEE AND OBJECTION Legal §§
Soluvions
1985.3, 19856,
SUBP-025[Rev. January 1, 2008] 2020.010-202.510
EXHIBIT E 4.
ATTORNEY 6R PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY (Name, Stanumber, and address) FOR COURT USE ONLY
SUBP-010
_ Michael C. Sullivan (SBN 131817)

San Diego, CA 92101
TELEPHONE NO.: 619-237-5200 FAX NO. (OptionaO: 619-615-0700
ATTORNEY FOR(Name): Defendant QUALCOMM' Incorporated

MAILING At)DRESSj
CITYANDZIP CODE: San Diego, CA 92101

BRANCH NAME: |

DEPOSITION SUBPOENA , CASE NUMBER:
FOR PRODUCTION OF BUSINESS RECORDS 37-2009-00101'537
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, TO (name, address, and telephone number of deponent if known):
Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP, 501 W. Broadway, 19th Floor, San Diego, CA 92101, 619.338-
6506
To (name of depos#ion omcer): Copyscan, Inc.
On (date): December 24,2009 At (time): 9:00 a.m.
a. 1-3 by delivering a true, legible, and durable copy of the business records described in item 3, enclosed in a sealed inner
wrapper with the title and number of the action, name of witness. and date of subpoena clearly written on it. The inner
address in item 1.
b. F1 by delivering a true, legible, and durable copy of the business records described in item 3 to thedeposition officer at the
c. 1-fl by,making the original business records described:in item 3 available for inspection at your business address by the '
business hours.
deposition subpoena, or 15 days afterservice, whichever date is later). Reasonable costs of locating records, making them
available orcopying them, and postage, ifany, are recoverable as set forth in Evidence Code section 1563(b). The records shall be
FX-1 Continued on Attachment 3.
FOR THE SUM OF FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS AND ALL DAMAGES RESULTING FROM YOUR FAILURE TO OBEY.
gYPE OR PRINT NAME) (SIGNATURE OF PERSON ISSUING SUBPOENA)
Attornev for Defendant Qualcomm Incorporated

(TITLE)
(Proof of senAce on reverse)
Page 1 of 2
Judicial Council of California DEPOSITION SUBPOENA FOR PRODUCTION Legml Code of Civil Procedure, §§ 2020.4104020.440;
Soluns-
SUBP-010[Rev. January 1.20071 OF BUSINESS RECORDS
Civil Code, § 15(a)(e),
Government Code § 68097.1
G Plus
..
RESPONDENT/DEFENDANT:
Sandip ("Mickey") Minhas, Qualcomm Incorporated 37-2009-00101537
Attachment 3
employment at SHEPPARD MULLIN RICHTER &HAMPTON LLP ("employer"), including, but not limited
to, any of the following: (1) her entire personnel file; (2) documents reflecting her wage and/or salary
history; (3) her applications for employment, resumes, letters of reference and any reference or
background checks; (4) documents related to her interview and hiring; (5) offer letters and employment
agreements; (6) job descriptions; (7) performance evaluations; (8) written counselings, warnings or
disciplinary actions; (9) notes or other written records reflecting any oral counselings, warnings or
disciplinary actions; (10) any complaints about her from management, co-workers or third parties; (11)
related to any complaints by Ms. Etnyre against the employer or any of its employees asseded by the
Equal Opportunity Commission, the Department of Labor, or any other governmental agency; (16) any
records reflecting any potential or actual legal claims by Ms. Etnyre against the employer; and (17) any
records constituting or reflecting the employer's responses to any administrative or legal claims
threatened or asserted by Ms. Etnyre against the employer or any of its employees.
sofi:Esr
4 Plus
EXHIBIT F <,1
LAW OFFICES
H. PAUL KONDRICK
ISROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
Friday, December 18,2009
Via Facsimile and US. Mail
Michael G. Sullivan, Esq.

Paul, Plevin, Sullivan & Connaughton, LIP
401 B St., Tenth Floor ·
San Diegq, CA 9!2]01
Re: Courtney Emyre v. Sandip CMickey") Minhas and QUALCOMM, Incorporated;

San Diego Superior Court Civil Case No. 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL
Dear Mr. Sullivani
As discussed in our bief phone call late yesterday afternoon, our law office is in receipt
of QUALCOMM Incorporated's business records subpoenas issued to Courtney Etnyre's former
employers Or law offices or corporations for which she provided services, including Pfizer, Inc.,
Howrey, Inc., Casey-Gerry, Finnegan-Henderson and Sheppard-Mullin.
Ms. Etnyre objects to the production ofthose employment or personnel records on

various grounds, including but not limited tothe reasons that follow. Pursuant to Code of Ch'1/
Procedure, #1983.2(g), and otherwise, earlier today we objected, in writing, to the
productions of the requested writings as well as providing notice of her intent to bring a
motion to quash or otherwise modify the subject subpoenas, as necessary. The Court has
yet to assign a hearing dateforthatmotion. Intheinterim, our office intendsto assure that we
communicate with your office to see ifte can come to agreement relative to the subpoenas
issued to Courtney Etnyre's pFior employers in particular.
QUALCOMM Incorporated has subpoenaed the following documents:
"All documents pertaining to Courtney S. Etnyre (SSN: 229-02-3132; DOB: 04/04/69),

for all dates of her employment at [your firm/company] Cemployef) including, but not
limited to, any ofthe following. (1) her entire personnel file; (2) documents reflecting her
wage and/or salary history; (3) her applications for employment resumes, letters of.
reference and anyreference orbackground checks; (4) documents related to her interview
and hiring; (5) offer letters and employment agreements; (6) job descriptions; (7)
performance evaluations; (8) written coumelings, warnings or disciplinary actions; (9)
notes or other written records reflecting any oral counselings, warnings or disciplinary
actions; (10) any complaints about her from management co-workers or third parties;
(11) documents refiectilig or relating to any investigation into any complaints about her:
(12) any documents reflecting the reason for her separation from employment; (13) any
documents regarding any complaints by Ms. Etnyre about other employees or managers;
(14) any documents reflecting an investigation or any other response by the employer to
Ms. Etnyre's complaints about others; (15) any.records reflecting or related to any
complaints by Ms. Etnyre against the employer or any of its employees asserted by the
Equal Oprtunity Commission, the Department of Labor, or any other governmental
agency; (16) any records reflecting any potential or actual legal claims by Ms. Etnyre
against the employer; and (17) any records constituting or reflecting the employer's
3130 FOURTH AVENUE 9 SAN DIEGO, CA 92103-5803 1.3619)191.-2400 0 FAX (619) 29 1-71 23
EXHIBIT F 01•
Re: Etnyre v. QUALCOMM, etc,
December 18, 2009
Page 2
responses to any administrative or legal claims threatened or asserted by Ms. Etnyre against the
employer or any of its employees."
Ms. Etnyre objects to the documents being produced on various grounds, including that the '
subpoenas, as drafted, are defective. For instance, QUALCOMM Incorporated seeks business
records from the Washington, D.C*law firm improperly. Moredver, the subpoenas seek the
production of documents outside San Diego County, or more than 75 miles from the place of
business pf the subpoenaed persons, in multiple instances. More particularly she objects on
privacy and other grounds set forth in some detail as follows. Moreover, in the present matter,
the burden falls to defendant QUALCOMM Incorporated, to show that there are no less
intrusive means, suchas depositions, wouldyieldthe information sought byhim ib the subject
business records subpoena. She further submits that even if there were no means less intrusive,
the trial 6ourt should first examine the records in camera and order disclosure.6fonly that
information that might be relevant to the suit
We fully expect that you appreciate that confidential personnel files at a person's place of
employment are within a zone ofprivacy, and personnel records are generallyprotected from
discovery "unless the litigant can show a compelling need for the particular documents and that
the information cannot reasonably be obtained through depositions or from non-confidentiAl
sources." Harding Lawson Associates_v. Superior Court (Bailev) (1992) 10 Cal. App. 4th
7,10,12. A plaintiff does not automatically waiveher right of privacy by filing a lawsuit - Even
when disclosure is necessary to the fair resolution of a lawsuit, the compelled disclosure should
be narrowly drawn so as to insure maximum protection of the constitutional interests at
stske. Britt v. Superior Court 0978) 20 Cal. 3d 844,859: BI Dorado Savi*23 & Loan Assn. v.
SNperior Court (1987) 190 Cal. App. 3d 342, [holding that theriglitofprivacy pbtects, and
reaches to, Personnel records'7.
A plaintiffdoes not automatically Waive his or her right ofprivacy by filing a lawsuit.
Any waivermust be narrowly construed andencompasses only discovery directly relevant to the
claim and essential to the fair resolution ofthe lawsuit. Further, there must be a compelling need
fotlhe discovery. Tvlo ¥. Swerior Coutt 0997) 55 Cal. App. 1379,1386-1389; Davis v.-
Superior Court (1992) 7 Cal. App. 4* 1004 1014.
- The right ofprivacy maybe invoked by litigant as a ground for refusal to allow discovery
that constitute an unreasohable intrusion on that right. Kahn v. Superior Court 6987) 188 Cal
App. 3d . 752; Fults v. Superior Court (1979) 88 Cal. App. 3d 899,903. Evendientheina*Y
is relevant and Bot privileged duch overriding constitutional considerations as the right to
privacy under Article I, Section 1, Ofthe Cal#ornia Constitution may require limitations on
discovery. Vallev Bank of Nevada v. Superior Court (1975) 15 Cal. 3d 652,656,658. The
provisi6n for the right of privacy under Article I Section I ofthe CaN/ornia Constitution is self-
executing in creating an enforceable right Craig v. jkfunicipal Court (1979) 100 CaL*p. 3d 69,
76.
When invasion ofa right to privacy may occur, the relevance and materiality are not
sufficient to establish discoverability.. The party seeking discovery must demonstrate a
compelling state interpst to justify disclosure. Rancho Publications v. Superior Court (1999)
..

Re: Etnyre v. QUALCOMM, etc.
December 18,2009
Palm 3
68 Cal. App. 4* 1538.; Hinshaw. Winkler. Draa. Marsh & Still v Superior Court (1996) 51 Cal.
App. 4*; Fults v. Superior Court (1979) 88 Cal. App. 3d 899, 905. ·Evenwheild\sclosureis
necessary to the fair resolutiongfa lawsuit, the compelled disclosure shmild be narrowly-
drawn so as to insure maximum protection of the constitutional interests at stake. Britt v.
Superior Couh (1978) 20 Cat 3d 844, 859: FI Dorado Savinfs & Loan Asm v. Superior Court
6987) 190 Cal. App. 3d 342, [holding that the right ofprivacy protects, and reaches to, '
"personnel recordsl.
This afternoon, we also received some documents from your office requesting that Ms.
Etnyre sign medical information mlease foms. In relation to the subpoenas of various.
healthcare providers, *t the present time, we know of no reason to object to QUALCOMM
Incorporated subpoeoaing those records; however, there is a likely issue relative to having her.
sign medical release forms. Our experience has been that there are typically issues that arise in
the wordind of the documents, as well as waiver issues. Over the fveekend, I will review those ,
documents so we can also discuss them in necessary detail.
We appreciatethat this letter reaches you as a work week ends and the Holidays are upon
us. When you have a moment, let' s discuss these issues
In closing, I also extend to you and your Family our wishes for a Happy Holiday Season
and Health, Prosperity and the very best in 2010. I remain
H. Paul Kondrick,
HPK: pk
,.
cc: · Leonid M. Zilberman, Esq. (Via Facsimile and U.S. Mail)

.
HI' LaserJet 3050
H PAUL KONDRICK APC

6192917123
Dec-18-2009 5:36PM
Job Date Tlme Type Identification Duration Pages Result
1978 12/18/2009 5:17:59PM Send 16192369669 4:24 14 OK

1979 12/18/2009 5:22:28PM Send 16196150700 14:06 14 OK
EL Pan; Kondria
3130 Foar:h Aven-
Sant)1<14 Cal#rnia 92103-6803
Facsh/lfr"./'Ima
TO·. Imoid M. Zilbezman, Es* From: IL Paul Kondricl Esq.

Michae! 0. Sullivan. Esq.
Company: Wilan Petty, Kosmo & maner Date: December 18,2009

Paut. PleviA Sullivan,etc.
Fa*Numbeg: 619-236·9669 TotaINo. Pages including Cover: 14

619-615-OTOO
Phone Number 619-23&9600 Senders Phone Number 619-291-2400

619-744-3655
Re:Ebomv. QUALCOMM Ina,*Minhas Sender'sFa*Number:619-291-7123
RGENTFORYOURDIFORMA,IONAND,n-BS LBREPLY OPERYOURREAVEST

Enclosed am copies ofthe bllowing:
Kondrick-Sullivan lotterdated December 18,2009;
• Kandrick - PA=; in6/rks¥,can. Inc. letter dat,d Deoember 18,2009 objectiag to
theQUALCOY"' - .
2009;
• Kondrick-Howmy, IneJCopy,can.Inc. lettcrdated D=nber 18,20090bjecting
I ./.- .
to the QU. .... . 3,
2009,
o Kondriar .Flnnessn·OarreWCopy,caz Ino. letterdated December 18,2009
objecting to tho QUALCOMM Incorpomtod bud,im, r=ds mbpoena dat:d
December 8,2009;
• Kondrick-Casey-Omy/CopyscaA Irc. !etterdated December 18,2009: and
• Kendrick-Sheppard-MulliWCop„con,InaletterdatedDecembe 18,2009
-' .: - .. - . -- ...···- //00/,/d/dWh8'5M

. 7 . I. I ./-/.-". .Th*yel
.
.
EXHIBIT G 019
LAW 'OFFICES
-
H. PAUL KONDRICK
/m.
Tuesday, December 22,2009

Paul, Plevin, Sullivan & Connaughton, LIP
401 B St., Tenth Floor
San Diego, CA 92101
Re: Courtney Etnyre v. Sandip ("Mickey") Minhas and QUALCOMM, ,Incorporated*,

San Diego Superior Court, Civil Case No. 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL
,
Dear Mr. Sullivan:
First, I think that we made progress in our phone call this morning to address the
outstanding subpoenas pertaining to Courtney Etnyre's prior employers, including discussion of
Code of Civil Procedure,#201 7.220 dealing with discovery relative to a plaintiffs sexual
conduct in other contexts than the pending litigation. Second, I still need to impress on your
office our need to promptly resolve the issue. The earliest subpoenaed document productions are
scheduled to proceed this Thursday, December 24th, and our office will have to file any
necessary motion to quash the subpoenas by tomoirow afternoon so that we can head off any
inadvertent turn over or disclosure of the 6mployment records being solight.
.' As mentioned, the Court provided us with a March 12, 2609 hearing date for a motion to
quash the employment subpoenas. Although the hearing date is set for March 12m, any oral
argument would be heard on March 19, 2009 because the Court will be dark from February 12
through March 15. If we can't resolve the employment subpoenas by 10:30 a.m. tomorrow,
December 23,2009, then our office will have to commence drafting the motion to quash at
that time so that it will be timely served on the subpoenaed persons. Accordingly, we
abpreciate your giving the employmat subpoenas your immediate attention.
As a separate matter, in view of the impending discovery of confidential materials and

information, including Ms. Etnyre's healthcare information, we suggest that our offices give
immediate attention to fashioning a Protective Order and stipulation. In that context, you will
find enclosed a copy of aproposed Protective Order Stipulation that was used in another matter.
In the event that either your office or that of Lonny Zilberman have any proposed revisions to
the entlosed stipulation or any other form of a protective order that you may want us to consider,
then please send us your suggestions or proposal. Thanks for giving these matters your prompt
attention. Happy Holidays, again! As always, I remain
Vefjoyyom, A
H. Paul Kondrick,
1 -
HPK: pk
, cc: Leonid M. Zilberman, Esq. (Via Facsimile - w/ encl)
3130 FOUR-:-:-1 AVENUE R SAN DIEGO, CA 92103-5603 1 (619)29 1-2400 0 FAx (619)29 1-7 123
EXHIBIT G *
HP LaserJet 3050
H PAUL KONDRICK APC

6192917123
Dec-22-2009 3:48PM
Job Date Time Type Identification Duration Pages Result
1985 12/22/2009 3:34:461*1 Send 16192369669 2:42 11 OK

1986 12/22/2009 3:37:33PM Send 16196150700 10:37 11 OK
H. Paul Kondild
A Professional Corporatton
3130Fou!€h Avenue
Faeli.ill'Faa,miu'l
To: konid M. ZIbe=* Esq. From: H Paul Kondrick, Esq.

Michael 0. Sullivan, Esq.
Companj Wlison. Pctty. Kosmo & Taima Dato: Decemba 22,2009

Paut, Plevin, Sullivai). etc.
FaINumber. 6194364669 Total No. Pages including Cover. 11

619·615-0700
Phone Number; 619·23*9600 Sender's Phone Numbes 619-29!-2400

619-744-3655
.Re:Ebon,v. QUALCOMA£ Bic.,18*,has Sender'BF=Numbe: 619-291-7123
UB#ENT OFORYOURD#ORMATIONANDPnES AkRASEREMY OPERYOURREQUEST
Attached isa copy ofthe Kondfick-Sullivan letter dated December 22, 2009 and
enclosed Protective Order Stipulation.
59'=BTIALAM==
n·
9
, Th,nk,on.
.
1 H. Paul Kondrick, Esq. (State Bar No. 88566) SAN DIEGO SUP?RIOR COURT
Ek*ks:-*Alp --ff L ED-

3 Telephone: (619) 291-2400
4
Facsimile: (619) 291-7123
Attorney for Plaintiff, COURTNEY S. ETNYRE u uCLERK-Sljrtu-difougit:LL
u u VA-6 1 6,ed< of the Court
CA ey
5
SAN DIEGO COUNTY,

DEC 23'09 PM 3:58
9
10
Plaintiff, SEPARATE STATEMENT OF
i1 SUBPOENAED BUSINESS
V. RECORDS IN DISPUTE IN
12 SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF'S
SANDIP ('*MICKEY") MINHAS, individually, ) MOTION FOR ORDER QUASHING
13 QUALCOMM Incorporated, a Delaware OR MODIFYING DEFENDANT'S
corporation, and DOES 1 through 40, inclusive, ) CIVIL SUBPOENAS PERTAINING
14 TO HER PRIOR EMPLOYMENT,
AND TO AWARD MONETARY
15 Defendants. SANCTIONS [RULES OF COURT,
RULE 3.1345(aA
16
Date: March 12, 2009
17 Oral Argument: March 19, 2009
Time: 10:30 a.m.
Judge: Hon. Richard E. L. Strauss

19
20
The following is a statement of the subpoenaed business records sought by defendant,
21
QUALCOMM Incorporated, from plaintiff's former employers, namely law firms Casey, Gerry,
22
Schenk, Francavilla, Blatt & Penfield (San Diego), Howrey LLP (Los Angeles), Finnegan,
23
Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP (Washington, D.C.), Pfizer, Inc. (San Diego) and
24
Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP (San Diego), by defendant's separately requested
25
record or document category number, as set forth in the five (5) Civil Deposition Subpoenas for
26
Production of Business Records, copies of which are attached as Exhibits "A" through"E," to
27
the Declaration of H. Paul Kondrick in Support of Plaintiffs Motion for Order Quashing or
28
Modifying Defendant's Civil Subpoenas Pertaining to Her Prior Employment, and to Award
-1- Separate Statement - Motion to Quash Subpoenas
1 Monetary Sanctions, pursuant to Cal#ornia Rules ofCourt, Rule 3.1345, and otherwise:
2 1. Plaintifs entire personnel file;
3 2. Documents reflecting plaintiff's wage and/or salary history;
4 3. Plaintiffs applications for employment resumes, letters of reference and any
5 reference or background checks;
6 4. Documents related to plaintiff's interview and hiring;
7 5. offer letters and employment agreements;
8 6. Job descriptions;
9 7. Performance evaluations;
10 8. Written counselings, warnings or disciplinary actions;
11 9. Notes or other written records reflecting any oral counselings, warnings or
12 disciplinary actions;
13 10. Any complaints about plaintiff from management, co-workers or third parties;
14 11. Documents reflecting or relating to any investigation into any complaints about
15 plaintiff:
16 12. Any documents reflecting the reason for plaintiff separation from employment;
17 13. Any documents regarding any complaints by Ms. Etnyre about other employees
18 or managers;
19 14. Any documents reflecting an investigation or any other response by the employer
20 to Ms. Etnyre's complaints about others;
21 15. Any records reflecting or related to any complaints by Ms. Etnyre against the
22 employer or any of its employees asserted by the Equal Opportunity
23 Commission, the Department of Labor, or any other governmental agency;
24 16. Any records reflecting any potential or actual legal claims by Ms. Etnyre against
25 the employer; and
26 Ill
27 111
28 111

.
1 17. Any records constituting or reflecting the employer's responses to any
2 administrative or legal claims threatened or asserted by Ms. Etnyre against the
3 employer or any of its employees.
4
H. Paul Kondrick,
7 Dated: December 23,2009 BN.

