Preview
1 JOSHUA S. FALAKASSA (SBN: 295045)
FALAKASSA LAW, P.C.
2 1901 Avenue ofthe Stars Suite # 450
3 Los Angeles, Califomia 90067
Tel.: (818) 456-6168; Fax: (888) 505-0868
4 Email: josh@falakassalaw.com
5 ARASH S. KHOSROWSHAHI (SBN: 293246)
6 LIBERTY MAN LAW, P.C.
1010 F Street, Ste. 300 AUG - 3 2022
7 Sacramento, Califomia 95814
Tel.: (916) 573-0469; Fax: (866) 700-0787 By:. H. PEMELTON
8 Email: ash@libertymanlaw.com Deputy Clerk
9
Attomeys for Plaintiff,
10 SAJIDA ZAMAN
11 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
12
COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO
13
14
SAJIDA ZAMAN, CASE NO.: 34-2019-00252121
15 RESERVATION ID: 2664201
Plaintiff,
16 DECLARATION OF ARASH S.
vs. KHOSROWSHAHI IN SUPPORT OF
17 MOTION TO COJVIPEL FURTHER
LIQUI-BOX CORPORATION, and DOES 1 RESPONSES TO PLAINTIFF SAJIDA
18 through 20, inclusive, ZAMAN'S SPECIAL
INTERROGATORIES, SET THREE,
19 Defendants. AND MONETARY SANCTIONS
20 Date: October 18, 2022
Time: 1:30pm
21 Dept.: 53 B\ FAX
22 Trial Date: September 12, 2022
23 I, ARASH KHOSROWSHAHI, declare as follows:
24 1. I am an attomey licensed to practice law in the State of Califomia. My State Bar Numbei
25 is 293246.
26 2. I represent Plaintiff Sajida Zaman ("Plaintiff') in the above-entitled action. I have
27 knowledge ofthe facts stated herein and can testify competently thereto.
28
DECLARATION OF ARASH KHOSROWSHAHI IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO COMPEL
1 of 6
1 3. On May 3,2022, co-counsel Joshua S. Falakassa sent counsel for Defendant James T. Jones
2 a letter requesting Defendant's OSHA 300 Logs and annual summaries of recordable
3 occupational injuries and illnesses from 2017 to 2022, as well as OSHA 301 Incident
4 Reports describing any and all injuries or illnesses to Plaintiff. (Attached as Exhibit A is a
5 tme and conect copy of the May 3, 2022 letter.)
6 4. On May 5, 2022, Mr. Jones requested written authorization from Plaintiff, and attempted
7 to limit the scope of the production from when Plaintiff was terminated in 2019 onward
8 (Attached as Exhibit B is a tme and conect copy of the May 5 through 9, 2022 meet and
9 confer emails.) Mr. Falakassa responded that day claiming that Plaintiff was entitled to all
10 "cunent or stored" OSHA logs with no limitation in the regulation as to the date
11 employment ended. (See Exhibit B.)
12 5. However, by May 9, 2022, Mr. Jones had still not provided the documents, and instead
13 continued to quibble about the scope of the regulation, claiming the production ofthe
14 records should be limited to what was "relevant", and that he would only provide logs from
15 2019 onward. {Id.) Mr. Falakassa responded that day arguing that Defendant was already
16 late in its production and cited no law in support of its position. {Id.) Instead, Mr. Jones
17 went down an interpretative rabbit-hole, claiming that Plaintiff was requesting records as
18 far back as 20 years, and that the scope of the regulation was not that broad. {Id.) Mr,
19 Falakassa responded that Mr. Jones was quibbling about the term "relevant" when it simply
20 meant "current or stored" logs, and that he was creating false limitations on Plaintiffs
21 rights. {Id.)
