arrow left
arrow right
  • LINNA XIU LING ZHAO, BY THEO HONNIBALL et al VS. BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. et al OTHER NON EXEMPT COMPLAINTS document preview
  • LINNA XIU LING ZHAO, BY THEO HONNIBALL et al VS. BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. et al OTHER NON EXEMPT COMPLAINTS document preview
  • LINNA XIU LING ZHAO, BY THEO HONNIBALL et al VS. BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. et al OTHER NON EXEMPT COMPLAINTS document preview
  • LINNA XIU LING ZHAO, BY THEO HONNIBALL et al VS. BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. et al OTHER NON EXEMPT COMPLAINTS document preview
  • LINNA XIU LING ZHAO, BY THEO HONNIBALL et al VS. BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. et al OTHER NON EXEMPT COMPLAINTS document preview
  • LINNA XIU LING ZHAO, BY THEO HONNIBALL et al VS. BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. et al OTHER NON EXEMPT COMPLAINTS document preview
						
                                

Preview

UMA SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO Document Scanning Lead Sheet Sep-10-2012 09:07 am Case Number: CGC-11-512758 Filing Date: Sep-05-2012 09:07 am Filed by: JUDITH NUNEZ Juke Box: 001 Image: 03755936 PROOF OF SERVICE BY MAIL LINNA XIU LING ZHAO, BY THEO HONNIBALL et al VS. BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. et al 001003755936 Instructions: Please place this sheet on top of the document to be scanned.owe a DH AW FF YW YN Business Affairs Consultants Inc, ALC Christopher P. Epsha, Esq. (CSBN 202089) 1800 Century Park East Suite 600 Los Angeles, California 90067 Tel: 310 - 229-5921 Fax: 888 - 779 - 6561 Attorneys for Plaintiff LINNA XIU LING ZHAO by THEO HONNIBALL, UNDER POWER OF ATTORNEY FOR LINNA XIU LING ZHAO FI San Francisco County Suosrior Court SEP O5 2012 CLERK OF THE COURT ay tee epity Cerk SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO CIVIL DIVISION — ULIMITED LINNA XIU LING ZHAO By THEO HONNIBALL, UNDER POWER OF ATTORNEY FOR LINNA XIU LING ZHAO Plaintiff(s), v. BANK OF AMERICA, NA, BAC HOME LOANS SERVICING, L.P,; RECONTRUST COMPANY, N.A. and DOES 1-100, inclusive Defendant(s). ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) > ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No.: CGC-11-512758 PROOF OF SERVICE THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT BY FAX PROOF OF SERVICE OF PLAINTIFF'S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINTom YN A HW FF Ww NTS N —_ eee RBRRPRRR BBP BS SEAU AR BDEE NH HK SO | Zhao y. Bank of America, et al. San Francisco County Superior Court No. CGC-11-512758 PROOF OF SERVICE Lam a resident in the County of Los Angeles, State of California. 1 am over the age of eighteen years and not a party to the within action. My business address is 1800 Century Park East, Suite 600, Los Angeles, CA 90067. On the date set forth below, I serve the following documents: 1, PLASNTIFF’S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT On the interested parties to said action by the following means: (BY MAIL) By placing a true copy thereof, enclosed in a sealed envelope with postage prepaid, for collection and mailing on that date following ordinary business practices, in the United Stated Mail at San Jose, CA addressed as shown below. Lam readily familiar with this practice for collection and processing of correspondence for mailing with the U.S. Postal Service, and in the ordinary course of business, correspondence will be deposited with the U.S. Postal Service the same day it was placed for collection and processing. (BY EMAIL - ELECTRONIC SERVICE) 1 caused such documents to be delivered by email transmission this date to the offices of the addressee(s), to the email address noted herein. _ (BY HAND DELIVERY) I caused said documents to be delivered by hand this date to the offices of the addressee(s). XX (BY OVERNIGHT DELIVERY) I caused said documents to be delivered to an overnight deliver carrier with the deliver fees provided for, addressed to the person(s) on whom it is to be served. I DECLARE UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY UNER THE LAW OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THAT THE FOREGOING IS TRUE AND CORRECT. Executed on September 5, 2012 (i Z Christopher P. Epsha NAMES(S) AND EMAIL ADDRESSES OR FAX NUMBER(S) OF EACH PARTY SERVED: Aaron R. Marienthal REED SMITH LLP 101 Second Street, Suite 1800 San Francisco, CA 94105-3659 amarienthal@reedsmith.com PROOF OF SERVICE OF PLAINTIFF’S SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT 2