. 1->? M-
H. Paul Kondrick
S. ETNYRE
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

I '1. -
.
.
JFO Ii_ FL ecirRJA,1?13 ?09 PIt- 358

1 H. Paul K6ndrick, Esq. (State Bar No. 88566)
3 Telephone: (619) 291-2400 Ir clv}ElboakEd*BF{41* Ull!*U U U
Facsimile: (619) 291-7123 r--rEM·Rf4 8VISION
4 Attorney for Plaintiff, COURTNEY S. ETNYRE r.,>p o ., -,Ofil ·, 1 ,GOSUPERIOR COURT
1J%·d. EL
5
CLERK - SUPERIOR COUR
FILED
SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CA
6
7 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA Clerk of the Court ,

By
COURTNEY S. ETNYRE, individually, Case No. 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL

10
Plaintiff, ) MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND
11 AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF
V. PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR
12 ORDER QUASHING OR
SANDIP ("MICKEY") MINHAS, individually, ) MODIFYING DEFENDANT'S CIVIL
13 QUALCOMM Incorporated, a Delaware ) SUBPOENAS PERTAINING TO HER
corporation, and DOES 1 through 40, inclusive, ) PRIOR EMPLOYMENT, AND TO
14 ) AWARD MONETARY SANCTIONS
15 Defendants. ) Date: March 12, 2009

) Oral Argument: March 19, 2009
16 Time. 10:30 a.m.

Department: DC-75
19 Plaintiff, COURTNEY S. ETNYRE ["ETNYRE"], submits the following memorandum
20 of points and authorities in support of her motion for an order quashing or otherwise modifying
21 the five (5) Civil Deposition Subpoenas for Production of Business Records pertaining to her
22 prior employment issued by defendant QUALCOMM Incorporated [*'QUALCOMM"]

23 variously dated December 3,4 and 8,2009, and directed to plaintiff' s former employers, namely
24 law firms Casey, Gerry, Schenk, Francavilla, Blatt & Penfield (San Diego), Howrey LLP (Los
26 Inc. (San Diego) and Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP (San Diego), all relating to the
27 production of documents and things from plaintiffs former employers [hereinafter collectively
28 the"Subject Subpoenas"], as necessary or appropriate, and to award monetary sanctions:
P&A - Motion to Quash

1 PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
2 In the present action, plaintiff, Ms. ETNYRE, who works within the Patent Law
3 Department or group of defendant, QUALCOMM, is suing defendants, QUALCOMM
4 Incorporated and SANDIP ('*MICKEY") MINHAS ["MINHAS'l, her former direct supervisor
5 at QUALCOMM, forbattery, including sexual battery [Civil Code, #1708.51, assault, negligence
6 and discrimination, retaliation and harassment based on gender/sex. Her claims arise from her
7 sexual assault and battery while traveling to New Jersey with defendant M[NHAS, on company
8 business.
9 Promptly upon being served with summons and complaint, defendant, QUALCOMM,
10 noticed plaintiff's deposition. It also subpoenaed Ms. ETNYRE's employment records from her ,
11 five (5) prior employers going back to 1997, or earlier. Plaintiff still works for defendant,
,
12 QUALCOMM. She has not been terminated for performance related issues, nor is there any
13 issue relative to her misrepresenting her earlier employment history. Nonetheless, defendant,
14 QUALCOMM, now seeks to discover ALL plaintiffs employment background, including
15 inquiries whether she ever made earlier complaints or charges of sex discrimination, harassment
16 or retaliation.
17 Without any legal authority, defendant, QUALCOMM, seeks to compel plaintiffs
18 former employers in Los Angeles (Howrey LLP) and Washington, D.C. )Finnegan, Henderson,
19 Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP) to produce plaintiff's employment files and records in San
20 Diego. This is clearly contrary to law. Moreover, plaintifs personnel files constitute her
21 privacy rights and interests, and defendant is further precluded from inquiring into plaintiffs
22 prior conduct or charges/complaints of sexual harassment or otherwise, if anv. pursuant to Code
23 ofCivil Procedure, §2017.220.
24 In short, defendant, QUALCOMM, undertook pursue aggressive discovery. The Subject
25 Subpoenas must be quashed in its entirety, or at a minimum modified, including to direct
26 compliance in a limited scope on terms and conditions protective plaintiffs and other persons'
27 rights ofprivacy.
28 lll
-2- P&A - Motion to Quash

1 THE COMPLAINT'S OPERATIVE ALLEGATIONS AND STATEMENT OF FACTS
RELATIVE TO THE PENDING MOTION TO OUASH OR MODIFY THE SUBJECT
2 SUBPOENA.
3 Since March 2003, plaintiff, ETNYRE, has been employed in the Patent Law
4 Department or group of defendant, QUALCOMM, in various capacities, including Senior Patent

5 Prosecution Paralegal/Project Manager or Patent Prosecution Senior Paralegal/Project Manager.
6 Plaintiff, EINYRE, is still employed by defendant, QUALCOMM. The complaint herein
7 generally alleges that:
8
a. Inor about February 2006, as part of herjob responsibilities for defendant,
9 QUALCOMM, plaintiff, ETNYRE, was directed by defendants, MINHAS and
QUALCOMM, to travel to New Jersey for company business along with her "immediate
10 supervisor" defendant, MINHAS, also traveled to New Jersey as part of that same job
assignment [Allegation 1114];
11
b. On or about February 22,2006, while in New Jersey on the aforementioned
12 QUALCOMM company business, defendant, MINHAS, sexually assaulted and battered
plaintiff, Ms. ETNYRE [Allegation 1115];
13
c. Defendant, QUALCOMM, "condoned and openly promoted a polluted sexually
14 hostile work environment in particular for its paralegals working in its Patent
Department. For instance, in its Patent Department, defendant, QUALCOMM, planned,
15 sponsored and directed its employees to participate in so-called "team building" social
events, dinners, "happy hours" and the like, openly exposing their female employees,
16 including plaintiff, ETNYRE, to overt and inappropriate sexual conduct, including
offensive touching, and language [Allegation 11251;
17
d. Defendant, QUALCOMM's, so-called "team building" events typically
18 "promoted, condoned and sponsored the consumption of inappropriate amounts of
alcoholic beverages, contributing or otherwise leading to repeated instances of
19 demeaning conduct, discrimination, harassment and retaliation towards its female
employees, in particular in its Patent Department or Group. The foregoing conduct,
20 discrimination, harassment and retaliation of female employees, including but not
limited to plaintiff, ETNYRE, related but was not limited to promotions, positive
21 performance reviews, compensation; lewd, sexist remarks, including but not limited to
references to derogatory parts ofthe female anatomy, and the like; sexist jokes; groping;
22 sexual gestures; physical touching, including but not limited to uninvited kisses,
fondling, and the like; grabbing female employee buttocks; and attempted sexual activity
23 [Allegation 11461;
24 e. While attending defendant, QUALCOMM's, corporate sponsored events,

defendant, QUALCOMM's, "attorneys, supervisors, managing agents and corporate
25 officers improperly touched female employees in sexual manners. For instance, on
multiple occa5ions, they slid their hands up and down female employee's leg toward
26 their crotch; further attempted to kiss the female employees; caused the female
employees to raise their arms to try to fend off the sexually aggressive, offensive
27 conduct. The female employees, including plaintiff, ETNYRE, were upset, visibly
shaken and distraught by these events" [Allegation 11541;
28
f. On "more than one such occasion, defendant, MINHAS, forcible groped,

1 fondled, touched and kissed [plaintiff, Ms. ETNYRE] [Allegation 955]; and
2 g When plaintiff, ETNYRE, complained either within defendant, QUALCOMM,

or to governmental entities come including but not limited to the California Department
3 of Fair Employment and Housing ["DFEH"], she was subjected to: claims of
inappropriate conduct or misconduct; insubordination; poor performance; placed on a
4 Performance Improvement Plan ["PIP"]; and suspended or placed on administrative
leave [Allegation 1[47].
5
In early-December 2009, plaintiffwas served with defendant QUALCOMM's, Notices

6
to Consumer or Employee and Deposition Subpoenas for the Preduction of Business Records
7
that it was seeking her employment and other records from five (5) ofplaintiff, ETNYRE's,
8
former employers, all either law offices or corporate law departments, dating back to 1997. The
9
five (5) Civil Deposition Subpoenas for Production of Business Records pertaining to her prior
10
employment issued by defendant, QUALCOMM, variously dated December 3,4 and 8,2009,
11
directed to plaintiff's former employers, namely law firms Casey, Gerry, Schenk, Francavilla,
12
Blatt & Penfield (San Diego), Howrey LLP (Los Angeles), Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow,
13
Garrett & Dunner LLP (Washington, D.C.), Pfizer, Inc. (San Diego) and Sheppard, Mullin,
14
Richter & Hampton LLP (San Diego) [hereinafter collectively the "Subject Subpoenas"], all
15
seek the following records pertaining to plaintiff, ETNYRE:
16
17 "All documents pertaining to Courtney S. Etnyre (SSN: 229-02-3132; DOB: 04/04/69),

for all dates of her employment at [your firm/company] ("employer") including, but not
18 limited to, any ofthe following: (1) her entire personnel file; (2) documents reflecting
her wage and/or salary history; (3) her applications for employment, resumes, letters of
19 reference and any reference or background checks; (4) documents related to her
interview and hiring; (5) offer letters and employment agreements; (6) job descriptions;
20 (7) performance evaluations; (8) written counselings, warnings or disciplinary actions;
(9) notes or other written records reflecting any oral counselings, warnings or
21 disciplinary actions; (10) any complaints about her from management, co-workers or
third parties; (11) documents reflecting or relating to any investigation into any
22 complaints about her: (12) any documents reflecting the reason for her separation from
employment; (13) any documents regarding any complaints by Ms. Etnyre about other
23 employees or managers; (114) any documents reflecting an investigation or any other
response by the employer to Ms. Etnyre's complaints about others; (15) any records
24 reflecting or related to any complaints by Ms. Etnyre against the employer or any ofits
employees asserted by the Equal Opportunity Commission, the Department of Labor, or
25 any other governmental agency; (16) any records reflecting any potential or actual legal
claims by Ms. Etnyre against the employer; and (17) any records constituting or
26 reflecting the employer's responses to any administrative or legal claims threatened or
asserted by Ms. Etnyre against the employer or any of its employees."
27
Plaintiff, ETNYRE, requested defendant, QUALCOMM, withdraw or otherwise recall,

28
the Subject Subpoenas. It refused, and continues to refuse to recall the Subject Subpoenas, or
.
1 seek the information, in a less intrusive manner.
2 I. THE SUBJECT SUBPOENAS ARE DEFECTIVE. PURSUANT TO CODE OF CIVIL

PROCEDURE. #1987.1. AND OTHERWISE. THE COURT SHOULD GRANT
3 PLAINTIFF. ETNYRE'S. MOTION TO OUASH -HE SUBJECT SUBPOENAS
SEEKING HER EMPLOYMENT RECORDS BY LIMITING THE SCOPE OF
4 RECORDS OR DOCUMENTS TO BE PRODUCED. REVIEW OF THE DOCUMENTS
IN CAMERA. AND ORDERING DISCLOSURE OF ONLY THAT INFORMATION
5 THAT MIGHT BE RELEVANT TO THE SUIT BECAUSE THE EMPLOYMENT AND
PERSONNEL RECORDS INVADE PLAINTIFF'S RIGHT OF PRIVACY.
6
When a subpoena requires the attendance of a witness or the production of books,

7
documents or other things, the Court, upon motion reasonably made by the party, the witness, a
8
consumer described in Code ofcivil Procedure, #1985.3, or an employee described in Code qf

9
Civil Procedure, #1983.6, may make an order quashing, modifying or directing compliance
10
upon those terms and conditions that protect the person from unreasonable or oppressive
11
demands, including the right of privacy ofthe person. Code Civ. Proc. # 1987.1. In this case,
12
the employee litigant, COURTNEY ETNYRE, whose employment records are subpoenaed may,
13
before the date for production, bring a motion under Code OfCivil Procedure, #1987.lto quash
14
or modify the subpoena. Code Civ. Proc. § 1985.60*1).

15
The procedure for subpoenaing "employment records" is similar to that provided under
16
Code OfCivi/ Procedure, #1985.3 for subpoenaing"personal records" of a "consumer." Code of
17
Civi/ Procedure, §1985.6(b) requires that the following documents be served on the employee
18
(unless he or she is the subpoenaing party and the only subject of the subpoenaed records) a
19
copy of the subpoena; and "Notice of privacy rights.

20
In the present matter, defendant, QUALCOMM, issued subpoenas to witnesses in
21
Washington, D.C. and Los Angeles to produce plaintiffs personnel records here in San Diego.
22
First, a California-issued subpoena has no force or effect in Washington, D.C., nor has
23
defendant, QUALCOMM, requested relief from this Court to proceed with discovery in another
24
jurisdiction. Second, the subpoena on Howrey LLP cannot force the production of records here
25
in San Diego. Therefore, in the present matter, defendant's Subject Subpoenas are defective and
26
should be quashed.
27
lll
28
ill

. .
1 II. PLAINTIFF. COURTNEY ETNYRE'S. PERSONNEL AND EMPLOYMENT

RECORDS WITH HIS EMPLOYER. THE SAN DIEGO UNIFIED SCHOOL
2 DISTRICT. ARE CONFIDENT AL AND FALL WITHIN A ZONE OF PRIVACY. AS A
MATTER OF LAW. AND THE SUBJECT SUBPOENAS VIOLATED PLAINTIFF'S
3 RIGHT OF PRIVACY. IN ADDITION. PLAINTIFF. ETNYRE. HAS NOT
AUTOMATICALLY WAIVED HER RIGHT TO PRIVACY IN HER EMPLOYMENT
4 RECORDS MERELY BY FILING T**IS SEXUAL ASSAULT AND BATTERY AND
DISCRIM_NATION LAWSUIT.
5
Confidential personnel files at a person's place of employment are within a zone of

6
privacy. Board of Trustees v. Superior Court (1981) 119 Cal. App. 3d 516,528-530. For
7
example, the personnel file may contain confidential letters regarding the employee written by
8
outsiders, and disclosure would impair the confidentiality they expected would be accorded to
9
their communications. ld. Moreover, personnel records are generally protected from discovery
10
"unless the litigant can show a compelling need for the particular documents and that the
11
information cannot reasonably be obtained through depositions or from non-confidential
12
sources." Harding Lawson Associates v. Superior Court (Bailev) (1992) 10 Cal. App. 4th
13
7,10,12.
14
A plaintiff does not automatically waive his or her right of privacy by filing a lawsuit.
15
Any waiver must be narrowly construed and encompasses only discovery directly relevant to the
16
claim and essential to the fair resolution of the lawsuit. Further, there must be a compelling
17
need forthediscovery. Tvlov. Superior Court (1997) 55 Cal. App. 4'h 1379,1386-1389; Davis
18
v. Superior Court (1992) 7 Cal. App. 4'h 1008,1014.

19
The right of privacy may be invoked by litigant as a ground for refusal to aHow
20
discovery that constitute an unreasonable intrusion on that right. Kahn v. Superior Court (1987)
21
188 Cal. App. 3d . 752; Fults v. Suverior Court (1979) 88 Cal. App. 3d 899, 903. Evenwhen
22
the inquiry is relevant and not privileged, such overriding constitutional considerations as the
23
right to privacy under Article I, Section 1, of the Cal(fornia Constitution may require limitations
24
on discovery. Vallev Bank of Nevada v. Superior Court (1975) 15 Cal. 3d 652,656,658. The
25
provision for the right of privacy under Article I, Section I ofthe Cal#ornia Constimtion is self-
26
executing in creating an enforceable right Craig v. Municipal Court (1979) 100 Cal. App. 3d
27
69,76.
28
When invasion of a right to privacy may occur, the relevance and materiality are not
. .
1 sufficient to establish discoverability. The party seeking discovery must demonstrate a
2 compelling state interest to justify disclosure. Rancho Publications v. Superior Court (1999)
3 68 Cal. App. f 1538. ; Hinshaw, Winkler, Draa, Marsh & Still v Superior Court (1996) 51 Cal.
4 App. 4'11; Fults v. Superior Court (1979) 88 Cal. App. 3d 899,905. In the presentmatter, the
5 burden falls to defendant, QUALCOMM.
6 Even when disclosure is necessary to the fair resolution of a lawsuit, the compelled
7 disclosure should be narrowly drawn so as to insure maximum protection of the
8 constitutional interests at stake. Brin v. Superior Court (1978) 20 Cal. 3d 844, 859: El
9 Dorado Savings & Loan Assn. v. Superior Court 0987) 190 Cal. App. 3d 342, Bkoldingthetthe
10 right of privacy protects, and reaches to, "personnel records"]. '
11 In the present matter, therefore, the further burden falls to defendant, QUALCOMM, to
12 show that there are no less intrusive means, such as depositions, would yield the information
13 sought by him in the Subject Subpoena. Plaintiff, Ms. ETNYRE submits that even ifthere were
14 no means less intrusive, the trial court should first examine the records in camera and order
15 disclosure of only that information that might be relevant to the suit.
16 III. TO THE EXTENT THAT DEFENDANT. OUALCOMM. FURTHER SEEKS

DISCOVERY OF ANY ASPECT OF SEXUAL CONDUCT PERTAINING TO
17 PLAINTIFF. COURTNEY ETNNYRE. THEN DEFENDANT. OUALCOMM. FAILED
TO SATISFY THE REOUIREMENTS OF Code of Civi/Procedure. #2017.220(a),
18 WHICH INCLUDES SHOWING GOOD CAUSE FOR THE DISCOVERY UNDER THE
CIRCUMSTANCES OF THIS LAWSUIT.
19
20 Code of Civil Procedure, §2017.220(a), restricts the discovery of any plaintiff s sexual
21 conduct, including accusations, in other instances, and specifically provides that:
22 6'In any civil action, alleging conduct that constitutes sexual harassment, sexual assault,
or sexual' battery, any party seeking discovery concerning the plaintiff s sexual conduct
23 with individuals other than the alleged perpetrator shall establish specific facts showing
that there is good cause for that discovery, and that the matter sought to be discovered is
24 relevant to the subject matter ofthe action and reasonably calculated to lead to the
discovery of admissible evidence. This showing shall be made by a noticed motion,
25 accompanied by a meet and confer declaration under Section 2016.040, and shall not be
26
The court found that the record was inadequate to support disclosure ofthe entire personnel file. It said
27
jiat consideration must first be given to whether less intrusive means, such as depositions, would yield the
mformation sought. Then, even if there were no means less intrusive, the trial court should first examine the records
28
* camera and order disclosure of only that information that might be relevant to the suit. 190 CaL App. 3d 342,
146.

..
1 made or considered by the court at an ex parte hearing."
2 In this matter, defendant QUALCOMM, fails to even attempt to fashion a tenable
3 showing during the meet and confer process pertaining to the Subject Subpoenas now before
4 this Court. In this case, "sexual harassment sexual assault, or sexual battery" are clearly
5 alleged. Accordingly, defendant QUALCOMM, as a matter of law, must file a noticed motion
6 in order to seek discovery concerning the plaintifs sexual conduct with individuals other than
7 the alleged perpetrator, in this case defendant, MINHAS, in order to show that there is good
8 cause for that discovery, and that the matter sought to be discovered is relevant to the subject
9 matter of the action and reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence.
10 Defendant, QUALCOMM, failed to undertake any of these statutory protections. The motion to
11 quash must be granted.
12 IV. IT IS REGRETTABLE THAT MONETARY SANCTIONS SHOULD PROBABLY

BE AWARDED IN THIS MATTER.
13
Monetary sanctions may be imposed against the losing party in a discovery dispute
14
unless the court finds "substantial justification" for that party's position or other circumstances
15
rendering sanctions "unjust." See Code OfCivil Procedure f 2023.030. In addition, monetary
16
sanctions are mandatog (no excuses allowed) for failure to "meet and confer" as required by
17
stabite, notwithstanding the outcome ofthe motion . Code of Civil Procedure § 2023.020. The
18
losing party may be ordered to pay the reasonable expenses, including attorneys'fees, incurred
19
bythe party prevailing on the motion. Code OfCivil Procedure # 2023.030(a).