22 6. Then Mr. Jones engaged in hypotheticals, asking if an 18-year-old employee who worked
23 for an employer one day could request OSHA logs as far back as 50 years. {Id.) Mr
24 Falakassa responded in detail, citing OSHA's own standard interpretation ofthe regulation
25 requiring the disclosure of all cunent and stored OSHA logs, but Mr. Jones continued to
26 bicker about the scope of the regulation going into the past forever. {Id.) Mr. Falakassa
27 responded that per OSHA regulations employers were only supposed to keep such logs for
28
DECLARATION OF ARASH KHOSROWSHAHI IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO COMPEL
2 of 6
1 afive-yearperiod, and that Plaintiff was entitled to any logs Defendant had, regardless ol
2 when they were drafted—thus, Mr. Jones was simply "making things up." (M)
3 7. Thereafter Defendant produced a piecemeal version ofthe logs, which was missing OSHA
4 Form 300 for years 2019 through 2021, OSHA 300a logs, and OSHA Form 301 Incident
5 Reports. (Attached as Exhibit C is a tme and conect copy of the piecemeal production;
6 attached as Exhibit D are counsel's communications re: the production being piecemeal
7 and late.)
8 8. Not tmsting Defendant's piecemeal production, and given Defendant's history of
9 gamesmanship. Plaintiff thereafter served her Special Intenogatories, Set Three, on oi
10 about May 18, 2022, asking (1) identifying information of persons responsible for drafting
11 OSHA 300,300a, and 301 logs ("OSHA logs") at Defendant's Sacramento facility (Special
12 Intenogatory, Set Three, No. 30); (2) identifying information of persons responsible for
13 storing OSHA logs at Defendant's Sacramento facility {Id., No. 31); (3) identifying
14 information of persons with knowledge of Defendant's procedures relating to the drafting
15 and storing of the OSHA logs at the Sacramento facility {Id., No. 32); and (4) to describe
16 where the OSHA logs are stored at the Sacramento facility {Id., No. 33). (Attached as
17 Exhibit E is a tme and conect copy of Plaintiff Sajida Zaman's Special Intenogatories to
18 Defendant Liqui-Box Corporation (Set Three).)
19 9. While waiting for Defendant's responses, on June 15, 2022 I sent a follow-up email as to
20 the status of Plaintiffs OSHA 301 Incident Log related to her work-related injury leading
21 to her termination of employment. (Attached as Exhibit F is a tme and correct copy ol
22 counsel's June 15 meet and confer emails.) Mr. Jones responded that Defendant could not
23 find it and continued to make arguments about how the document would not state anything
24 different than other documents in the matter, causing further delay and obstmction. (See
25 Exhibit F.)
26 10. On June 20,2022, Mr. Falakassa followed up on when the OSHA logs would be produced,
27 to which Mr. Jones repeated that the only one not sent was Plaintiffs OSHA 301 log
28
DECLARATION OF ARASH KHOSROWSHAHI IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO COMPEL
3 of 6
1 (Attached as Exhibit G is a tme and conect copy of counsel's June 20 to July 12 meet and
2 confer emails.)
3 11. Thereafter, on or about June 21,2022, rather than provided responses. Defendant continued
4 its obstmction by serving only objections to Plaintiffs intenogatories. (Attached as
5 Exhibit H is a tme and conect copy of Defendant Liqui-Box Corporation's Response to
6 Plaintiff Sajida Zaman's Special Intenogatories, Set Three.) The objections were that the
7 intenogatories: (1) were vague and ambiguous (Response to Special Interrogatories, Set
8 Three, Nos. 30-33); (2) compound {Id., Nos. 30-31); (3) called for speculation {Id. Nos.
9 30-33); (4) overbroad {Id.); (5) inelevant/not calculated to lead to the discovery ol
10 admissible evidence {Id., Nos. 30-31); and (6) were protected by the attomey-client
11 privilege/attomey work-product doctrine {Id., Nos. 30-33). (See Exhibit H.)
12 12. On June 22, 2022, Plaintiff sent a detailed, seven-page meet and confer letter arguing why
13 each and every objection to the intenogatories were without merit. (Attached as Exhibit I
14 is a tme and conect copy of the June 22, 2022 meet and confer letter.) Not having heard
15 from Defendant, on July 8, 2022 counsel sent follow-up emails as to Defendant's
16 incomplete and late production of the OSHA logs and lack of meet and confer response
17 (Khos Deck, 14; see Exhibit G and Exhibit I.)