20
If the motion to compel is granted, to avoid sanctions the deponent must show
21
"substantial justification" for his or her refusal to answer the deposition question; e.g.,
22
reasonable grounds to believe the objection was valid when made and that opposition to the
23
motion to compel therefore was justified. See FoothW Properties v. Lyon/Cop/ev Corona
24
Assocs- L.P. (1996) 46 Cal. App. 4th 1542, 1557-1558 \refusmg Code ofCivit Procedure §
25
2031.010 document requests and opposing motion to compel was "substantially justified" where
26
refusing party's motion for protective order was pending.] Where monetary sanctions are sought
27
in connection with discovery motions, the court is required to impose such sanctions against the
28
losing party unless itfinds the losing party acted with"substantialjustf cation"or"other
1 circumstances make the sanction unjust" Code of Civil Procedure * 2023.030(a),
2 2025.480(D (emphasis added).
3 In the present matter, plaintiff, COURTNEY ETNYRE, submits there is no justification
4 for the extraordinary, rushed subpoena at issue being pursued by defendant, QUALCOMM. In
5 relation to the pending motion to quash, or alternatively modify, the Subject Subpoenas issued
6 by defendant, QUALCOMM, caused plaintiffto bring this motion.
7 Accordingly, plaintiff, ETNYRE, necessary incurred through counsel more than 3.0
8 hours reviewing the Subject Subpoenas and pertinent pleadings, notes and correspondence, and
9 drafting thepresent discovery motion. At the standard hourly fee is $275 per hour.
10 Accordingly, plaintiff, ETNYRE, incurred, or will incur, the minimum sum of $1,277.50 in
13 to this motion or to prepare additional reply papers, and a $40.00 filing fee for this motion. The
14 foregoing expenditure of time does not take into consideration any need to review any
15 opposition to this motion or to prepare additional reply papers..
16 CONCLUSION
17 Based on the foregoing, plaintiff, COURTNEY ETNYRE, requests that the Court quash,
18 in its entirety, the five (5) Civil Deposition Subpoenas for Production of Business Records
19 pertaining to her prior employment issued by defendant, QUALCOMM, variously dated
20 December 3,4 and 8,2009, directed to plaintiffs former employers, namely law firms Casey,
21 Gerry, Schenk, Francavilla, Blatt & Penfield (San Diego), Howrey LLP (Los Angeles),
22 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP (Washington, D.C.), Pfizer, Inc. (San
23 Diego) and Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP (San Diego), all relating to the
24 production of documents and things from plaintiff s former employers [hereinafter collectively
25 the "Subject Subpoenas"]. The Court should also impose on defendant, QUALCOMM, the
26 burden to demonstrate that there are no less intrusive means, such as depositions, that would
27 yield the information sought by it from plaintiff's former employers as presently sought by the
28 Subject Subpoenas; and it should first examine the employment, personnel or other records and

.
.
1 document pertaining to plaintiff, COURTNEY S. ETNYRE, or other persons, in camera before
2 allowing them to be turned over to defendant QUALCOMM, or its deposition officer,
3 Copyscan, Inc..
4 The Court should further specifically preclude any documents or writings pertaining to
5 plaintiff, ETNYRE's, sexual conduct with individuals other than the alleged perpetrator, in this
6 case defendant SANDIP ("MICKEY') MINHAS ["MINHAS'l, including any claims of sexual
12 declaration under co*>cf Civil Procedure, #2016.040, and, shall not be made or considered by
13 the courtal anfer:#di#'rd-haring, in accordance wAth Code of Civil Procedure, §2017.220(a).
14 Finally, the C0%*tshould likely award monetary sanctions against defendant QUALCOMM.
H. Paul Kondrick,
17

H. Paul Kondrick
S. ETNYRE
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

1 H. Paul Kendrick, Esq. (State Bar No. 88566) ... It-En
H. Paul Kendrick, a Professional Corporation ' evil BUSINESS OFFICE Ltd/
t ,- 1. R@MEION
0
, 2 3130 Fourth Avenue
San Diego, CA 92103-5803 SAN DIEGO SUPERIOR C t· . 8
3 Telephone: (619) 291-2400 FILE ...
Facsimile: (619) 291-7123 357
4 Attorney for Plaintiff, COURTNEY S. ETN DM, /4 -23
5
Clerk of the Court '2¢97
6 Deputy

10 )
Plaintiff, ) NOTICE OF PLAINTIFF'S MOTION
11 FOR ORDER QUASHING OR
V. A MODIFYING DEFENDANT'S CIVIL
12 SUBPOENAS FOR PRODUCTION
SANDIP f'MICKEY") MINHAS, individually, OF BUSINESS RECORDS
13 QUALCOMM Incorporated, a Delaware ) PERTAINING TO HER PRIOR
corporation, and DOES 1 through 40, inclusive, EMPLOYMENT, AND TO AWARD
14 MONETARY SANCTIONS
15 Defendants. Date: March 12, 2009

Oral Argument: March 19, 2009
16 Time: 10:30 a.m.
Department: DC-75
19 To: Defendants, QUALCOMM Incorporated and SANDIP ("MICKEY") MINHAS, by
20 and through their respective attorneys of record herein, Paul, Plevin, Sullivan & Connaughton,
21 LLP, and in particular attorney Michael C. Sullivan thereof, and Wilson, Cosmo & Turner LLP,
22 and in particular attorney Leonid M. Zilberman:
23 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that for purposes of this motion, and in particular filing
24 pleadings, on March 12,2009, at 10:30 a.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, in
25 Department DC-75 ofthe above-entitled Court, located at 330 West Broadway, San Diego,
26 California 92101, plaintiff, COURTNEY S. ETNYRE ["ETNYRE"], will move the Court for an
27 order quashing or otherwise modifying the five (5) Civil Deposition Subpoenas for Production
28 of Business Records pertaining to her prior employment issued by defendant, QUALCOMM
*V
.
1 Incorporated ["QUALCOMM"l variously dated December 3,4 and 8,2009, directed to

6 plaintiffs former employers [hereinafter collectively the "Subject Subpoenas'7, and to award
7 monetary sanctions. In the event that the parties, or any of them, request oral argument on this
8 motion, in particular after the Court issues its tentative ruling pursuant to its local court rules,
9 then oral argument on this motion will proceed on March 12,2009, at 10:30 a.m., or as soon
10 thereafter as the matter may be heard, in Department DC-75 of the above-entitled Court, located
11 at 330 West Broadway, San Diego, California 92101.
14 and things by plaintiffs former employers seeking plaintifs personnel and employment records

1,
3 d. Specifically prectuding any documents or writings pertain to plaintiff,

11 declaration under Code OfCivil Procedure, #2016.040, and shall not be made or considered by
12 the court at an ex parte hearing, in accordance wAth Code of Civil Procedure, §2017.220(a).
21 instance, defective, and seek plaintiffs employment and personnel records from her previous
23 substantial justification; the Subject Subpoenas improperly invade or infringe on plaintiff' s right
27 accompanying Declaration ofH. Paul Kondrick in Support ofPlaintiffs Motion for Order

T
2 memorandum ofpoints and authorities, served and filed herewith, and on the records and files
4 argument.
H. Paul Kondrick,
7N.Dwemkr23,200983 1'1'*1- 2-
6
H. Paul Kondrick
S. ETNYRE
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

.
POS-010
FOR COURT USE ONLY

ATTORNEY ORPARTY WITHOUTATTORNEY (Name, State Bar number, and address)
H. Paul Kondrick (Bar # 88566)
H. Paul Kendrick, A Professional Corporation
3130 Fourth Avenue, San Diego, CA 92103-5803 CILEre
r CIVIL BUSINESS OFFICE 11:,#
TELEPHONE NO.: (619) 291-2400 FAX,NO. cop#onao: (619) 291-7123 CENTRAL DIVISION
E-MAIL ADDRESS (01*na/):
ATTORNEY FOR,Name, Courtney S. Etnyre, Plaintiff DEC 0 4 2009

STREET ADDRESS: 330 West Broadway CLERK-SUPERIORCOURT
MAIUNG ADDRESS: SAN BEGO COUNTY, CA
CITYAND ZIP CODE: San Diego 92101
BRANCH NAME: Central Division
PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER: Courtney S. Etnyre

CASE NUMBER:
37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL
DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT: Sandip ("Mickey") Minhas, et at.
Ref. No. or File No.
PROOF OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS
(Separate proof of service is required for each patty served.)

1. At the time of service I was at least 18 years of age and nota party to this action.
2. I served copies of:
a. 1-Yl summons
b [TI complaint
c 1-37 Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) package
d. Fl Civil Case Cover Sheet (served in comp/ex cases on/y)
e. F-1 cross-complaint
f. |Yl other (specify documents): Civil Case Cover Sheet Notice of Case Assignment Stipulation to Alternative Dispute
Resolution Process, Peremptory Challenge, Notice of Case Reassignment. and Notice and Acknowledgement of Receipt
3. a. Pady served (specify name of party as shown on documents served):
SANDIP ("MICKEY") MINHAS, individually
b. 1-Fl Person (other than the party in item 3a) served on behalf of an entity or as an authorized agent (and not a person
under item 5b on whom substituted service was made) (specify'name and relationship to the oartv named in item 38)
Leonid M. Zilberman, Attorney for Defendant, SANDIP ("MICKEY") MINHAS
4. Address where the party'was served: do Leonid M. Zilberman, Esq., Wilson, Petty Cosmo & Turner, 550 West "C" Street Suite 1050
San Diego, CA 92101
5. I served the party (check proper box)
a, Fl by personal service. I personally delivered the documents listed in item 2 to the party or person authorized to
receive service of process for the party (1) on (date): (2) at (time).
b. by substituted service. On Mate): at (time) I left the documents listed in Item 2 with or
in the presence of (name and tit/e or miationship to pemon indicated in item 3)
(1) 1-1 (business) a person at least 18 years of age apparently in charge at the office or usual place of business
of the person to be served. I informed him or her of the general nature of the papers.
(2) Fl (home) a competent member of the household (at least 18 years of age) at the dwelling house or usual
place,of abode of the party. I informed him or. her of the general nature of the papers.
(3) Fl (physical address unknown) a person at least 18 years of age apparently in charge at the usual mailing
address of the person to be served, other than a United States Postal Service post office box. I informed
him or her of the general nature of the papers.
(4) Fl I thereafter mailed (by first-class,,postage prepaid) copies of the documents to the person to be served
at the place where the copies were left (Code Civ. Proc., § 415.20). I mailed the documents on
(date): from (city): or |33 a declaration of mailing is attached.
(5) I attach a declaration of dillgence stating actions taken first to attempt personal service.
Page 1 Of 2
Code of Civil Procedure, § 417.10

Judicial Council of.California
POS-010 [Rev. January 1, 2007] LexisNexis® Automated California Judicial Cotmcil Forms
CASE NUMBER:
37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL
DEFENDANTARESPONDENT Sandip ("Mickey") Minhas, et at.
5. c. 1-37 by mall and acknowledgment of receipt of service. I mailed the documents listed in item 2 to the party, to the
address shown in item 4, by first-dass mail, postage prepaid,
(1) on (date): November 12, 2009 (2) from (city): San Diego, California
(3) 1-TI with two copies of the Notice and Acknow/edgment ofReceipt and a postage-paid return envelope addressed
to me. (Attach comp/eted Notice and Acknowledgement of Receipt.) (Code Civ. Proc., § 415.30.)
(4) E-1 to an address outside California with return receipt requested. (Code Civ. Proc., § 415.40.)
d, Fl by other means (spec#) means of service and authorizing code section)
Additional page describing service is attached.
6. The "Notice to the Person Served" (on the summons) was completed as follows:
a. |"Fl as an individual defendant.
b. |77 as the person sued under the fictitious name of (specify):
c £ as occupant.
d. On behalf of (spec/44:
under the following Code of Civil Procedure section:
¤ 416.10 (corporation) 415.95 (business organization, form unknown)
416.20 (defunct corporation) ¤ 416.60 (minor)
0 416.30 (loint stock company/association) 6 416.70 (ward or conservatee)
0 416.40 (association or partnership) 416.90 (authorized person)
Il 416:50 (public entity) ¤ 415.46 (occupant)
0 other:
7. Person who served papers
a. Name: Candice Caufield
b. Address: c/o H. Paul Kondrick, A.P.C., 3130 Fourth Avenue, San Diego, CA 92103
c. Telephone number: (619) 291-2400
d. The fee for service was: $
e. I am:
(1) [3E1 nota registered California process server.

(2) F7 exempt from registration under Business and Professions Code section 22350(b).
(3) 1 T a registered California process server:
(i) 1-l owner r-1 employee F-7 Independent contractor.
(li) Registration No.:
(lii) County:
8. |Tl I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.
or
9. F7 I am a California sheriff or marshal and I certify that the foregoing is true and correct.
Candice Caufield
(NAME OF PERSON WHO SERVED PAPERS/SHERIFF OR MARSHAL) (SIGNATURE)
POS-010 [Rev. January 1,2007] Page 2 of 2

LexisNexis® Automated California Judicial Council Forms
.
POS-015
FOR COURT USE ONLY
ATTORNEY OR PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY (Name, State Bar number, and address):
.4 _H. Paul Kondrick (Bar # 88566)
H. Paul Kondrick, A Professional Corporation
3130 Fourth Avenue

TELEPHONE NO.: (619) 291-2400 FAX NO. copmw: (619) 291-7123
E-MAIL ADDRESS (Op#onal)
le/LEIF%
M- CIVIL BUSINESS OFFICE IL#
ATTORNEY FOR (Name): Courtney S. Etnyre, Plaintiff CENTRAL DIVISION
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTYIOF SAN DIEGO

1 STREET ADDRESS:
330 West Broadway
DEC 04 2009
MAILING ADDRESS:
CLERK-SUPERIORCOURT
CITY AND ZIP CODE:
San Diego 92101 SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CA
PLAINTIFF/PETFTIONER: COUrtney S. Etnyre
DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT: Sandip¢'Mickey')Minhas, et al.

CASE NUMBER:
NOTICE AND ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF RECEIPT-CIVIL

37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-Cn
TO (insert name of party being served): Sandip¢'Mickey'Minhas, individually
NOTICE
The summons and other documents identified below are being served pursuant to section 415.30 of the California Code of Civil
Procedure. Your failure to complete this form and return it within 20 days from the date of mailing,shown below may subject you
(or the party on whose behalf you are being served) to liability for the payment of any expenses incurred in serving a summons
on you in any other manner permitted by law.
'If you are being served on behalf of a corporation, an unincorporated association (including a partnership),or other entity, this
form must be signed by you in the name of such entity or by a person authorized to receive service of process on behalf of such
entity. In all other cases, this form mustbe signed by you personally or by a person authorized by you to acknowledge receipt of
summons. If you return this form to thesender. service of a summons is deemed complete on the day you sign the
acknowledgment of receipt below.
Date of mailing: November 12, 2009

Candice Caufield
(SIGNATURE OF SENDER-MUST NOT BE A PARTY IN THIS CASE)
ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF RECEIPT
This acknowledges receipt of (to be comp/eted by sender before mailing):

1. [-Fl A copy ofthe summons and of the complaint.
2.90 Other (speci64:
Civil Case Cover Sheet Notice of Case Assignment Notice to Litigants/ADR Information
Package, Stipulation to Alternative Dispute Resolution Process, Peremptory Challenge and
Notice of Case Reassignment.
(To be completed by recipient):
Date this form is signed: November32,2009
Leonid M. Zilberman, Esq. on behalf of Sandip<MickeylMinhas

rryPE OR PRINT YOUR NAME AND NAME OF ENTITY, IF ANY,
¥d.-645&) .
1 BIGNATURE F P SON WLEDGING RECEIPT, WITH TITLE IF
ON WHOSE BEHALF THIS FORM IS SIGNED)
ACVNOWLEDGME
V IS MeZ.5,56(ALF OF ANOTHER PERSON OR ENTITY)
By: Leonid M. Zilberman, Attorney for Sandipt'Mickey'inhas
Page 1 of 1
Judicial Council of California NOTICE AND ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF RECEIPT - CIVIL Code of Civil Procedure,
§§415.30.417.la
POS-015 [Rev. January 1,20051
vmw.courtinfo.ca.gov

'-
POS-015
FOR COURT USE ONLY
ATTORNEY OR PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY (Name. State Barnumber„mid address):
_H. Paul Kondrick (Bar # 88566)
3130 Fourth Avenue

TELEPHONE NO : (619) 291-2400 FAX NO.(Op#onaa: (619) 291-7123
ILEn
E-MAIL ADDRESS (Optiona/:
F CIVIL BUSINESS OFFICE EW
ATTORNEY FOR (Namek Courtney S. Etnyre, Plaintiff CENTRAL- DIVISION
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA. COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

STREETADDRESS: 330 West Broadway DEC 0 4 2009
MAILING ADDRESS:
CLERK-SUPERIORCOURT
CITY AND ZIP CODE: San Diego 92101
BRANCH NAME. Central Division
DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT: Sandip("Mickey'Minhas, et al.

CASE NUMBER:
NOTICE AND ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF RECEIPT--CIVIL 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL
TO (insert name of party being served): Sandip('Mickey')Minhas, individually
NOTICE
The summons and other documents Identified below are being servedpursuant to section 415.30 of the California Code of Civil
Procedure. Your failure to complete this form and return it within 20 days from the date of mailing shown below maysubject you
(or the party on whose behalf you are being served) to liability for the payment of any expenses incurred in serving a summons
If you are being served on behalf of a corporation, an unincorporated association (including a partnership), or other entity, this
form must be signed by you in the name of such entity or by a person authorizedtoreceive service of process on behalf of such
entity. In all other cases, this form must be signed by you personally or by a person authorized by you to acknowledge receipt of
summons. If you return this form to the sender, service of a summons is deemed complete on the day you sign the
Candice Caufield
(TYPE OR PRINT NAME) (SIGNATURE OF SENDER-MUST NOT BE A PARTY IN THIS CASE)
This acknowledges receipt of (to be completed by sender before mailing)

1. Tl A copy of the summons and of the complaint.
2.1T1 Other (spec#*
Civil Case Cover Sheet, Notice of Case Assignment, Notice to Litigants/ADR Information
Notice of Case Reassignment.
Date this form is signed: November32,2009 -
Leonld M. Zilberman, Esq. on behalf of.Sandip<MickeylMinhas

(TYPE OR PRINT YOUR NAME AND NAME OF ENTITY, IF ANY, i *IGNATURE dF PEkSON ACKIJOWLEDGING RECEIPT. WrTH TITLE IF
AtNOWLEDGME
V IS 'tl=pEHALF OF ANOTHER PERSON OR ENTITY)
By: Leonid M. Zilberman, Attorney for Sandipf'Mickey'phinhas
Page 1 of 1
NOTICE AND ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF RECEIPT - CIVIL §§415.30,417.10
POS-015 [Rev. January 1, 20051 winv.couttinfo.ca.gov

0
*0' 931)09
6 />
0 0
POS-015
FOR COURT USE ONLY
ATTORNEY OR PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY fName, Sfate Barnumber and address)
3130 Fourth Avenue
TELEPHONE NO.:
(619) 291-2400 FAX NO. (OptionaO. ,(619) 291-7123
E-MAIL ADDRESS (Optiona/)
ATTORNEY FOR (Name): Courtney S. Etnyre, Plaintiff F civit.CENTRAL

Bus,NESS
DIVISION
OFICE D
MAILING ADDRESS: DEC 04 2009
CITY AND ZIP CODE:
San Diego 92101
BRANCH NAME: Central Division CLERK-SUPERIORCOURT
PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER: COUrtney S. Etnyre
DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT: Sandip "Mickey" Minhas, et al.

' , CASE NUMBER:
NOTICE AND ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF RECEIPT-CIVIL 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL
TO (insert name of party being served): QUALCOMM Incorporated, a Delaware corporation
NOTICE
The summons and other documents Identified below are being served pursuant to section,415.30 of:the California Code of Civil
Procedure. Your failure to complete this form and return it within 20 days from the date of mailing shown below maysubject you
(or the party on whose behalf you are beingserved) to liability for the payment of any expenses Incurred in serving a summons
If youare being served on,behalf of a corporation, an unincorporated association (including a partnership), or other entity, this
form rhust be signed by you in the name of such entity or by a person authorized to receive service of process on behalf of such
entity. In all other cases, this form must be signed by you personally or by a person authorized by you to acknowledge receipt of
summons. If you return this form to the sender, service of a summons isdeemed complete on the day you sign the
Candice Caufield ,-- --'
(TYPE OR PRINT NAME) (SIGNATURE OF SENDER-MUST NOT BE A PARTY IN THIS CASE)
This acknowledges receipt of (to be completed by sender before mailing).

1. [T| A copy of the summons and of the complaint.
2,1-l Other (spec/44:
Civil Case Cover Sheet Notice of Case Assignment, Notice to Litigants/ADR Information
Notice of Case Reassignment
Date this form is signed: S@albep--,2009
Metiss*-168 ok V A./ F 7 -
0, Esq. on behalf of QUALCOMM Incorporated /7-i--* V (-0
(TYPE OR PRINT YOUR NAME AND NAME OF ENTITY, IF ANY, - (01(31,18*RE OF PERSON ACKNOWLEDGING RECEIPT, WITH TITLE IF
ACKprEDGMENT IS MADE ON BEHALF OF ANOTHER PERSON OR ENT'm
-1*41//ga 1561 6<.
Attorney for QUALCOMM Incorporated
Page 1 of 1
Form Adopted for Mandatory Use Code of Civil Procedure,

NOTICE AND ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF RECEIPT - CIVIL §§41530. 417.10
POS-015[Rev January 1. 2005] vmw.coutlinfo.ca.gov
LexisNexia® Automated California Judicial Council.Forms

0. 0
FOR COURT USE ONLY
ATTORNEY OR PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY(Name, state bernumber. andaddmss)
H. Paul Kondrick (State Bar # 88566)

3130 Fourth Avenue
San Diego , California 92103-5803

: (619) 291-2400 FAXNO. cop#onao: (619) 291-7123
TELEPHONE NO. (Optional)
F civliCENTRAL
Busibss 0,5,cE D
DIVISION
E-MAIL ADDRESS (Optiona/:
ATTORNEY FOR (Name) Courtney S. Etnyre. Plaintiff DEC o 21}09

HALL OF JUSTICE, 330W BROADWAY, SAN DIEGO, CA 92101-3827
CLERK-SUPERIORCOURT
O NORTH COUNTY DIVISION, 325·S. MELROSE DR., VISTA, CA 92081-6643
O'EAST COWNTY DIVISION, 250 E. MAIN ST., EL CAJON, CA 92020-3941
O RAMONA BRANCH, 1428 MONTECIIO RD., RAMONA, CA 92065-5200
0 SOUTH COUNTY DIVISION, 500 3RD AVE.. CHULA VISTA, CA 91910-5649
PLAINTIFF(S) JUDGE· Hon. Richard E.L. Strauss

Courtney S. Etnyre
DEFENDANT(S) DEPT: C-75
Sandip ("Mickey") Minhas, et al.
1 CASE NUMBER
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
(San Diego Superior Court Rules, Division 11, Rule 2.5) 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL
I certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that all defendants named in the complaint of
the above-entitled case have either made a general appearance or have been properly and timely 5950 in compliance with
San Diego Superior Court Rules, Division 11, Rule 2.5.

1 1- lyllt\\/f
Signature
H. Paul Kondrick, Esq.

Typed or printed name
NOTES:
If service cannot be effected on all defendants within 60 days of filing the complaint, DO NOT USE THIS CERTIFICATE, but file
the form CERTIFICATE OF PROGRESS (SDSC CIV-144) stating the reasons why service has not been effected on all parties
and what Is being done to effect service.
THE FILING OF A GENERAL APPEARANCE BY A DEFENDANT DOES NOT DISPENSE WITH THE PLAINTIFF'S
OBLIGATION TO FILE THIS DOCUMENT.
SDSC CIV-345(Rev. 8-02) CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

LexisNexis® Automated California County Forms
..
POS-010
FOR COURT USE ONLY

ATTORNEY OR PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY (Name, State Barnumber, and address):
-H. Paul Kondrick, A Professional Corporation
3130 Fourth Avenue, San Diego, CA 92103-5803
TELEPHONE NO.: (619) 291-2400 FAX NO. (OptionaO: (619) 291-7123 F Jeusjiss o,ficE D
CENTRAL DIVISION
E-MAIL ADDRESS OptionaO:
ATTORNEY FOR (Name) Courtney S. Etnyre, Plaintiff

SUPERIOR COURT OF CAUFORNIA, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO DEC 04 2009
MAIUNG ADDRESS: CLERK-SUPERIORCOURT
CITY AND ZIP CODE: San Diego 92101 SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CA
PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER: Courtney S. Etnyre CASE NUMBER:
37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL
DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT: Sandip ("Mickey") Minhas, et al.
Ref. No. or File No.
(Separate proof of service is required for each party served.)

1. At the time of service I was at least 18 years of age and not a party to this action.
2. I served copies of:
a. 13-1 summons
b. ITI complaint
c. 13E1 Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) package
d. Fl Civil Case,Cover Sheet (served in comp/ex cases on/y)
e. r-1 cross-complaint
f. 1-Fl other (speci documents): Civil Case Cover Sheet Notice ofCase Assignment, Stipulation to Alternative Dispute
Resolution Process, Peremptory Challenge, Notice of Case Reassignment, and Notice and Acknowledgement of Receipt
3. a. Party served (speci*name ofpartyas shown on documents served):
QUALCOMM Incorporated, a Delaware corporation
b. 13E1 Person (other than the party in item 3a) served on behalf of an entity or as an authorized agent (and not a person
under item,5b on whom substituted service was made) (speci& name and relationship to the party named in item 3a):
Melissa Klick, Attorney for QUALCOMM Incorporated
4. Address where the party was served: c/o Michael C. Sullivan, Paul, Plevin, Sullivan & Connaughton, 401 "B" Street, 10th Floor
San Diego, CA 92101
5. I served the.party (check. proper box)
a F7 by personal service. I personally delivered the documents listed in item 2 to the party or person authorized to
receive service of process for the party (1) on (date): (2) at (time):
b. by substituted service. On Mate): at (time): I left the documents listed in item 2 with or
in the presence of (name and title or relationship to person indicated in item 3)
(1,) 17 (business) a person at'least 18 years of age apparently in charge at the office or usual place of business
of the person to be served. I informed him or her of the general nature of the papers.
(2) F7 (home) a competent member of the household (at least 18 years of age) at the dwelling house or usual
place of abode of the party. I informed him or her of the general nature of the papers.
(3) Fl (physical address unknown) a person at least 18 years of age apparently in charge at the usual mailing
address of the person to be served, other than a United States Postal Service post office box. I informed
him or her of the general nature of the papers.
(4) F-1 I thereafter mailed (by first-class, postage prepaid) copies of the documents to the person to be served
at the place where the copies were left (Code Civ. Proc., § 415.20). I mailed the documents on
(date): from (city): or [7 a declaration of mailing is attached.
(5) I attach a declaration of dillgence stating actions taken first to attempt personal service.
Page 1 of 2
Code of Civil Procedure, § 417.10

405·010 IRev January 1,2007] LexisNexis® Automated California Judicial Council Forms
CASE NUMBER:
37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL
DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT: Sandip ("Mickey") Minhas, et al.
s. c. 1-37 by mail and acknowledgment of receipt of service. I mailed the documents listed in item 2 to the party, to the
address shown In·item 4, by first-dass mail, postage prepaid,
(1) on (date): November 12, 2009 (2) from (city): San Diego, California
(3) 1-Yl with two copies of the Notice and Acknowledgment of Receipt and a postage-paid return envelope addressed
to me. (Attach comp/eted Notice and Acknowledgement of Receipt.) (Code Civ. Proc., § 415.30.)
(4) Fl to an address outside California with return receipt requested. (Code Civ. Proc., § 415.40.)
d.|1 by other means (specify means of service and authorizing code section):
Additional page describing service is attached.
6. The "Notice to the Person Served" (on the summons) was completed as follows:
a. F-7 as an individual defendant.
b. as the person sued under the fictitious nameof (speci40:
c. Fl as occupant.
d. On behalf of (specify): QUALCOMM Incorporated
under the following Code of Civil Procedure section:
& 416.10 (corporation) 0 415.95 (business organization, form unknown)
j 416.20 (defunct corporation) ¤ 416.60 (minor)
Il 416.30 (loint stock company/association) 416.70 (ward or conservatee)
6 416.40 (association or partnership) 0 416.90 (authorized person)
j 416.50 (public entity) ¤ 415.46 (occupant)
0 other:
7. Person who served papers
a. Name: Candice Caufield
b. Address: c/o H. Paul Kondrick, A.P.C., 31:30 Fourth Avenue, San Diego, CA 92103
c. Telephone number: (619) 291-2400
d. The fee for service was: $
e. I am:
(1) IT-1 not a registered California process server.

(2) 1| exempt from registration under Business and Professions Code section 22350(b).
(3) 1,El a registered California process server:
(i) Fl owner El employee F--7 independent contractor.
(ii) Registration No..
(iii) County:
8. rfl I declare under penalty of pelury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.
or
9. g- I am a California sheriff or marshal and I certify that the foregoing Is true and correct.
Candice Caufield
(NAME OF PERSON WHO SERVED PAPERS/SHERIFF OR MARSHAL) (SIGNATURE)
POS-010 [Rev January 1,20071 Page 2 of 2

LexisNexis® Automated California Judicial Cornell Forms
. /
POS-015
FOR COURT USE ONLY
ATTORNEY OR PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY Name, State Barnumber, and addmss):

3130 Fourth Avenue
TELEPHONE NO-(619) 2914400 FAX NO<Op#0180: (619) 291-7123
E-MAIL ADDRESS (Opt/ona/:
ATTORNEY FOR (Name): Courtney S. Etnyre, Plaintiff F c,vi BUS{Ess OFICE D

CENTRAL DIVISION
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
TREETADDRESS: 330 West Broadway
MAILING ADDRESS:
DEC 04 2009
CITY AND ZIP CODE: San Diego 92101
CLERK - SUPERIOR COURT
PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER: COUrtney S. Etnyre
DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT: Sandip "Mickey" Minhas, et al.

CASES NUMBER.
NOTICE AND ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF RECEIPT-CIVIL 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-Cn
TO (insert name of pany being sewed): QUALCOMM Incorporated, a Delaware corporation
NOTICE
The summons and other documents identified below are being served pursuant to,section 415.30 of the California Code of Civil
Procedure. Your failure tocomplete this form and return it within 20 days from the date of mailing shown below may subject you
(or the party on whose behalf you are being served) to liability forthe payment of any expenses incurred in serving a summons
If you are being served on behalf of a corporation, an unincorporated association (including a partnership), or other entity, this
form must be signed by you in the name of such entity or by a person authorized to receive service of process on behalf of such
entity. In all other cases, this form must be signed by you personally ort}y a person authorized by you to acknowledge receipt of
summons. If you return this form to the sender, service of a summons is deemed complete on the day you sign the
Candice Caufield --
(TYPIE OR PRINT NAME) (SIGNATURE OF SENDER--MUST NOT BE A PARTY IN="AiSEASE)
This acknowledges receipt of (to be completed by sender betbre mailing):

1. |TYl A copy of the summons and of the complaint
2.1T] Other (specify):
Civil Case Cover Sheet Notice of Case Assignment, Notice to Litigants/ADR Information
Notice of Case Reassignment
Date this form is signed: INED£ikEN-0,2009
,-dis0, Esq.
w- )24; ck. ,
on behalf of QUALCOMM Incorporated >*1--U (YU-
(TYPE OR PRINT YOUR;NAME AND NAME OF ENTITY. IF ANY, C--•/ (0|GNa*RE OF PERSON ACKNOWLEDGING RECEIPT. WITH TITLE IF
ON WHOSE BEHALF THIS FORM IS SIGNED) ACKPEEDGMENT IS MADE ON BEHALF OF ANOTHER PERSON OR ENTITY)
By: MiGla6G:·Gellivan, Attorney for QUALCOMM Incorporated
Page 1 of 1
Fonn Adopted for Mandatory Use NOTICE AND ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF RECEIPT CIVIL
Judicial Coundl of California §§415:30,417.10
w.w.coultinfo.ca.gov
POS-015 [Rev. January 1.2005]
LexiNexis® Automated California Judicial Council Formj

1, '4 Y
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, CO OF SAN DIEGO
FOR COURT USE ONLY

11/09/2009
COWRTNEY S ETNYRE VS. SANDIP MINHAS
CASE NUMBER:
NOTICE OF CASE REASSIGNMENT 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL
,Filed: 11/02/2009
to Judge Richard E. L. Strauss, in Department C-75

due to the following reason: Peremptory Challenge
page immediately below the nwmberof the case. All counsel and self-represented litigants are advised that Division 11 of the
Superior Court Rules is strictly enforced. It is the duty of each plaintiff (and cross-complainant) to serve a copy of this notice
Page: 1
(Rev 8-06) NOTICE OF CASE REASSIGNMENT
Central
330 West Broadway
San Diego, CA 92101
CASE NUMBER:
37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL
I certify that I am not a party to this cause. I certify that a true copy of the NOTICE OF CASE REASSIGNMENT
was mailed following standard court practices in a sealed envelope with postage fully prepaid: addressed as
indicated below. The certification occured at San Diego, California on 11/09/2009. The mailing occured at
Clerk of the Court, by: , Deputy
H. iPaul Kondrick
3130 FOURTH AVENUE
SAN DIEGO, CA 92103-5803
Page: 2
l.
FOR COURT USE ONLY
ATTORNEY OR PARIY WITHOUT ATTORNEY (Name, state barnumber, and address)

F- 1 L
H. Paul Kondrick, A Professional Corporation ED
3130 Fourth Avenue
San Diego , California 92103-5803
TELEPHONE NO.: (619) 291-2400 FAX NO.: (619) 291-7123
1 0:NOYs gm:Os·200.9:p
ATrORNEY FOR IName): OUICy S. Etnyre, Plaintiff
O COUNTY COURTHOUSE, 220 W. BROADWAY, SAN DIEGO, CA 92101-3814
17 HALL OF JUSTICE, 330 W. BROADWAY, SAN DIEGO, CA 92101-3827
By: A. SCHMIDT, Deputy
O FAMILY COURT, 1501 6TH AVE., SAN DIEGO, CA 92101-3296
U MADGE BRADLEY BLDG., 1409 4TH AVE., SAN DIEGO, CA 92101-3105
Il NORTH COUNTY DIVISION, 325 S. MELROSE DR., VISTA, CA 92081-6643
O EAST COUNTY DIVISION, 250 E. MAIN ST.,EL CAJON, CA 92020-3941
O RAMONA BRANCH, 1428 MONTECITO RD., RAMONA, CA 92065-5200
0 SOUTH COUNTY DIVISION, 500 3RD AVE., CHULA VISTA CA 91910-5649
O JUVENILE COURT, 2851 MEADOW LARK DR., SAN DIEGO, CA 92123-2792
PLAINTIFF(S)
Courtney S. Etnyre
DEFENDANT(S) JUDGE: Hon. Charles R. Hayes
Sandip Minhas, et al.
IN THE MATTER OF DEPT: C-66
A MINOR
CASE NUMBER
PEREMPTORY CHALLENGE
(CCP 170.6; Superior Court Rules, Division ll, Rule 5.5) 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL
Courtney S. Etnyre , is ® aparty Il an attorney for a party in the

above-entitled case and, declares that Hon. Charles R. Hayes , the Judge to whom this case
is assigned, is prejudiced against the party or the party's attorney or the interests of the party or the party's attorney such
that the said party or parties believe(s) that a fair and impartial trial or hearing cannot be had before such Judge.
WHEREFORE, pursuant to the provisions of §170.6 of the California Code of Civil' Procedure, I respectfully request that
this Court Issue its order reassigning said case to another, and different, Judge for further proceedings.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.
Dated:
Al
rp 109
2- 51-n
1.-7 0, (Sgndu[EL__,
ORDER OF THE COURT
GRANTED ¤ DENIED
This case is referred to Presiding/Supervising Department for reassignment and a Notice will be mailed to counsel.
Dated:
NOV - 6 2009 fr
/ i Judge of the Superior Court
CHARLES R. HA*9/
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
This case has Wn re*igned»dudge 17/ AA- f. L *&-cs, er re g/S pervising Judge
Kp'-,k#< *- 9=, on tri 1 'O1

SDSC Clv-249(Rev. 5-00) PEREMPTORYCHALLENGE
LexisNexis® Automated California County Forms
STREET ADDRESS:
330 West Broadway
CITY AND ZIP CODE: San Diego. CA 92101
PLAINTIFF(S) / PETITIONER(S): Courtney S Etnyre
DEFENDANT(S) / RESPONDENT(S): Sandip MInhas et.al.
ETNYRE VS. MINHAS
CASE NUMBER:
NOTICE OF CASE ASSIGNMENT
37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL
Judge: Charles R. Hayes Department: C-66
COMPLAINT/PETITION FILED: 11/02/2009
CASES ASSIGNED TO THE PROBATE DIVISION ARE NOT REQUIRED TO COMPLY WITH THE CIVIL
REQUIREMENTS LISTED BELOW
FF IS THE DUTY OF EACH PLAINTIFF (AND CROSS-COMPLAINANT) TO SERVE A COPY OF THIS NOTICE WITH
THE COMPLAINT (AND CROSS-COMPLAINT).
ALL COUNSEL WILL BE EXPECTED TO BE FAMILIAR WITH SUPERIOR COURT RULES WHICH HAVE BEEN
PUBLISHED AS DIVISION 11, AND WILL BE STRICTLY ENFORCED.
TIME STANDARDS: The following timeframes apply to general civil cases and must be adhered to unless you have
requested and been granted an extension of time. General civil consists of all cases except: Small claims appeals,
petitions, and unlawful detainers.
COMPLAINTS: Complaints must be served on all named defendants, and a CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE (SDSC CIV-
345) filed within 60 days of filing. This is a mandatory document and may not be substituted by the filing of any
other document.
DEFENDANT'S APPEARANCE: Defendant must generally appear within 30 days of service of the complaint. (Plaintiff
may stipulate to no more than a 15 day extension which must be in writing and filed with the Court.)
DEFAULT: If the defendant has not generally appeared and no extension has been granted, the plaintiff must request
default within 45 days of the filing of the Certificate of Service.
THE COURT ENCOURAGES YOU TO CONSIDER UTILIZING VARIOUS ALTERNATIVES TO LITIGATION,

INCLUDING MEDIATION AND ARBITRATION, PRIOR TO THE CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE. MEDIATION
SERVICES ARE AVAILABLE UNDER THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROGRAMS ACT AND OTHER PROVIDERS.
SEE ADR INFORMATION P.ACKET AND STIPULATION.
YOU MAY ALSO BE ORDERED TO PARTICIPATE IN ARBITRATION PURSUANT TO CCP 1141.10 AT THE CASE
MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE. THE FEE FOR THESE SERVICES WILL BE PAID BY THE COURT IF ALL PARTIES
HAVE APPEARED IN THE CASE AND THE COURT ORDERS THE CASE TO ARBITRATION PURSUANT TO CCP
1141.10. THE CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE WILL BE CANCELLED IF YOU FILE FORM SDSC CIV-359
PRIOR TO THAT HEARING
SDSC CIV-721 (Rev. 11-06) Page: 1

NOTICE OF CASE ASSIGNMENT
DO NOT
FILE
SEE
.
VOLUME
SDSC ADM-171(Rev. 7-03)

FILED 4
. CIVIL=SINE-r. fi :f--P:,7 9

MELISSA LISTUG KLICK (SBN 228470) 09 DEC 3! PM I: 21'
401 B Street, Tenth Floor CLERK-0-1 -,L- :
SAN 0.1 EGO COUA E v Co
Telephone: 619-237-5200
4 Facsimile: 6119-615-0700