18 13. In response to the logs requested in Plaintiffs original May 3, 2022 letter, Mr. Jones
19 incredulously asked what was still outstanding, despite it being Defendant's obligation to
20 maintain the records. (See Exhibit G.) Once again Mr. Falakassa reiterated that the OSHA
21 300 Logs of Work Related Injuries/Illnesses for 2017-2021 and all OSHA 301 Incident
22 Reports, including Plaintiffs, from 2017-2021 were missing. {Id.) Mr. Jones then
23 responded once again that Plaintiff was only entitled, and Defendant would only produce,
24 logs during Plaintiffs employment period, in clear contravention of the OSHA regulation
25 met and confened about a month prior. {Id.) Mr. Falakassa once again cited OSHA's
26 standard interpretation of its own regulations that Plaintiff was entitled to all "current and
27 stored" logs. {Id.) Mr. Jones then went back to his hypothetical scenarios, arguing that Mr,
28
DECLARATION OF ARASH KHOSROWSHAHI IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO COMPEL
4 of 6
1 Falakassa's interpretation was too broad because a hypothetical employee could request
2 records 80 years into the future. {Id.) Mr. Falakassa responded that he was simply citing
3 OSHA's own interpretation documents, and that Mr. Jones's hypothetical scenarios were
4 contrived and missed the point, and further even offered to compromise that names and
5 contact information be redacted to alleviate privacy concems. {Id.) Then Mr. Jones argued
6 that Plaintiff was only entitled to her OSHA logs, not the logs of other employees, and that
7 either her logs no longer existed or could not be located. {Id.)
8 14. In response to the June 22,2022 meet and confer letter, Mr. Jones responded July 10,2022
9 arguing that Special Intenogatory No. 30 did not define the time period of which
10 individuals were responsible for drafting the OSHA logs. (See Exhibit I.) As to Special
11 Intenogatories Nos. 31-33, Defendant continued to bicker about the meanings the plain
12 terms "responsible for storing OSHA logs" and "describe where they are stored". {Id.)
13 However, Mr. Jones represented that responses would be provided. {Id.) On July 29,2022,
14 1 responded, (1) agreeing to a scope of five years prior to Plaintiffs termination ol
15 employment to the present as to Special Intenogatory No. 30, and (2) asking when the
16 responded to Special Intenogatories Nos. 31-33 would be provided after having met and
17 confened in good faith. (M) On August 1, 2022 I sent a follow up email, stating the
18 motions to compel deadlines were fast approaching, and given discovery motions seeking
19 sanctions against Defendant already filed as to other discovery requests he hoped the
20 parties could come to an agreement to resolve the outstanding issues. {Id.) But as of this
21 writing no response was provided.
22 15.1 am a graduate ofthe University of Califomia, Berkeley School of Law ("Boah Hall"), a
23 Top 14 law school. I further graduated with a Bachelor of Science in Mathematics (Honors)
24 and a Bachelor of Arts in Philosophy (Highest Honors) from the University of Califomia,
25 Davis in 2009.1 mn a solo practice in Sacramento, Califomia, and have been practicing
26 law since December 2013.1 primarily handle unlimited civil litigation cases in employment
27 law, which include class-action wage-and-hour cases as well as wrongful termination
28
DECLARATION OF ARASH KHOSROWSHAHI IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO COMPEL
5 of 6
1 cases. 1 practice throughout the State of Califomia, having litigated cases successfiilly in
2 the greater Sacramento Area, the Bay Area, and the greater Los Angeles area. 1 have also
3 negotiated six-figure/seven-figure settlements for class-action wage-and-hour matters as
4 well as six-figure settlements for wrongful termination matters. 1 was selected as a Super
5 Lawyer Rising Star in Northem Califomia in 2020, 2021, and 2022, a distinction that is
6 reserved for the top 2.5% of lawyers practicing less than 10 years. For these reasons, 1
7 believe an hourly rate of $500 is a reasonable hourly rate.
8 16.1 spent 9.7 hours researching and drafting this instant Motion and related documents herein
9 resulting in $4,850.00 in reasonable attomey's fees. Further, Plaintiff incurs a $60 motion
10 filing fee. I therefore respectfiilly request sanctions in the amount of $4,910.00 for
11 reasonable costs and attomey's fees.
12 1 declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Califomia that the
13 foregoing is tme and conect.