6

8
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

9
11 Plaintiff, DEFENDANTQUALCOMM
INCORPORATED'S ANSWER TO
12 V. PLAINTIFF'S UNVERIFIED COMPLAINT

Dept: 75
Judge: Richard E.L. Strauss
14 Delawa* corporation and DOES 1 through
40, inclusive, Complaint Filed: November 2,2009
15
Defendants.
16
17
18
Defendant'QUALCOMM Incorporated ("defendant") answers plaintiff Courtney Etnyre's
19
("plaintiff') unverified complaint as follows:
20
GENERAL DENI*L
21
Pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 431.30, defendant generally denies
22
' each and every allegation of plaintiffs' unverified complaint.
23
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
24
For a further and separate answer to the allegations contained in plaintiff' s complaint,
25
26
defendant submits the following affirmative defenses. <
XSX
27 j
HI
28
PAUL, PLEVIN, 1
SULLIVAN & Answer to Complaint
.
1 FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
2 (To All Causes of Action)
3 The complaint, and each cause of action, fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause
4 of action against defendant.
5 SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
7 Defendant is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that plaintiff has failed,
8 refused, or neglected to mitigate or avoid the damages complained' of in her complaint. By reason
9 of the foregoing, plaintiff is barred, in whole or in part, from recovering monetary damages from
10 defendant.
11 THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
13 By reason of plaintiffs conduct, she is barred under the doctrine ofunclean hands from all
14 forms of relief sought in her complaint.
15 FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
17 Plaintiff is barred by the doctrine of waiver from all' forms of relief sought in her
18 complaint.
19 FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
21 Plaintiff is barred by the doctrine of estoppel from all forms of relief sought in her
22 complaint.
23 SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
25 Plaintiff is barred by the doctrine of consent from all forms of relief sought in her
26 complaint.
27 lili
28 111
PAUL, PLEVIN,
SULLIVAN &
Answer to Complaint 2
CONNAUGHTON p
.
1 SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
3 Plaintiff s claims are barred, in whole or in part, by the applicable statute of limitations,
4 including, but not limited to, California Government Code sections 12960 and 12965, Code of
5 Civil Procedure sections 335.1,338 and 343.
6 EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
8 Plaintiff s damages, if any, are limited by the doctrine of avoidable consequences.
9 NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
10 (To Fourth Cause of Action)
11 Plaintiff' s fourth cause of action is barred, in whole or in part, due to plaintiff' s failure to
12 ' timely exhaust her administrative remedies, as required by California Government Code section
13 12960.
14 TENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
15 (To First, Second, Third, and Fifth Causes of Action)
16 The first, second, third, and fifth causes of action are barred, in whole or in part, by the
17 exclusive remedy of the California Workers' Compensation Act set forth in California Labor
18 Code section 3600 et seq.
19 ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
20 (Reservation of Rights)
21 Defendant is informed and believes and thereon alleges that it may have additienal, as yet
22 unasserted, defenses to plaintiffs' complaint or the purported causes of action contained therein.
23 Defendant specifically reserves the right to assert additional defenses as deemed appropriate ata
24 later time.
25 WHEREFORE, defendant prays that:
26 1. Plaintiff be denied relief by way ofher complaint;
27 2. Plaintifs complaiht be dismisded;
28 3. Defendant be dismissed with its costs of suit and attorneys' fees; and
PAUL, PLEVIN, 3
SULLIVAN & ' Answer to Complaint
CONNAUGHTONp
1 4. For such other and further relief as the Court deems proper.
Dated: December 31, 2009 PAUL, PLEVIN, SULLIVAN &

3 CONNAUGHTON LLP
6 ·MICHAEAC>SVELWAN
MELIS\§LISTUG KLICK
8
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PAUL, PLEVIN, 4
SULLIVAN &
Answer to Complaint
CONNAUGHTON LLP
..
FILED
1 Etnyre v. Minhas et al. QIVIL BUSINESS OFFICE E
1 San Diego Superior Court Case No. 37-2009-0010,1537 CENT°
2
PROOF OF SERIfEEC 31 PM 1: 2 1
3
I, the undersigned, hereby declare that I am oveft!e98%9% gighteen.yi.ks and nota party
4 to this action. I am employed, or am a resident of, the 4044tziefisas[Biekki, C&lifornia, and my
business address is: Paul, Plevin, SuHivan & Connaughton LLP, 401 B Street, th Floor, San
6 On December 31, 2009, I caused to be served the following document(s):
7 • DEFENDANT QUALCOMM INCORPORATED'S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF'S

UNVERIFIED COMPLAINT
8
9
10 H. Paul Kondrick, a Professional Corporation Wilson, Petty, Kosmo & Turner, LLP
11 San Diego, CA 92103 San Diego, CA 92101-3532
Telephone: (619)291-2400 Telephone: (619) 236-9600
E-Mail': kondrick@msn.com E-Mail: tzilberman@wpkt. com
15 day, at my business address shown above, following ordinary business practices.
16 (By FACSIMILE) I transmitted the documents by facsimile machine, pursuant to

California Rules of Court, Rule 2.306. The facsimile machine I used complied with Rule
17 2.301 and no error was reported by the machine. The transmitting facsimile machine
number is (619) 615-0700. The fax number of the party being served is listed above.
18 Pursuant to Rule 2.306, I caused the machine to print a transmission record of the
transmission, a copy of which is attached to this declaration.
19
(By OVERNIGHT DELIVERY) I deposited in a box or other facility regularly
20
, the express service carrier to receive documents, in an envelope or package with delivery
21
Civil Procedure section 1013(c).
22 (State) I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws ef the State of California that the
23
0 (Federal) I declare that I am employed by the office 0f a member of the bar of this court
24 at whose direction the service was made.
25 Executed December 31, 2009, at San Diego, California.
26
27
.-n 1 515-9-%7«6- 9
Martha Maitmez
28
PAUL PLEVIN
PROOF OF SERVICE 1
SULLIVAN &
CONNAUGHTON LLP
.
.
FILED ,- -
1 WILSON TURNER KOSMO LLP
r.'IVILOrtRUSINESS Or FILE ].3
9·17 - rotisiot!
LEONID M. ZILBERMAN (182829)
2 JESSICA A. CHASIN (214983)
550 West C Street, Suite 1050 ?Mi DEC 30 P 3,4 1
3 San Diego, California 92101
,_: Un V
Telephone: (619) 236-9600
4 Facsimile: (619) 236-9669
I
SAN DiEUO COUNTY. CA

+
E-mail: 1zilberman@wilsonturnerkosmo.com
5 E-mail: jchasin@wilsonturnerkosmo.com

SANDIP ("MICKY') MINHAS
7
ff< 8 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

Z
9 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, CENTRAL DIVISION
'rn
- /NO
1 C9/1
10
M
11 COURTNEY S. ETNYRE, individually, Case No. 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL
0
12 Plaintiff, ANSWER TO COMPLAINT ON
BEHALF OF DEFENDANT SANDIP
13 I v. («MICKY") MINHAS
14 SANDIP C'MICKY") MINHAS, individually, Complaint Filed: November 4,2009

QUALCOMM Incorporated, a Delaware
15 corporation, and DOES 1-40, inclusive
Dept: C-75
16 Defendants. Judge: Richard E. L. Strauss
Tiial: Not Yet Set
17
18 Defendant Sandip ("Micky") Minhas ("Minhas" or "Defendant") hereby answersthe
19 unverified Complaint C'Complaint") ofplaintiff Courtney S. Etnyre ("Etnyre" or "Plaintiff') on file
20 herein as follows:
21 GENERAL DENIAL
22 Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 431.30(d), Defendant generally denies each and
23 every allegation in each and every paragraph and cause of action in Plaintiffs unverified Complaint,
24 denies that Plaintiff was injured or has suffered damages in any sum and further denies that Plaintiff
25 is entitled to the relief claimed, or any relief, on the grounds alleged or otherwise.
26 AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
27 1. Plaintiffs Complaint, and each and every count or cause ofaction therein, fails to
28 state facts sufficient to constitute any claim or cause of action against Defendant
-1-
ANSWER TO COMPLAINT ON BEHALF OF DEFENDANT'SANDIP C'MICKY') MINHAS

1 2. Without admitting the allegations ofthe Complaint, Defendant alleges that Plaintiff's
2 employment was at-will and could be terminated at any time, with or without cause, pursuant to
3 Labor Code section 2922.
4 3. Without admitting the allegations of the Complaint, Defendant alleges that any
5 disciplinary actions against Plaintiff were taken for legitimate business reasons and for just cause.
6 4. To the extent that Plaintiffs Complaint, or any purported claim or cause of action
7 alleged therein, alleges emotional or physical injury, any recovery is barred by the exclusivity of
8 remedy thereof under the California Workers' Compensation Act.
9 5. Regarding Plaintiff' s fourth cause of action, Defendant is an individual and not a
10 proper Defendant to this claim.
11 6. Defendant is informed and believes that all of Plaintiffs claims or causes of action
12 may be barred by the applicable statutes of limitations, including, without limitation, Code of Civil
13 Procedure sections 337,338,339,340, and 343, and Government Code section 12900 et seq.
14 7. Defendant did not authorize, ratify, acquiesce in, have knowledge of, have reason to
15 know of, approve, participate in, or direct action by any person or entities, constituting unlawful
16 I conduct toward Plaintiff, whether as alleged or otherwise.
17 8. Plaintiff is estopped by her conduct from recovering any relief by his Complaint, or
18 any purported claim or cause of action alleged therein.
19 9. By her conduct Plaintiff has waived any right to recover any relief sought in the
20 Complaint, or any purported claim or cause of action alleged therein.
21 10. Defendant alleges that Plaintiffs Complaint is barred by the doctrine of laches.
22 11. Defendant alleges that Plaintiffs Complaint is barred by the doctrine of unclean
23 hands.
24 12. Without admitting any wrongful conduct by Defendant, to the extent any of the
25 claims or causes of action of Plaintiffs Complaint or the damages thereon are based on a loss of
26 employee benefits, those counts are preempted by the Employment Retirement Income Security Act
27 (ERISA), 29 U.S.C. §1101, et seq.
28
-2-
ANSWER TO COMPLAINT ON BEHALF OF DEFENDANT SANDIP ("MICKY") MINHAS

.
1 13. Any recovery on Plaintiffs Complaint, or any claim or purported cause of action
2 alleged therein, is barred because the disputed conduct was privileged and/or justified.
3 14. Regarding all of Plaintiffs causes of action, decisions made regarding Plaintiffs
4 employment were made in the exercise of proper managerial discretion and in good faith based on
5 legitimate reasons.
6 15. Regarding all of Plaintiffs causes of action, Defendant is informed and believes those
7 causes of action are barred by Plaintiffs failure to timely exhaust internal administrative remedies,
8 including but not limited to those provided by the employer.
16. Regarding Plaintiffs fourth cause of action, Defendant is informed and believes that
10 cause of action is barred by Plaintiffs failure to timely exhaust administrative remedies with
11 appropriate public or government agencies.
12 17. Plaintiffs claims brought pursuant to FEHA may not be maintained to the extent they
13 differ from or exceed the allegations of an administrative charge filed with the appropriate
14 administrative remedy.
15 18. Defendant and Plaintiffs employer exercised reasonable care to prevent and correct
16 promptly any harassing behavior in the workplace. Defendant is informed and believes, and on that
17 basis alleges, that Plaintiff unreasonably failed to take advantage of any preventive or corrective
18 opportunities provided by Defendant to avoid harm otherwise. By reason of the foregoing, Plaintiff
19 is barred, in whole or_in.part, from recovery on the alleged causes of action in the Complaint.
20 19. Regarding all of Plaintiffs causes of action, the alleged conduct is protected free
21 expression under the United States Constitution and the Constitution ofthe State ofCalifornia.
22 20. This answering Defendant is informed and believes and thereon alleges that any
23 conduct engaged in toward Plaintiff was not unwelcome in that it was neither uninvited nor
24 ' unsolicited, and was neither undesirable nor offensive to Plaintiff.
25 21. Defendant denies that he authorized, ratified, acquiesced in, had knowledge of, had
26 reason to know of, approved of, or directed action by any person or entities, constituting unlawful
27 conduct towards Plaintiff, whether alleged or otherwise.
28
-3-
ANSWER TO COMPLAINT ON BEHALF OF DEFENDANT SANDIP ("MICKY') MINHAS

.
..
1 22. Based on Plaintiffs wrongdoing, Plaintiffs claims are barred in whole or in part by
2 the doctrine of after-acquired evidence.
3 23. Without admitting the allegations contained in the Complaint, if Plaintiff suffered any
4 loss or damage, such loss or damage was proximately caused, at least in part, by Plaintiffs own
5 failure to mitigate against her alleged damages, and therefore, Plaintiffs claims must be reduced,
6 diminished, or defeated by such amounts as should have been so mitigated.
7 24. If any loss, injury, damage, or detriment occurred as alleged' in the Complaint, the
8 loss, injury, damage, or detriment was caused and contributed to by the actions of Plaintiff, or by
9 other factors outside of Plaintiffs employment relationship with Defendant. Furthermore, as
10 Plaintiff did not exercise ordinary care on her own behalf, her own acts and omissions proximately
11 caused and contributed to the loss, injury, damage, or detriment to Plaintiff, and Plaintiffs recovery
12 from Defendant, if any, should be reduced in proportion to the percentage of Plaintiffs negligence or
13 fault.
14 25. To the extent Plaintiff suffered any symptoms of mental or emotional distress or
15 injury, they were the result of a pre-existing psychological disorder or alternative concurrent cause,
16 and not the result of any act or omission of Defendant.
17 26. Plaintiff is not entitled to recover punitive or exemplary damages from Defendant, as
18 prayed for in the Complaint, on the grounds that any award of punitive or exemplary damages based
19 on the facts ofthis specific action would violate Defendant's due process and equal protection rights
20 under the United States Constitution.
21 27. · Regarding all ofPlaintiffs causes of action, Plaintiffs actions are insufficient to
22 sustain the imposition ofpunitive damages against Defendant
23 28. Defendant is informed and believes and thereon alleges that he has performed and
24 fully discharged any and all obligations and legal duties to Plaintiff pertinent to the matters alleged
25 in Plaintiffs Complaint on file herein.
26 :Ill
27 dll
28 ill
-4.
ANSWER TO COMPLAINT ON BEHALF OFDEFENDANT SANDIP ("MICKY') MINHAS

.
1 29. Defendant currently has insufficient information available upon which to form a
2 belief as to whether it has additional, as yet unstated, affirmative defenses available. Defendant
3 reserves the right to assert additional affirmative defenses in the event discovery indicates they
4 would be appropriate.
5 WHEREFORE, Defendant prays as follows:
6 1. That Plaintiff takes nothing by her Complaint for damages;
7 2. That Plaintiffs Complaint and all causes of action therein be dismissed in its entirely with
8 prejudice;
9 3. Thatjudgment be entered against Plaintiffand in favor ofDefendant;
10 4. That Defendant recovers his costs of suit incurred in this action, including reasonable
11 attorneys' fees; and
12 5. That the court grant Defendant such other and further legal or equitable relief as the court
13 deems just and proper.
14
15 Dated: December 30,2009 WILSON TURNER KOSMO LP
16
17 BY:
' L NID ZIL
18 SIC A. CHA
rney for ant
19 ANDIP C'MICKy") MINHAS
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
5-
ANSWER TO COMPLAINT ON BEHALF OF DEFENDANT SANDIP ("MICKY') MINHAS

.
COURT USE ONLY
SUPERIOR COURTOF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
TmEOF CASE(ABBREViATED) ·. F 13
ETNYRE v. MINHAS
ATTORNEY ORPARTY Wrn{OUT AITORNEY (NAME AND ADDRESS):
LEONID M. ZILBERMAN (182829) Tel. (619) 236-90,00\) /'1 5 -

WILSON TURNER KOSMO LLP Fax: (619) 236-9669
550 West C Street Suite 1050
San Diego, CA 92101

?969 DEC 30 P 3-OUS
8,4?*, 0 A
ATTORNEYS FOR:
SANDIP"MICKY" MINHAS
HEARING DATE - [IME
CLr-,»-'T'FRO
CASB
CUUN
u*72004-00101537-CU-OE-CTL
PROOF OF SERVICE--CIVIL
, Check method of service (only one):

O By Personal Service IE By Mail 0 By Overnight Delivery
0 By Messenger Service O By Fax By Electronic Service
1. At the time of service I was over 18 years of age and not a party to this action.
2. My residence or business address is: 550 West C Street Suite 1050, San Diego, CA 92101
3. 0 The faxnumber or electronic notification address from which I servedthe,documents is (complete if service was by fax or
electronic service):
4. On December 30,2009: I served the following documents (specify):

1. ANSWER TO COMPLAINT ON BEHALF OF DEFENDANT SANDIP ("MICKY") MINHAS
O The documents are listed in the Attachment to Proof of Service--Civil (Documents Served) (form POS-040(D)).
5. I served the documents on the person or persons below, as follows:
a. Name ofperson served: SEE BELOW
b. M (Complete if service was by personal service, mail, overnight delivery, or messenger service.) Business or
residential address where person was served:
H. Paul Kondrick
3130 Fourth Avenue

Tel: (619) 291-2400
Fax: (619) 291-7123
Attorneys for Plaintiff, Courtney S. Etnyre
c. 0 (Complete if service was by fax or electronic service.)
(1) Fax number or electronic notification address where person was served:
(2) Time of service:
0 The names, addresses, and other applicable information about persons served is on the Attachment to Proof of Service--
Civil (Persons Served) (form POS-040(P».
6. The documents were served by the folioung means (specify):

a. 0 By personal service. I personally delivered the documents to the persons atfthe addresses listed in item 5.
(1) For a party represented by an attorney, delivery was made tothe attorney or at the attorney'sofficeby
leaving the documents, in an envelope or package clearly labeled to identify the attorney being served, with
a receptionist or an individual in charge of the office, between the hours of nine in the morning and five in
the evening. (2) For a patty, delivery was made to the pmty or by leaving the documents at the party's
residence with some person not younger than 18 years of age between the hours of eight in the morning and
six in the evening.
b. 'M By United States mail. I enclosed the documents in a sealed envelope or package addressed to the persons
at the addresses in item 5 and (specify, one):
(1) 9/ deposited the sealed envelope with the United States Postal Service, with the postage fulb' prepaid.
PROOF OF PERSONAL SERVICE - CIVIL

. .
ETNYRE vt MINHAS
37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL
(2) 0 placed the envelope for collection and mailing, following our ordinary business practices. I am
readily familiar with this business's practice for collecting and processing correspondence for mailing. On
the same day that correspondence is placed for collection and mailing it is deposited in the ordinary course
of business with the United States Postal Service, in a sealed envelope with postage fully prepaid.
I am a resident or employed inthe county where the mailirg occurred. The envelope or package was placed in the
mail at San Diego, California:
C. 0 By overnight delivery. I enclosed the documents in an envelope or package provided by an overnight

delivery carrier and addressed to the persons at the addresses in item 5. I placed the envelope or package
for collection and overnight delivery at an office or a regularly utilized drop box ofthe overnight delivery
carrier.
d. 0 By messenger service. I served the documents by placing them in an envelope or package addressed to the
persons at the addresses listed in item 5 and providing them to a professional messenger service fer service.
(A declaration by the messenger must accompany this Proof of Service or be containedin the Declaration
of Messenger below.)
e. 0 By fax transmission. Based on an agreement of the parties to accept serviceby fax transmission, I faxed
the documents to the persons at the fax numbers listed in item 5. No error was reprted by the fax machine
that I used. A copy of the record of the fax transmission, which I printed out, is attached.
0 By electronic service. Based on a court order or an agreement of theparties to accept service by electronic
transmission, I caused the documents to be sent to the persons at the electronic notification addresses listed
in item 5. I did not receive, within a reasonable time after the transmission, electronic message or other
indication that the transmission Mas unsuccessful.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws ofthe State of California that the fore oing is tru and rrect.
MICHAEL FRIDDLE
00361946
PROOF OF PERSONAL SERVICE - CIVIL

. .

01\'1CENTRAL
1. BUSINf-jbOFFICE 12
DIVISION '
1004 NO\1 -2 A 8: 48
Telephone: (619) 291-2400
4.\SAHERKUtEGO
-SUPERIOR
COUIJTY. CO
3
Facsimile: (619) 291-7123

COURTNEY S. ETNYRE, individually, Case No. 37.200940101537-CU-OE-CTL

10
Plaintiff, ) COMPLAINT FOR MONEY
11 ) DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE
V. ) RELIEF: BATTERY, INCLUDING
12 ) SEXUAL BATTERY ICIVIL CODE,
SANDIP ('*MICKEY") MINHAS, individually, ) #1708.51; ASSAULT; NEGLIGENCE;
13 QUALCOMM Incorporated, a Delaware ) DISCRIMINATION, RETALIATION
corporation, and DOES 1 through 40, inclusive, ) AND HARASSMENT BASED ON
14 ) GENDER/SEX; AND
) INTENTIONAL/NEGLIGENT
15 Defendants. ) INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL
DISTRESS
16
[Amount Demanded Exceeds
17 $50,000.001
18 [DEMAND FOR JURY TRIALl
19 Plaintiff, COURTNEY S. ETNYRE, alleges as follows:
20 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
21 IBATTERY, INCLUDING SEXUAL BATTERY AND ASSAULT (CIVIL CODE,

§1708.50)1
22
(Plaintiff asserts against defendants, SANDIP C'MICKEY") MINHAS) and QUALCOMM
23 Incorporated)
24 1. At all times relevant hereto, plaintiff, COURTNEY S. ETNYRE (hereinafter
25 "ETNYRE'D, resided in the County of San Diego, State of California. Plaintiff further alleges
26 that all relevant times through the present she was employed by defendant, QUALCOMM
27 Incorporated, a Delaware corporation, or other business organization, doing business as
28 QUALCOMM, and other business names, and/or DOES 1 through 40, inclusive, and/or their
-1- Complaint
..
I subsidiaries or affiliates as further described below, in various positions including Senior Patent
2 Prosecution Paralegal/Project Manager or Patent Prosecution Senior Paralegal/Project Manager,
3 or similarly named position.
4 2. Plaintiff is further informed and believes and thereon alleges that at all times
.1
5 relevant hereto, defendants, SANDIP (**MICKEY") MINHAS [hereinafter"MINHAS 1, was
6 and is a citizen and resident of San Diego County. Plaintiff further alleges that at all time
7 relevant hereto, defendant MINHAS, was and is employed by defendant QUALCOMM, as its
8 Vice President and Patent Counsel, and corporate officer of defendant, QUALCOMM, and
9 defendant, MINHAS, supervised and otherwise controlled plaintiff' s job and work
10 responsibilities as hereinafter alleged as a Senior Patent Prosecution Paralegal/Project Manager
11 at defendant QUALCOMM.
12 3. Plaintiff is further informed and believes and thereon alleges that defendants,
13 QUALCOMM Incorporated [hereinafter "QUALCOMM"1, and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive,

14 and each of them, were, and are, a Delaware or other corporation or other business organization,
15 doing business as QUALCOMM Incorporated, QUALCOMM, and other business names, and
16 doing business, in California, with its/their principal place(s) of business in San Diego County,
17 California.
18 4. Plaintiff is at present unaware of the true names, identities, or capacities, whether
19 individual, corporate, associate, or otherwise of those defendants sued herein as DOES 1
20 through 40, inclusive, and therefore sues said defendants by such fictitious names. Plaintiff will
21 ask leave to amend this complaint so as to set forth the same when the same have been
22 ascertained. Plaintiffis informed and believes and thereon alleges that said defendants, and
23 each of them, are in some way responsible for the acts, events, and occurrences complained of
24 herein. Plaintiff will ask leave to amend this complaint so as to more specifically set forth the
25 same when the same have been ascertained.
26 5. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that at all times relevant
27 hereto, defendants, DOES 1 through 20, inclusive, and each of them, were and are majority
28 shareholders, principals, officers and/or directors in defendant, QUALCOMM, and/or that said
-2- Complaint
..
1 defendants were and are in direct control of defendant, QUALCOMM, and/or have full and
2 complete control and management of all of the activities and finances of defendant,
3 QUALCOMM; that said defendants have ignored the separate and distinct corporate existence
4 of defendant, QUALCOMM, and in wanton disregard of the separate corporate existence(s),
5 have completely controlled and directed the daily business affairs and activities of defendant,
6 QUALCOMM; and that the funds and accounts of defendant, QUALCOMM, have been
7 commingled and intermingled with the funds and accounts of the said defendants, and that
8 defendant, QUALCOMM, is a mere conduit, instrumentality, and the alter ego of each of said
9 defendants. The adherence to the fiction of a separate corporate identity of defendant,
10 QUALCOMM, from each other and said defendants, DOES 1 through 20, inclusive, would
11 sanction a fraud and work an injustice upon the plaintiff herein.
12 6. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that at all times shown
13 hereto, except as otherwise specifically alleged to the contrary, defendants, and each of them,
14 were the agents, and in many instances the managing agents, servants, and employees of the
15 remaining defendants, especially defendant, QUALCOMM.
16 7. At all times relevant herein, defendants, QUALCOMM, and DOES 1 through 40,
17 inclusive, acted, and act, through their employees in supervisory capacities, agents, servants,
18 officers, and/or directors in taking the actions complained of herein.
19 8. The acts and omissions set forth in this complaint occurred, in whole or in
20 substantial part, within the County of San Diego, California, and defendants, QUALCOMM,
21 and DOES 1 through 40, inclusive, have agents and transact business within the County of San
22 Diego, unless specifically alleged otherwise, and plaintiffs injuries were sustained, and
23 continue to be sustained, in San Diego County.
24 9. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that the employment
25 contract and/or relationships upon which plaintiff, in part, sues herein was/were to be
26 substantially performed in the County of San Diego, especially from and after 2003.
27 10. At all times relevant hereto, defendants, QUALCOMM, and DOES 1 through 10,
28 inclusive, and each of them, were, and are, engaged in business, and owned and/or operated
-3- Complaint
..
1 offices and other facilities and operations in San Diego County.
2 11. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that from and after January
3 18, 2008 through July 2009, plaintiff, ETNYRE, and defendants, QUALCOMM and MINHAS,
4 entered into a tolling agreement, and series of continuing extensions of the tolling agreement,
5 governing plaintiff, ETNYRE's, claims against defendants, QUALCOMM and MINHAS,
6 expressly extending the period of time from January 17,2008 to the last stated termination of
7 the tolling agreement date, namely through and including October 30,2009, which shall not be
8 included in the computation of time under any applicable limitations period.
9 12. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that in or about 2003,
10 defendant, QUALCOMM, and/or DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, actively recruited and hired
11 plaintiff, ETNYRE, to work as an employee, in particular in its Legal Department at its San
12 Diego business operations and facilities located at or near Morehouse Dr., in San Diego,
13 California, in particular in the Patent Department or group.
14 13. Plaintiff is further informed and believes and thereon alleges that in order to
15 induce plaintiff to join defendants, QUALCOMM, that said defendant and DOES 1 through 10,
16 inclusive, represented to plaintiffthat she would have a career and long-term employment with
17 said defendant(s), including retirement possibilities. At all times relevant hereto, defendants
18 assured plaintiff of continued employment with defendants on the conditions that plaintiffs
19 performance was satisfactory and that there was no cause for her termination.
20 14. In or about March 2003, plaintiff, ETNYRE, was employed by defendants,
21 QUALCOMM, and/or DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, or any of them, in various positions
22 including Senior Patent Prosecution Paralegal/Project Manager or Patent Prosecution Senior
23 Paralegal/Project Manager, or similarly named position, in San Diego, California.
24 15. In or about February 2006, as part of her job responsibilities for defendant,
25 QUALCOMM, plaintiff, ETNYRE, was directed by defendants, MINHAS and QUALCOMM,
26 to travelto New Jersey purportedly for company or corporate business. Plaintiff' s immediate
27 supervisor, defendant, MINHAS, also traveled to New Jersey as part of that same job
28 assignment.
-4- Complaint
..
1 16. On or about February 22,2006, while in New Jersey on the aforementioned
2 QUALCOMM company business, defendant, MINHAS, acted with the intent to cause harmful,
3 offensive and sexual contact with plaintiffs intimate parts, in particularly sexually assaulting
4 and penetrating plaintiff in the most intimate manner.
5 17. On or about February 22,2006, defendant, MINHAS, acted with the intent to
6 cause a harmful and offensive contact with plaintiff by use of his sexual organ, penetrating
7 plaintiff, ETNYRE, sexually. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that
8 defendant, MINHAS's, sexual assault and battery on her violated California Civil Code,
9 #1708.5(a) in that:
10 a. Defendant, MINHAS, acted with the intent to cause a harmful or
11 offensive contact with an intimate part ofplaintiff, ETNYRE, and a
12 sexually offensive contact with plaintiff, directly or indirectly, resulted;
13 b. Defendant, MINHAS, acted with the intent to cause a harmful or
14 offensive contact with plaintiff, ETNYRE, by use of his intimate part, and
15 a sexually offensive contact with plaintiff, ETNYRE, directly or
16 indirectly, resulted; and
17 c. Defendant, MINHAS, acted to cause an imminent apprehension on the
18 part of plaintiff, ETNYRE, of the aforementioned perverse, sexual
19 conduct by defendant, MINHAS with resulting sexually offensive contact
20 with plaintiff, ETNYRE.
21 18. As part of his sexual assault and battery of plaintiff, ETNYRE, with his sexual
22 organ, defendant, MINHAS, seized plaintiff, threw her on his bed, and engaged in an act of
23 forcible and unconsented sexual intercourse with her.
24 19. Plaintiff is further informed and believes and thereon alleges that in order to
25 accomplish his unlawful purpose and act, defendant, MINHAS, struck and beat plaintiff,
26 ETNYRE, causing her a bloody nose and abrasions, and he further used force to restrain her
27 movement.
28 20. In doing the acts as alleged above, defendant, MINHAS, acted with the intent to
-5- Complaint
..
1 make physical, sexual contact with plaintiffs person, and indeed her most intimate body parts.
2 21. On or about February 22,2006, while on QUALCOMM company business in
3 New Jersey, and under the guise of conducting company business, plaintiff's immediate work
4 supervisor, namely defendant, MINHAS, acted to cause an imminent apprehension of sexual
5 assault as before-mentioned to plaintiff, and a sexually offensive contact with plaintiff,
6 ETNYRE, directly resulted.
7 22. In doing the acts as alleged above, defendant acted with the intent to make
8 physical and sexual contact with plaintiff, ETNYRE's, person and most intimate body parts.
9 23. At no time did plaintiff, ETNYRE, consent to any of the acts of defendant above
10 alleged and set forth.
11 24. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that defendant, MINHAS',
12 conduct as hereinbefore alleged was reasonably foreseeable to defendant, QUALCOMM, in
13 particular for the reasons hereinafter set forth. Plaintiff is further informed and believes and
14 thereon alleges that defendant, MINHAS', conduct as before-alleged was expressly or impliedly
15 ratified by defendant, QUALCOMM. For instance, defendant, QUALCOMM, failed to fully
16 investigate the circumstance ofthe aforementioned sexual assault and battery ofplaintiff,
17 ETNYRE, by defendant MINHAS; defendant, QUALCOMM, failed to repudiate the egregious,
18 gross, oppressive, unconscionable conduct of its officer and managing agent, namely defendant
19 MINHAS, by redressing the harm done to plaintiff, ETNYRE; and/or defendant, QUALCOMM,
20 failed to discharge defendant, MINHAS, after learning of the sexual assault and battery, and
21 other unlawful behavior by defendant, MINHAS, as hereinafter further alleged, or at least take
22 reasonable measures to prevent defendant, MINHAS, from committing such acts in the future.
23 Plaintiff is further informed and believes and thereon alleges that defendant, QUALCOMM,
24 exhibited a conscious disregard ofdefendant, MINHAS', acts, in particular his sexual and, other
25 assaults, batteries and harassment of plaintiff, ETNYRE, as hereinbefore and hereinafter
26 alleged.
27 25. Plaintiff is further informed and believes and thereon alleges that defendant,
28 QUALCOMM, condoned and openly promoted a polluted sexually hostile work environment in
-6- Complaint
. .
1 particular for its paralegals working in its Patent Department. For instance, in its Patent
2 Department defendant, QUALCOMM, planned, sponsored and directed its employees to
3 participate in so-called "team building" social events, dinners, "happy hours" and the like,
4 openly exposing their female employees, including plaintiff, ETNYRE, to overt and
5 inappropriate sexual conduct, including offensive touching, and language.
6 26. As a proximate result of the aforementioned acts of defendants, MINHAS and
7 QUALCOMM, plaintiff, ETNYRE, was hurt and injured in her health strength, and activity,
8 sustaining injury to her nervous system and person, all of which have caused, and continue to
9 cause, plaintiff great mental, physical, and nervous pain and suffering. Plaintiff is further
10 informed and believes and thereon alleges that there is a likelihood and significant probability
11 the foregoing injuries will result in some permanent disability to her. As a result ofthese
12 injuries, plaintiff has suffered general damages. Plaintiff has been damaged in an amount she is
13 presently unable to ascertain with certainty, and plaintiff will seek leave to amend this
14 Complaint to set forth the exact amount thereof as the same as ascertained or according to proof
15 at trial.
16 27. As a further proximate result of defendants' acts and omissions, plaintiff,
17 ETNYRE, has been damaged in that she has been required to expend money and incur
18 obligations for medical services, x-rays, drugs, and sundries reasonably required in the treatment
19 and relief ofthe injuries herein alleged. Plaintiff has been damaged in an amount she is
22 at trial.
23 28. As a further proximate result of the acts of defendant, plaintiff, ETNYRE, has
24 incurred, and will continue to incur, medical and related expenses. Plaintiff has been damaged
25 in an amount she is presently unable to ascertain with certainty, and plaintiff will seek leave to
26 amend this Complaint to set forth the exact amount thereof as the same as ascertained or '
27 according to proof at trial.
28 29. As a further proximate result of the acts of defendants, and each of them, for
-7- Complaint
. .
1 various extended periods, plaintiff, ETNYRE, was prevented from attending to her usual
2 occupation as a Senior Patent Prosecution Paralegal/Project Manager or Patent Prosecution
3 Senior Paralegal/Project Manager, or similarly named position, with defendant, QUALCOMM,
4 for an as yet undetermined period. Plaintiff thereby has lost, and will likely continue to lose,
5 earnings, including bonuses, salary and other compensation increases, stock and other
6 employment benefits. As a further proximate result of the acts of defendants, plaintiff s present
7 and future earning capacity has been greatly impaired. Plaintiff has been damaged in an amount
8 she is presently unable to ascertain with certainty, and plaintiff will seek leave to amend this
10 at trial.
11 30. As a result of the aforementioned conduct, defendants were and are guilty of
12 oppression and/or malice, and with the intent to vex, injure, annoy or harass plaintiff, ETNYRE,
13 and were in willful and conscious disregard of plaintif s rights, and as a result plaintiff seeks an
14 award of punitive damages in an amount according to proof at trial.
15 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
16 [ASSAULT]
17 (Plaintiff asserts against defendants, MINHAS and QUALCOMM)
18 31. Plaintiff repeats and realleges each of the allegations contained in paragraphs 1
19 through 25, inclusive, and paragraph 29, of her first cause of action, and incorporates the same
20 herein by reference as though fully set forth.
21 32. In doing the acts as alleged above, defendants, MINHAS and QUALCOMM,
22 intended to cause or to place plaintiff, ETNYRE, in apprehension of a harmful or an offensive
23 contact with plaintiff's person. Moreover, in other incidents, defendant, MINHAS, threw
24 objects, including a cellular telephone at plaintiffs person, while yelling and screaming at
25 plaintiff, ETNYRE. Defendant, QUALCOMM, had full knowledge and understanding of the
26 foregoing and ratified said conduct.
27 33. As a result ofdefendants' acts as alleged above, plaintiff, in fact, was placed in
28 great apprehension of a harmful or an offensive contact with plaintiffs person. Defendants
-8- Complaint
.
1 intentionally engaged in said conduct that making plaintiff reasonably believe that she was about
2 to be touched in a harmful and/or offensive and/or unlawful manner.
3 34. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that defendant, MINHAS',
4 conduct as before-alleged was reasonably foreseeable to defendant, QUALCOMM. Plaintiffis
5 further informed and believes and thereon alleges that defendant, MINHAS', conduct as before-
6 alleged was expressly or impliedly ratified by defendant, QUALCOMM. For instance,
7 defendant QUALCOMM, failed to fully investigate the circumstance of the before-mentioned
8 assaults of plaintiff, ETNYRE, by defendant, MINHAS; defendant, QUALCOMM, failed to
9 repudiate the egregious, gross, oppressive, unconscionable conduct of its office and managing
10 agent, namely defendant, MINHAS, by redressing the harm done to plaintiff, ETNYRE; and/or
11 defendant, QUALCOMM, failed to discharge defendant, MINHAS, after learning of the assaults
12 and other unlawful behavior by defendant, MINHAS, as hereinafter further alleged, or at least
13 take reasonable measures to prevent defendant MINHAS, from committing such acts in the
14 future. Plaintiff is further informed and believes and thereon alleges that defendant,
15 QUALCOMM, exhibited a conscious disregard of defendant, MINHAS', acts, in particular his
16 sexual and other assaults, batteries and harassment of plaintiff, ETNYRE, as hereinbefore and
17 hereinafter alleged.
18 35. As a proximate result of the aforementioned acts of defendants, MINHAS and
19 QUALCOMM, plaintiff, ETNYRE, was hurt and injured in her health, strength, and activity,
20 sustaining ihjury to her nervous system and person, all of which have caused, and continue to
21 cause, plaintiff great mental, physical, and nervous pain and suffering. Plaintiff is further
22 informed and believes and thereon alleges that there is a likelihood and significant probability
23 the foregoing injuries will result in some permanent disability to her. As a result of these
24 injuries, plaintiff has suffered general damages. Plaintiff has been damaged in an amount she is
27 at trial.
28 36. As a further proximate result of defendants' acts and omissions, plaintiff,
-9- Complaint
..
1 ETNYRE, has been damaged in that she has been required to expend money and incur
2 obligations for medical services, x-rays, drugs, and sundries reasonably required in the treatment
3 and relief ofthe injuries herein alleged. Plaintiff has been damaged in an amount she is
6 at trial.
7 37. As a further proximate result ofthe acts ofdefendant, plaintiff, ETNYRE, has
8 incurred, and will continue to incur, medical and related expenses. Plaintiff has been damaged
9 in an amount she is presently unable to ascertain with certainty, and plaintiff will seek leave to
10 amend this Complaint to set forth the exact amount thereof as the same as ascertained or
12 38. As a further proximate result of the acts of defendant, plaintiff, ETNYRE, was
13 prevented from attending to her usual occupation as a Senior Patent Prosecution
14 Paralegal/Project Manager or Patent Prosecution Senior Paralegal/Project Manager, or similarly
15 named position, with defendant, QUALCOMM, for an extended and as yet undetermined
16 period. Plaintiff thereby has lost and willlose earnings. As a further proximate result of the
17 acts of defendants, plaintiffs present and future earning capacity has been greatly impaired.
18 Plaintiff has been damaged in an amount she is presently unable to ascertain with certainty, and
19 plaintiff will seek leave to amend this Complaint to set forth the exact amount thereof as the
20 same as ascertained or according to proof at trial.
23 and were in willful and conscious disregard of plaintiffs rights, and as a result plaintiff seeks an
24 award ofpunitive damages in an amount according to proof at trial.
25 THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
26 lin the Alternative, NEGLIGENCE]
27 (Plaintiff, ETNYRE, asserts against defendants, MINHAS and QUALCOMM)
28 40. Plaintiff repeats and realleges each of the allegations contained in paragraphs 1
-10- Complaint
. .
1 through 25, inclusive, and paragraph 29, and paragraphs 32 through 34 of her first and second
2 causes of action, and incorporates the same herein by reference as though fully set forth.
3 41. In the alternative to her first and second causes of action immediately above,
4 plaintiff, EINYRE, is informed and believes and thereon alleges defendants, MINHAS and
5 QUALCOMM, owed duties to plaintiff, ETNYRE, and so acted negligently.
6 42. As a proximate result of defendants' conduct, plaintiff suffered harm, including
7 lost earnings and other employment benefits, and she suffered, and continues to suffer,
8 humiliation, embarrassment and mental anguish, all to her damage in an amount which she is
9 presently unable to ascertain, but an amount which she will set forth either in an amended
10 complaint or according to proof at trial.
11 43. As a further proximate result of the acts of defendant, plaintiff, ETNYRE, was
12 prevented from attending to her usual occupation asa Senior Patent Prosecution
13 Paralegal/Project Manager or Patent Prosecution Senior ParalegaVProject Manager, or similarly
14 named position, with defendant, QUALCOMM, for an extended and as yet undetermined
15 period. Plaintiffthereby has lost and wililose earnings. As a further proximate result of the
16 acts of defendants, plaintiffs present and future earning capacity has been greatly impaired.
17 Plaintiffhas been damaged in an amount she is presently unable to ascertain with certainty, and
18 plaintiff will seek leave to amend this Complaint to set forth the exact amount thereof as the
19 same as ascertained or according to proof at trial.
20 FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
21 [HARASSMENT, DISCRIMINATION AND RETALIATION BASED ON GENDER/SEX

- Three (3) Counts]
22
(Plaintiff, ETNYRE, asserts against defendants, MINHAS and QUALCOMM)
23
44. Plaintiff repeats and realleges each ofthe allegations contained in paragraphs 1
24
through 25, inclusive, and paragraph 29, and paragraphs 32 through 34 ofher first and second
25
causes of action, and incorporates the same herein by reference as though fully set forth.
26
45. Plaintiff is informed and believe and thereon alleges that defendants, MINHAS,
27
QUALCOMM, and DOES 1 through 40, inclusive, and each of them, harassed, discriminated
28
and/or retaliated, as appropriately hereinbefore and hereinafter alleged against any or all of said
-11- Complaint
.
1 defendants, against plaintiff, ETNYRE, because of her gender and sex, namely female, in
2 particular relative to the terms and condition of her employment, and plaintiff, ETNYRE,
3 further was damaged.
4 46. Plaintiff is further informed and believe and thereon alleges that at all times
5 relevant hereto, defendant, QUALCOMM, promoted and sponsored various company functions
6 before, during and after ordinary work hours purportedly to promote "team building." These
7 '*team building" events typically promoted, condoned and sponsored the consumption of
8 inappropriate amounts of alcoholic beverages, contributing or otherwise leading to repeated
9 instances of demeaning conduct, discrimination, harassment and retaliation towards its female
10 employees, in particular in its Patent Department or Group. The foregoing conduct
11 discrimination, harassment and retaliation of female employees, including but not limited to
12 plaintiff, ETNYRE, related but was not limited to promotions, positive performance reviews,
13 compensation; lewd sexist remarks, including but not limited to references to derogatory parts
14 ofthe female anatomy, and the like; sexists jokes; groping; sexual gestures; physical touching,
15 including but not limited to uninvited kisses, fondling, and the like; grabbing female employee
16 buttocks; and attempted sexual activity.
17 47. Defendants, QUALCOMM, MINHAS, and DOES 1 through 40, inclusive, and
18 each of them, further retaliated against female employees, such as plaintiff, ETNYRE, who
19 complained either within defendant, QUALCOMM, or to governmental entities come iricluding
20 but not limited to the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing ["DFEH"l, by
21 subjecting the complaining female employees to: claims of inappropriate conduct or
22 misconduct; insubordination; poor performance; placing the female employees on a
23 Performance Improvement Plan ["PIP"]; and/or suspending or placing the employee on
24 administrative leave, including disability leave.
25 48. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that defendant
26 QUALCOMM, condoned and promoted a polluted, contaminated sexually hostile work
27 environment, in particular for its paralegals working in its Patent Department. For instance, in
28 its Patent Department, defendant QUALCOMM, planned, sponsored and directed its employees
-12- Complaint
. .
1 to participate in so-called'*team building" social events, dinners, "happy hours" and the like, at
2 restaurant and bar locations in which substantial quantities of alcohol were purchased and paid
3 for be defendant, QUALCOMM, by and through its officers and managing agents, for
4 consumption by its employees, especially non-management employees such as paralegal within
5 its Patent Department, in informal atmospheres. Defendant's sponsorship ofthese events was
6 with the full understanding that they would lower employee inhibitions and resistance, in which
7 physical conduct, frequently leading to overt inappropriate sexual conduct language.
8 49. Plaintiff is further informed and believes and thereon alleges that at the
9 aforementioned team-building events, defendant, QUALCOMM's, paralegals for the company
10 attended, and indeed were expected to attend, and interact with their immediate and upper-level
11 supervisors and managers, including to the Vice President level.
12 50. Plaintiff is further informed and believes and thereon alleges that, for instance,
13 defendant, QUALCOMM's, Patent Department organized and held company-sponsored social
14 events, dinners, "happy hours," tour of various wineries, and the like, designed to promote
15 comradery within the Patent Department, and all employees of the Patent Department including
16 plaintiff, ETNYRE,were strongly encouraged to attend the company-sponsored event.
17 51. Plaintiff is further informed and believes and thereon alleges that during the
18 aforementioned company-sponsored social events by defendant, QUALCOMM, large amounts
19 ofwine and alcohol were purchased and consumed; defendant, QUALCOMM's, attorneys,
20 managers, supervisors and officers, in particular males, made sexually explicit, unwelcomed
21 comments to and about plaintiff, ETNYRE, and other female employees, in particular
22 paralegals, in the presence of others. These comments included, but are not limited to, the
so fucking intelligent;"
9 66
23 female paralegals or employees being"hot; .#so fucking beautiful;
24 comments and/or jokes about male genitalia; rating the suspected sexual promiscuity of the
25 female employees; commenting about their anatomies; and other sexually explicit comments.
26 The foregoing and similar comments made plaintiff, ETNYRE, and others, extremely
27 uncomfortable; however, defendant's male employees continued to make such statements.
28
-13- Complaint
.
1 52. Plaintiff is further informed and believes and thereon alleges that she, and other
2 female employees similarly situated, did not complain when the harassing, hostile actions and
3 comments were made in many instances because the female employees felt that, if they did
4 complaint, then their jobs would be in jeopardy given positions of the attorneys, supervisors,
5 managing agents, including vice presidents, involved. In addition, there was a strong possibility
6 or likelihood that if the offended employee complained, then there would be no corrective action
7 taken, e.g., the complaints would be disregarded or minimized.
8 53. Plaintiff is further informed and believes and thereon alleges that defendant's
9 company-sponsored events as before alleged, especially at local restaurants and bars, were so
10 common place that the locations became identified with being part of defendant,
11 QUALCOMM's, work"campus." For instance, defendant's company-sponsored events at the
12 Karl Strauss Brewery located close to the defendant's corporate campus was commonly known
13 as defendant, QUALCOMM's, 'Building 'K"'.
14 54. Plaintiff is further informed and believes and thereon alleges that while attending
15 these corporate sponsored, mandated events, defendant, QUALCOMM's, attorneys, supervisors,
16 managing agents and corporate officers improperly touched female employees in sexual
17 manners. For instance, on multiple occasions, they slid their hands up and down female
18 employee's leg toward their crotch; further attempted to kiss the female employees; caused the
19 female employees to raise their arms to try to fend off the sexually aggressive, offensive
20 conduct. The female employees, including plaintiff, ETNYRE, were upset, visibly shaken and
21 distraught by these events.
22 55. Plaintiff is further informed and believes and thereon alleges that on more than
23 one such occasion, defendant, MINHAS, forcible groped, fondled, touched and kissed her.
24 56. Defendants, QUALCOMM, and DOES 1 through 20, inclusive, and each of
25 them, were at all times material hereto employers or otherwise falling within the meaning of
26 California Government Code, f 12926(c), and as such, barred from discriminating in relation to
27 employment decisions, including but not limited to the terms, conditions and privileges of
28 employment, on the basis of an employee's gender or pursuant to California Government Code,
-14- Complaint
. .
1 f 12940 et. seq., and the California Constitution and other public policy.
2 57. Plaintiff is further informed and believes and thereon alleges that, in truth in fact,
3 the reasons that she was treated as she was, including in relation to promotions, compensation,
4 recognition, awards, suspensions, PIP selection, and the like, resulted principally because of her
5 gender and sex, namely female, during the period December 2004, when defendant,
6 QUALCOMM's, Chief Patent Counsel, Phil Wadsworth sexually harassed plaintiff, ETNYRE,
7 at a "happy hour" team building session, and continuing through approximately November,
8 2007, when plaintiff, ETNYRE, was placed on then short-term disability from her employment
9 at defendant QUALCOMM. By so acting, defendants violated the provisions of California
10 Government Code, §§12940 and 12926, and other,Ase, and Califorida Constitution, Article I,
11 Section 8, by using gender and sex as illegally improper criteria as a determining criteria for the
12 treatment or disciplining ofplaintiff, ETNYRE, and other female employees or persons,
13 including but not limited to discrimination in terms, conditions and privileges of employment.
14 58. Pursuant to Government Code, f 12926(a), or otherwise, the California
15 Constimtion and/or public policies referred to in paragraph 56, above, plaintiff, ETNYRE,
16 requests the imposition of liability on defendants, QUALCOMM, and DOES 1 through 40,
17 inclusive, and each of them. Should other persons be found to have participated in the
18 gender/sex discrimination, harassment or retaliation, then plaintiff reserves the right to request
19 imposition of liability against those employees on the same bases as DOES 1 through 30,
20 inclusive.
21 59. Defendants, QUALCOMM and DOES 1 through 30, inclusive, and each ofthem,
22 discriminated against plaintiff, ETNYRE, and harassed and retaliated against her on the basis of
23 sex in violation of California Government Code, f 12940, the California Constitution and/or
24 public policy, by engaging in a course of conduct which includes retaining, promoting and
25 transferring into better, more highly compensated positions less qualified employees, in
26 particular male employees, and giving plaintiffpretextual or untrue reasons for plaintiffs and
27 other female employees' treatment. Moreover, defendants discriminated against plaintiff,
28 ETNYRE, on the basis of sex, and continue to pursue, a policy and practice of discriminating on
-15- Complaint
. .
1 the basis of sex, with respect to employment opportunities, and have implemented this policy
2 and practice, among other ways, as follows: by failing and refusing to recruit and accept
3 females on an equal and impartial basis, especially within its Patent Law Department or group;
4 by establishing and maintaining arbitrary and unreasonable requirements for employment which
5 requirements have not been shown to have any significant relationship to job performance and
6 have the effect of excluding females in higher paying positions; by demoting, disciplining,
7 transferring (or refusing to transfer, especially as an accommodation), and discharging female
8 employees in an arbitrary and discriminatory manner; by failing and refusing to train and
9 promote female employees on an equal and impartial basis; by discriminating against female
10 employees in the assignment and distribution ofjobs; by failing and refusing to take reasonable
11 and adequate steps to eliminate the effects of past discriminatory, harassment and retaliatory
12 acts and practices based on gender or sex; and by failing to investigate and take prompt remedial
13 action relative to defendants' discriminatory, harassment and retaliatory past acts and practices
14 based on gender or sex.
15 60. During the period 2006-2007, plaintiff, ETNYRE, complained to defendant,
16 QUALCOMM's, management about discrimination toward her by defendants, QUALCOMM
17 and MINHAS, and plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that defendants,
18 QUALCOMM, and DOES 1 through 20, inclusive, failed, and continue to fail, to properly or
19 reasonably investigate such alleged claims, or later alleged claims, or apply uniform, non-
20 discriminatory standards in relation to California's gender and sex discrimination, harassment
21 and retaliation laws. In particular, plaintiff alleges and contends that her gender was a factor in
22 defendants' reaching their employment decisions relative to plaintiff, ETNYRE, and similarly
23 situated employees at defendant QUALCOMM. As a result of plaintiff, ETNYRE, making
24 these complaints in particular to the DFEH, defendants, QUALCOMM, MINHAS, and DOES 1
25 through 20, inclusive, further retaliated against, and harassed, plaintiff, ETNYRE, including but
26 not limited to suspending plaintiff from her employment.
27 61. To the extent that plaintiffs gender and sex were a factor or factors contributing
28 to her treatment by defendants, or any of them, the acts of said defendants, and each of them,
-16- Complaint
. .
1 constituted sex discrimination and/or harassment, and ultimately retaliation, and such
2 discrimination, harassment and retaliation were substantial factor(s) in causing damage or injury
3 to plaintiff, ETNYRE, as set forth herein.
4 62. Plaintiff timely filed charges of sex/gender discrimination, harassment and
5 retaliation with the California Department ofFair Employment and Housing ["DFEH"], and on
6 or about February 1, 2008, the DFEH issued written notices ofplaintiff, ETNYRE's, right to sue
7 in the California Superior Court pursuant to California Government Code, f 12963(b), and
8 otherwise. As a result, plaintiff exhausted all of her administrative remedies.
9 63. Plaintiff filed a further third DFEH complaint [DFEH Case No. E200809-D-
10 0248-00-prse] against defendant, QUALCOMM, alleging sex and disability discrimination and
11 retaliation including, in part, that she had been denied a reasonable accommodation and denied
12 reinstatement to return to her earlier employment position at defendant, QUALCOMM. To
13 date, plaintiff has not received a right to sue on that claim; however, she intends to further
14 amend this complaint to set forth that additional claim upon timely issuance of a right to sue
15 letter thereby exhausting her administrative remedies.
16 64. Plaintiff is further informed and believes and thereon alleges that from and after
17 December 2004, and on a continuing basis through the present, defendants, MINHAS and
18 DOES 1 through 40, inclusive, and each of them, knowingly and willingly aided, abetted,
19 incited, compelled, coerced and/or conspired with defendant QUALCOMM, to discriminate
20 against, harass and retaliate against plaintiff, ETNYRE, to deprive her of her state constitutional
21 emd civil rights, and further depriving her of full employment rights and benefits. ,
22 65. Defendants, and each of them committed the acts herein alleged maliciously and
23 oppressively, and in callous and conscious disregard and with the intention to deprive plaintiff
24 of property and legal rights or otherwise causing plaintiff injury, and such conduct was
25 despicable and subjected plaintiffto cruel and unjust hardship in conscious disregard ofher
26 rights so as to justify an award of exemplary and punitive damages according to proof at trial.
27 66. Defendants, and each of them, did the acts and things alleged herein pursuant to,
28 and in furtherance of, the conspiracy and agreement alleged herein.
-17- Complaint
. .
1 67. Defendants, and each ofthem, furthered the conspiracy by cooperation, aid,
2 encouragement, ratification, and adoption of the acts of the other conspirators.
3 68. Defendants' actions and conduct deprived plaintiff, ETNYRE, of the substantial
4 employment benefit to a discrimination-free work environment by creating a sexually hostile
5 working environment at defendant, QUALCOMM, in particular in its Patent Law Department.
6 69. Defendants' conduct and actions, including sexual harassment ofplaintiff,
7 ETNYRE, and other female employees especially in the QUALCOMM Patent Law group(s) or
8 Department(s), created a hostile, offensive, oppressive, or intimidating work environment and
9 deprived plaintiff, ETNYRE, of her statutory right to work in a place free of discrimination, and
10 defendants' harassing conduct offended, humiliated, distressed or intruded upon plaintiff,
11 ETNYRE, and other female employees at defendant, QUALCOMM, so as to disrupt their
12 emotional tranquility in the workplace, affect their abilities to perform theirjobs as usual, or
13 otherwise interfered with and undermined their personal senses of well-being.
14 70. The actions and conduct of defendants, QUALCOMM and MINHAS, constituted
15 and evidenced a pattern of continuous, pervasive sexual harassment, and a sexually hostile,
16 polluted work environment.
17 71. At all time relevant hereto, defendant QUALCOMM, knew, or should have
18 known, ofthe aforementioned sexual discrimination, harassment and indeed retaliation for
19 instance as demonstrated by the pervasiveness of the harassment which gives rise, at a
20 minimum, to an inference of its knowledge or constructive knowledge.
21 72. As a direct and proximate result of defendants' discrimination against plaintiff,
22 plaintiff, ETNYRE, suffered, and continues to suffer, substantial economic loss because of
23 decreased earnings, bonuses, deferred compensation and other employment benefits, and she has
24 suffered, and continues to suffer, embarrassment, humiliation and mental anguish all to her
25 further damage and in an amount according to proof at trial.
26 73. Defendants, and each of them, committed the acts herein alleged maliciously and
27 oppressively, and in callous and conscious disregard and with the intention to deprive plaintiff,
28 ETNYRE, ofproperty and legal rights or otherwise causing plaintiff injury, and such conduct
-18- Complaint
..
1 was despicable and subjected plaintiffto cruel and unjust hardship in conscious disregard of her
2 rights so as to justify an award of exemplary and punitive damages according to proof at trial.
3 74. As a further result of defendants' discriminatory, harassing and retaliatory acts as
4 alleged herein, plaintiff has no plain, adequate or complete remedy at law, and defendants
5 continue to engage in said alleged wrongful conduct. Therefore, plaintiff, ETNYRE, requests
6 that defendants, and their agents, successors, employees, and those acting in concert with them,
7 or any of them, be enjoined permanently from engaging in each of these unlawful
8 discriminatory, harassing and retaliatory practices, policies, usages and customs set forth herein,
9 and such additional practices as said defendants have engaged in which are not yet fully known
10 by plaintiff.
11 75. As a result of defendants' discriminatory acts as alleged herein, plaintiff is
12 entitled to her reasonable attorneys' fees and costs of suit incurred herein.
13 76. As a direct result of defendants' actions, plaintiff, ETNYRE, has further suffered
14 economic loss in that she was suspended from, and later placed on disability leave from, her
15 position at defendant, QUALCOMM, as herein alleged, and she suffered violations of her
16 California Constitutional protections, especially pertaining to her gender/sex. Plaintiff,
17 ETNYRE, will be damaged in an amount to be shown at trial for loss of salary, compensation,
18 wages other employment benefits, and further suffered emotional distress in amounts not less
19 than $150,000. Plaintiff will seek leave to amend this complaint to set for the exact amounts of
20 those economic and non-economic damages once the same have been ascertained, or offer proof
21 thereof at trial, as appropriate.
24 and were in willful and conscious disregard of plaintiff' s rights, and as a result plaintiff seeks an
25 award ofpunitive damages in an amount according to proof at trial.
26 Ill
27 Ill
28 Ill
-19- Complaint
.
1 FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
2 [INTENTIONAL AND, IN THE ALTERNATIVE,

NEGLIGENT INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESSl
3
(Plaintiff, ETNYRE, asserts against defendants, MINHAS and QUALCOMM)
4
78. Plaintiff repeats and realleges each of the allegations contained in paragraphs 1
5
through 25, inclusive, and paragraph 29, paragraphs 32 through 34, and, paragraphs 45 through
6
73 of her first second and fourth causes of action, and incorporates the same herein by
7
reference as though fully set forth.

8
79. Defendants', MINHAS, QUALCOMM and DOES 1 through 20, inclusive, and
9
each them, physical actions toward, and statements made about, plaintiff, ETNYRE, as more
10
fully set forth above, were extreme and outrageous conduct that was intended to cause plaintiff
11
severe emotional distress in conscious disregard for plaintiff s rights and safety. Defendants
12
further acted with reckless disregard of the probability that plaintiff would suffer severe
13
emotional distress. As a result of defendants, MINHAS and QUALCOMM's, intentional,
14
extreme and outrageous conduct, plaintiff suffered severe emotional distress.
15
80. Plaintiff, ETNYRE, is informed, and believes, and thereon alleges that because
16
of defendants' actions and conduct that she has experienced, and continues to experience,
17
persistent symptoms of anxiety that include racing and pounding heart palpitations, chest
18
discomfort, difficulty breathing, upset stomach, muscle tension, and fatigue, short term memory
19
loss, sleep disturbance, difficulty staying asleep due to pain and problems concentrating and
20
focusing and being highly distracted.
21
81. In doing *se things hereinabove alleged, defendants, QUALCOMM, MINHAS,

22
and DOES 1 through 40, inclusive, and each of them, acted willfully, wantonly, intentionally,
23
and maliciously and for the purpose of causing plaintiff, ETNYRE, to suffer further humiliation,
24
mental anguish and emotional and physical distress. In the alternative, plaintiff alleges that said
25
defendants so acted negligently.
26
82. As a direct and proximate result ofthe conduct ofdefendants, QUALCOMM,

27
MINHAS, and DOES 1 through 40, inclusive, and each of them, plaintiffhas suffered
28
humiliation, mental anguish and severe and/or extreme emotional and physical distress.
-20- Complaint
..
1 83. As a proximate result ofcarelessness and negligence ofdefendants, and each of
2 them, plaintiff has been damaged in an amount she is unable to ascertain with certainty at the
3 present time but which plaintiff believes to be in excess of $250,000. Plaintiff will seek leave to
4 amend this complaint to set forth the exact amount thereof once the same is ascertained or
6 WHEREFORE, plaintiffpraysjudgment against defendants, and each ofthem, as
7 follows:
8 1. For general damages according to proof;
9 2. For medical and related expenses according to proof;
10 3. For compensatory damages for losses resulting from humiliation, mental anguish,
11 physical illness, psychological and emotional distress, and harassment, according to proof;
12 4. For lost earnings, past and future, according to proof;
13 5. For interest as allowed by law;
14 6. For punitive damages according to proof;
15 7. For reasonable attorneys' fees, as appropriate;
16 8. For permanent injunction enjoining defendants, their agents, successors and
17 employees and those acting in concert with them from engaging in the unlawful practices,
18 policies, usages and customs set forth herein;
19 9. For costs of suit incurred herein; and
20 10. For such otherand furtherreliefas the Court deems just and proper inthe
21 premises.
A Professional Corporationk
Bypi)Lf<)
23
24
Dated: October 30,2009
25 H. Paul Kondrick -\
Attorney for Plaintiff,LQI,IEIMEY
26 S. ETNYRE
27
28
-21- Complaint
SUM-100
SUMMONS FOR COURT USE ONLY

(SOLO PARA USO DE LA CORTE)
(CITACION JUDICIAL)
NOTICE TO DEFENDANT:
(AVISO AL DEMANDADO):
SANDIP ("MICKEY") MINHAS, individually, QUALCOMM Incorporated, FILED
a Delaware corporation, and,m* DOES 1 through 40, inclusive, SanDiego Sunerior Court
NOV 04 2009
.
YOU ARE BEING SUED BY PLAINTIFF:

(LO ESTA DEMANDANDO EL DEMANDANTE): Clerk of the Superior Court
COURTNEY S. ETNYRE, individually
BY A. Fletes
NOTICEI You have been sued. The court may decide against you without your being heard unless you respond within 30 days. Read the information
below.
You have 30 CALENDAR DAYS after this summons·and legal papers are served on you to file a written response at this court and have a copy
served on the plaintiff. A letter or phone call will not protect you. Your written response must be in proper legal form if you want the court to hear your
case. There may be a court form that you can use for your response. You can find these court forms and more Infonnation at the California Courts
Online Self-Help Center (www. courtinfo.ca. gov/se#help), your county law library, or the courthouse nearest you. If you cannot pay the filing fee, ask
the court clerk for a fee waiver form. If you do not file your response on time, you may lose the case by default. and your wages. money. and property
may be taken without further warning from the court.
There are other legal requirements. You may want to call an attorney right away. If you do not know an attorney, you may want to call an attorney
referral service. If you cannot afford an attorney, you may be eligible for free legal services from a nonprofit legal services program. You can locate
these nonprofit groups at the California Legal Services Web site (www./awhe/pcalifornia.org), the California Courts Online Self-Help Center
(www. couninfo. ca.gov/se#help), orby contacting your local court or county bar association. NOTE: The court has a statutory lien for waived fees and
costs on any settlement or arbitration award of $10,000 or more in a civil case. The court's lien must be paid before the court will dismiss the case.
iAVISO! Lo han demandado. Si no responde dentro de 30 dias, la corte puede decidir en su contra sin escuchar.su versian. Lea la informacian a
continuaci6n.
Tiene 30 DIAS DE CALENDARIO despuas de que le entreguen esta'citacian y papeles legales para presentar una respuesta por escrito en esta i
corte y hacer que se entregue una.copia al demandante. Una carta o una Ilamada telefanice no lo. protegen. Su respuesta por escrito tiene que estar
en formato legal correcto si desea que procesen su caso en la corte. Es posible que haya un formulario que usted pueda usar para su respuesta.
Puede encontmrestos formularios de la corte y mas informacian en e/ Centro de Ayuda de las Cortes de Califomia fwww.sucorte.ca.gov), en /8
biblioteca.de leyes de su condado o en la corte que le quede mas cerca. Si no puede pager la cuota de presentacian, pida al secretario de la corte
que le d6 un formulario de exenci6n de pago de cuotas. Si no presenta su respuesta a tiempo, puede perder el caso por incumplimiento y la corie le
podra guitar su sueldo, dinero y bienes sin mas advertencia.
Hey otros requisitos legales: Es recomendable que liame a un abogado inmediatamente. Si no conoce a un abogado, puede Ilamar a un servicio de
remisan a abogados. Si no puede pagar a.un abogado, es posible que cumpla con los requisitos para obtener servicios legales gratuitos de un
programa de servicios legales sin fines de lucro. Puede encontrar estosgrupos sin fines de lucro en el sitio web de California Legal Services,
fvww.lawhelpcallfomia.org), en el Centro de Ayuda de las Cortes de Cal#omia. Wvww.sucorte.ca.gov) o poniandose en contacto con M cone o el
colegio de abogados locales. AVISO. Por ley, la corte tiene.derecho a·reclamar las cuotas y los costos exentos por imponer un gravamen sobre
cualquier recuperacan de $10,000 6 mas de valor recibida mediante un acuerdo o una concesian de arbitraje en un caso de derecho dvll. Tiene que
pagar el gravamen de le corte antes de que la code pueda desechar el caso.
CASE NUMBER:
The name and address of the court is:
(NOmero del Caso):
(El nombre v direccian de la corte es)
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE.CTL
Central Division District
330 West Broadway, San Diego, CA 92101
The name, address, and telephone number of plaintiffs attorney, or plaintiff without an attorney, is:
(El nombre, la direccian y el numero de telafono del abogado del demandante, o del demandante que no tiene abogado, es):
H. Paul Kondrick (Bar # 88566) Fax No.: (619) 291-7123
H. Paul Kondrick, A Professional Corporation, 3130 Fourth Avenue, San Diego, CA 92103-5803 Phone No.: (619) 291-2400
A zE[-£85
Clerk, by
DATE , Deputy
cpec4 NOV 0 4 2009 (Secretario) A Fletes (Adjunto)
(Forproof of service of this summons, use Proof of'Service of Summons (form POS-010).)
(Para prueba de entregade esta citatian use el formulano Proof of Service of Summons, (POS-010))
NOTICE TO THE PERSON SERVED: You are served
ISEAL]
1. F--1 as an individual defendant.
2. F-1 as the person sued under the fictitious name of (specilk).
3. on behalf of (speci40:
under: 0 CCP 416.10 (corporation) r--1 CCP 416.60 (minor)
17 CCP 416.20 (defunct corporation) 17 CCP 416.70 (conservatee)
0 e r--7 CCP 416.40(association or partnership) r--1 CCP 416.90 (authorized person)
0004 of S•*
[EZ] other (specilk)
4. F-7 by personal delivery on (date):
Page 1 of 1
Form Adopted for Mandatory Ute SUMMONS Code of Civil Procedure §§ 412:20, 465
Judicial Council of California www.courlinfo ca.gov
SUM-100 [Rev. July 1. 20091 LexisNexis® Automated California Judicial Council Forms
// :fLED
,
CM-010
ATTORNEy.OR.PARTYIMTHOUT ATTORNEY (Nanie StateBar number, andadd,essk

; 1 VIL E U ::11'FOR:coOky lid0Wki2
-H. Paul Kondrick (State Bar # 88566) CUITRAL DIVISION
3130 Fourth Avenue, San Diego, CA 92103-5803 ?069 NOV -2 A 8: 4 1
TELEPHONENO,: (619) 291-2400 FAX NO.: (619) 291-7123
ATTORNEY FOR (Name): Courtney S. Etnyre. Plaintiff
SUPERIOR COURT OF CAUFORNIA, COUNTY OP SAN DIEGO
CLERK-SUPERIOR COURT
SAN DIEGO COUNTY. CA
STREET ADDRESS:
330 West Broadway
MAIUNG ADDRESS:
CITYANDZFCOOE San Diego 92101

BRANCH NAME: lltfl Division
CASE NAME:
Courtney S. Etnyre v. Minhas, et al.

CASE NUMBER:
CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET Complex Case Designation 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL
1-3E] Unlimited 33 Limited
Fl Counter [T] Jolnder
(Amount (Amount JUDGE:
demanded demanded is Filed with first appearance by defendant

exceeds $25,000) $25,000 or less) (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.402) DEPT:
items 1-6 be ow must be completed (see instructions on page 2).

1. Check one box below for the case type that best describes this case:
Contract Provisionally Complex Civil Litigation
Breach of contracvwarranty (06) (Cal. Rules of Court, rules 3.400-3.403)
Auto Tort
1--33 Auto (22)

Fl Uninsured motorist (46) || Rule 3.740 collections (09) |3 Antitrust/Trade regulation (03)
Fl Construction defect (10)
Other PUPD/WD (Personal Injury/Property Other collections (09)
Damage/Wrongful Death) Tort Insurance coverage (18) Mass tort (40)
Asbestos (04) Other contract (37) |1 Securities litigation (28)
Fl Product liability (24) Real Property |7 Environmental/Toxictort (30)
Medical malpractice (45) |7 Eminent domain/Inverse Insurance coverage daims arising from the
Other PI/PD/WD (23) condemnation (14) above listed provisionally complex case
E-7 Wrongful eviction (33) types (41)
Non-PUPD/WD (Other) Tort
Business tort/unfair business practice (07) 1-3 Other real property (26) Enforcement of Judgment
|-1 Civil rights.(08) Unlawful Detalner Enforcement ofjudgment (20)

Defamation (13) E-1' Commercial (31) Miscellaneous Civil Complaint
Fraud (16) Ll Residential (32) El RICO (27)

I Intellectual propelly (19) Drugs (38) Other complaint mot specified above) (42)
Fl Professional negligence·(25) Judicial Review Miscellaneous Civil Petition
EJOther non-Pl/PD/WD tort (35) Asset forfeiture (05) F7 Partnership and corporate governance (21)
Employment F] Petition re: arbitation award (11) -1 Other petition (not specified above) (43)
17 Wrongful termination (36) Fl Writ of mandate (02)
1-TI Other employment (15) E-1 Other judicial review (39)
2. This case I _lis I X lisnot complex under rule 3.400 of the California Rules of Court. If the case is complex, mark the
factors requiring exceptional judicial:management:
a. 17 Large number of separately represented parties d. Large number of witnesses
b. Fl Extensive motion practice raising difficult or novel e. F7 Coordination with related actions pending in one or more courts
issues that will be time-consuming to resolve in other counties, states, or countries, or in a federal court
c. /1 Substantial amount of documentary evidence f. El Substantial postjudgment judicial supervision
3. Remedies sought (check all that apply): a.|37 monetary b. |Tl nonmonetary; declaratory or injunctive relief c. |T|punitive
4. Number of causes of action (specilk): FIVE (5)
5. This case F21 is |T| is not a class action suit.
6. If thereare any known related cases, file and serve a notice of related case. (You may use form C
Date: October 30,2009
H. Paul Kondrick
(TYPE OR PRINT NAME) (SIGNATURE OF PARTY OR AXQRNEY FOR PARTY)
NOTICE
• Plaintiff must file this cover sheet with the first paper filed in the action or proceeding (except small claims caseGreases filed
under the Probate Code, Family Code, or Welfare and Institutions Code). (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.220.) Failure to file may result
in sanctions.
• File this cover sheet in addition to any cover sheet required by local court rule.
• If this case is complex under rule 3.400 et seq. of the California Rules of Court. you must serve a copy of this cover sheet on all
other parties to the action or proceeding.
• Unless this is a collections case under rule 3.740 or a complex case, this cover sheet will be used for statistical purposes onlv.
Page 1 of 2
Cal. Rules of Court rules 2.30,3.220.3.400-3.403,3.740,

Form Adopted for Mandatory Use CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET Cal. Standards of Judicial Administration. std. 3.10
wmv.COU/#njo.Ca.gov
CM-010 [Rev. July 1, 20071
LexisNexis® Automated CaliJornia Judicial Council Forms
CM-010
I
INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW TO COMPLETE THE COVER SHEET
To Plaintiffs and Others Filing First Papers. If you are filing a first paper (for example, a complaint) in a civil case, you must
complete and file, along with your first paper, the Civ# Case Cover Sheet contained on page 1. This information will be usedto compile
statistics about the types and numbers of cases filed. You must complete items 1 through 6 on the sheet. In item 1, you must check
one box for the case type that best describes the case. If the case fits both a general and a more specific type of case listed in item 1,
check the more specific one. If the case has multiple causes of action, check the box that best indicates the primary cause of action.
To assist you in completing the sheet, examples of the cases that belong under each case type in item 1 are provided below. A cover
sheet must be filed only with your initial paper. Failure to file a cover sheet with the first paper filed in a civil case may subject a party,
its counsel, or both to sanctions under rules 2.30 and 3.220 of the California Rules of Court.
To Parties in Rule 3.740 Collections Cases. A "collections case" under rule 3.740 is defined as an action for recovery of money
owed in a sum stated to be certain that is not more than $25,000, exdusive of interest and attorney's fees, arising from a transaction in
which property, services, or money was acquired on credit. A collections case does not include an action seeking the following: (1) tort
damages, (2) punitive damages, (3) recovery of real property, (4) recovery of personal property, or (5) a prejudgment writ of
attachment. The identification of a case as a rule 3.740 collections case on this form means that it will be exempt from the general
time-for-service requirements and case management rules, unless a defendant files a responsive pleading. A rule 3.740 collections
case will be subject to the requirements for service and obtaining a judgment in rule 3.740.
To Parties In Complex Cases. In complex cases only, parties must also use the Civ# Case Cover Sheet to designate whether the
case Is complex. If a plaintiff believes the case is complex under rule 3.400 of the California Rules of Court, this must be indicated by
completing the appropriate boxes in items 1 and 2. If a plaintiff designates a case as complex, the cover sheet must be served with the
complaint on all parties to the action. A defendant may file and serve no later than the time of its first appearance a joinder in the
plaintiffs designation, a counter-designation that the case is not complex, or, if the plaintiff has made no designation, a designation that
the case is complex. CASE TYPES AND EXAMPLES
Auto Tort Contract Provisionally Complex Civil Litigation (Cal.

Auto (22)-Personal Injury/Property Breach of Contract/Warranty (06) Rules of Court Rules 3.400-3.403)
Breach of Rental/Lease Antitrustgrade Regulation (03)
Damage/Wrongful Death
Contract (not un/awfu/ detainer Construction Defect (10)
Uninsured Motorist (46) (ifthe
case involves an uninsured or wrongful eviction) Claims Involving Mass Tort (40)
Contract/Warranty Breach-Seller Securities Litigation (28)
motorist claim subject to
Plaintiff Mot fraud or neg#gence) Environmental/Toxic Tort (30)
amitration, check this item
Negligent Breach of Contract/ Insurance Coverage Claims
instead of Auto)
Warranty (arising from provisionally complex
Other Pl/PD/WD (Personal Injuryi
Other Breach of ContracUWarranty case type listed above) (41)
Property Damage/Wrongful Death)
Collections (e.g., money owed, open Enforcement of Judgment
Ton
Asbestos (04)
book accounts) (09) Enforcement of Judgment (20)
Collection Case-Seller Plaintiff Abstract of Judgment (Out of
Asbestos Property Damage County)
Asbestos Personal Injury/ Other Promissory Note/Collections
Case Confession of Judgment Mon-
Wrongful Death
Insurance Coverage (not proWsiona#y domestic relations)
Product Liability Mot asbestos or
complex) (18) Sister State Judgment
toxic/environmental) (24)
Auto Subrogation Administrative Agency Award
Medical Malpractice (45)
Other Coverage mot unpaid taxes)
Medical Malpractice-
Physicians & Surgeons Other Contract (37) Petition/Certification of Entry of
Judgment on Unpaid Taxes
Other Professional Health'Care Contractual Fraud
Other Enforcement of Judgment
Malpractice Other Contract,Dispute Case
Other Pl/PDAND (23) Real Property
Eminent Domain/Inverse Miscellaneous Civil Complaint
Premises Liability (e.g., slip
Condemnation (14) RICO (27)
and fall)
Other Complaint (not specified
Intentional Bodily'Injury/PD/WD V*ongful Eviction (33)
above) (42)
(e.g., assault, vandallsm) Other Real Property (e.g., quiet title) (26)
Dedaratory Relief Only
Intentional Infliction of Writ of Possession of Real Property
Injunctive Relief Only Mon-
Emotional Distress Mortgage Foredosure harassmenO
Negligent Infllction of Quiet Title
Mechanics Lien
Emotional Distress Other Real Property Mot eminent
Other Commercial Complaint
Other[PI/PD/WD . domain, land/ord/renant, or
Case mon-tortmon-complex)
Non-PUPD/WD (Other) Tort foreclosure)
Business Tort/Unfair Business Unlawful Detalner Other Civil Complaint
(non-tort/non.complex)
Practice (07) Commerdal (31) Miscellaneous ClvII,Petition
Civil Rights (e.g., discrimination, Residential (32) Partnership and Corporate
false arrest) (not civil Drugs (38) (ifthe case involves #legal Governance (21)
harassment) (08) drugs, check this item; othe,wlse, Other Petition Mot specified
Defamation (e.g., slander, libel) report as Commercial or Residential) above) (43)
(13) Judicial Review Civil Harassment
Fraud (16) Asset Forfeiture (05) Workplace Violence
Intellectual Property (19) Petition Re: Arbitration Award (11) Elder/Dependent Adult
Professional Negligence (25) Writ of Mandate(02) Abuse
Legal Matpractice Writ-Administrative Mandamus
Election Contest
Other Professional Malpractice VM-Mandamus on Limited Court
Petition for Name Change
(not medical or legal) Case Matter Petition for Relief From Late
Other Non-Pl/PD/WD Tort (35) Writ-Other Limited Court Case Claim
Employment Review Other Civil Petition
Wrongful Termination (36) Other Judicial Review (39)
Other'Employment (15) Review of Health Omcer Order
Notice of Appea14abor
Commissioner Appeals
Pago 2 of 2
CM-010 [Rev. July 1,20071
CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET LexisNexis® Automated California Judicial Council Forms

37 2009 00101537 Cu Oe CTL - Roa 310 - 05 16 17 - 1512525365911

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

37 2009 00101537 Cu Oe CTL - Roa 310 - 05 16 17 - 1512525365911

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

37 2009 00101537 Cu Oe CTL - Roa 310 - 05 16 17 - 1512525365911

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Superior Court of California

County of San Diego

C208_C3302/6 Reg_Date: 05/10/2017

SDSC ADM-171(Rev. 7-03)

1 MICHAEL C. SULLIVAN (SBN 131817)

COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

10 COURTNEY S. ETNYRE, CASE NO. 37-2069-00101537-CU-OE-CTL

11 Plaintiff, DEFENDANT QUALCOMM

12 V. APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER

13 SANDIP ("MICKEY") MINHAS, COMPEL DEPOSITION OF PLAINTIFF

19 Judge: Hon. Jay Bloom

PAUL, PLEVIN, ORIGINAL

1 TO PLAINTIFF COURTNEY S. ETNYRE AND HER ATTORNEY OF RECORD:

6 and fax served on March 10, 2010.

11 two months in advance;

14 seeking an order compelling her deposition on February 3, 2010;

15 (4) The Court ordered her to appear by March 5,2010;

17 conference attempting to secure her appearance.by the Court's deadline; and

19 Qualcomm before the deposition.

20 Yet, she refuses still refuses to appear.

27 ipossibly stalling in an effort at obtaining additional discovery before her deposition.

7 Courtney Etnyre's deposition to be heard on#March 12,2010.

9 FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

10 On November 2,2009, PlaintiffCourtney Etnyre filed the instarit lawsuit'against

12 battery; discrimination, and retaliati6n, among other claims.

13 A. Qualcomm Notices and Confirms with Etnyre's Counsel.

20 B. Etnyre Serves Extensive Document Demands and Refuses Any Extension.

1 begin to review and determine appropriate responses on January 4,2010. '

9 C. Qualcomm Seeks Etnyre's Cooperation to Make Discovery More Efficient and

10 Etnyre Fails to Respond in Any Manner.

24 reviewing hundreds 6fthousands of documents to identify,and produce responsive documents.

1 D. Etnyre Refuses to Appear for Her Deposition.

2 In the memitime, after*eceiving Qualcomm's responses and initial' pfoduction of

4 F. Etnyre Refuses to Appear for Her Deposition, Again.

5 On.February 25,2010, Qualcomm again contacted Etnyre's:counsel to secure her

12 THIS COURT SHOULD SHORTEN THE TIME IN WHICH IT HEARS QUALCOMM'S

13 MOTION TO COMPEL COURTNEY ETNYRE'S DEPOSITION

24 its motion fully heard on sh6rtened notice.

26 Etnyre's deposition to be heard.on March 12·,,2010.

1 DECLARATION OF MELISSA LISTUG KLICK IN SUPPORT OF EX PARTE

3 I, Melissa Listug Klick, declare as follows:

6 following facts, and could competently testify to the following:

7 2. 1 served a notice of deposition on Courtney Etnyre on December 3,2009 for January

13 to accommodate.the date because Ms. Etnyrewanted to proceed as noticed,

14 3. According to the usual and customary practices at my firm, when a document is

17 Plaintiff Courtney S. Etnyre's, Request for Production of Documents to Defendant, Qualcomm

8 be used to search electronic documentsand sought Mr. Kondrick's input. We received no

9 ' response regarding the search terms.

22 documents to identify and produce responsive documents.

23 8. At the same time, in response to Qualcdmm'-5 document production, 0n January 23,

1 Sullivah' s response areattached as Exhibits 7'and 8. In Mr. Kondrick's.communicatihn, he stated

9 Exhibit 9. In response, Ms. Etnyre filed her own exparte application.

27 correct copy ofthe deposition notice is attached as Exhibit 13.

1 an attemptsecure Ms. Etnyre's agreementto appear on March 4, 2010. While acknowledging

16 Diego, California on February 26,2010.

1 MICHAEL C. SULLIVAN (SBN 131817)

5 Attorneys for Defendant

8 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

13 3. The term 'you" or'your"refers to QUALCOMM Incorporatei or any of its