14 Dated: August 2, 2022
15
16
17 Arash S. Khosrowshahi
Attomey for Plaintiff Sajida Zaman
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DECLARATION OF ARASH KHOSROWSHAHI IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO COMPEL
6 of 6
EXHIBIT A
Joshua S. I';t]:iknss:t FALAKASSA LAW, RC. Telephone: Klti-456-6168
.Arash Klu».sro\vshflhi A Professional Corporation IJacsimile: 888-5n5-08&H
Sender's email: iosh(y)f:ilak:»ssala\v.com 1901 .Avcnoc iif ilic S!:irs. Suiic' S4.iO
I.us ;\rij;i-ics, California 91)1)0"'
www.fulaka.ssalaw.com
May 3, 2022
VIA EMAIL ONLY
james.JonesfSljacksonlewis.com
ATTN: Safety Manager
Liqui-Box Corporation
C/O James T. Jones
Jackson Lewis P.C.
400 Capitol Mall Suite 1600
Sacramento, CA 95814
Subject: Request pursuant to OSHA regulations 29 CFR 1904.35(b)(2)
Former Employee: Sajida Zaman
Establishment: Liqui-Box Corporation
Dear Mr. Jones:
As the personal representative of Sajida Zaman, this is a time-sensitive formal request to
your client Liqui-Box, made pursuant to 29 CFR 1904.35(b)(2). Please immediately inform the
undersigned ifyou require direct service of a copy of this request to Liqui-Box.
Request is hereby made for a tme and correct copy of:
1. All Liqui-Box OSHA 300 Logs and atmual summaries of recordable occupational injuries and
illnesses (OSHA Form 300) for the period of 2017 - 2022 for the entire establishment;
2. All OSHA 301 Incident Reports describing any and all injuries or ilbiesses to said former
employee.
As per the OSHA regulation § 1904.35,1 expect you to fulfill this request by the end of the
business day following your receipt of this dated request. As required by Section
1904.35(b)(2)(iv), you must not remove the names of the employees or any other information from
the OSHA 300 Log before providing the copies, except for allowed "privacy cases" as defmed in
the OSHA regulation.
Please confirm your receipt of this request.
Sincerely yours,
Joshua Falakassa, Esq.
EXHIBIT B
8/2/22, 9:12 AM Liberty Man Law, P.C. Mail - Liche Le and Said Zaman Requests Pursuant to 29 CFR Section 1904.35(b)(2)
^ 7 m 311 Arash Khosrowshahi
Liche Le and Said Zaman Requests Pursuant to 29 CFR Section 1904.35(b)(2)
Joshua Falakassa Mon, May 9, 2022 at 5:48 PM
To: "Jones, James T. (Sacrannento)" , Arash Khosrowshahi
Cc: Kasra Torabi , "Asano, Kelly (Sacramento)" , "Morris,
Kelsey F. (Sacramento)"
James,
We are not asking for all OSHA logs from "forever", rather we are requesting the OSHA logs that are "stored" by the
employer Indeed, an employer is not required to keep/store the logs for more than 5 years.
I think you are making things up now and have lost all credibility on this. The regulation clearly says "former employee"
and you have cited to no limitation on that.
Josh
Get Outlook for iOS
From: Jones, James T. (Sacramento)
Sent: Monday, May 9, 2022 4:08:58 PM
To: Joshua Falakassa ; Arash Khosrowshahi
Cc: Kasra Torabi ; Asano, Kelly (Sacramento) ;
Morris, Kelsey R (Sacramento)
Subject: RE: Liche Le and Said Zaman Requests Pursuant to 29 CFR Section 1904.35(b)(2)
I don't agree with your interpretation of that response. It made no comment on whether a former employee could obtain
records that do not relate to the time they were employed. Nothing in that response supports your argument that a former
employee has access forever.
James T. Jones
Attomey at Law
Jackson Lewis P.C.
400 Capitol Mall
Suite 1600
Sacramento, CA 95814
Direct: (916) 288-3020 | Main: (916) 341-0404
James.Jones@.iacksonlewis.com | www.iacksonlewis.com
From: Joshua Falakassa
Sent: Monday, May 9, 2022 3:17 PM
To: Jones, James T. (Sacramento) ; Arash Khosrowshahi
Cc: Kasra Torabi ; Asano, Kelly (Sacramento) ; Morris,
Kelsey F. (Sacramento)
Subject: Re: Liche Le and Said Zaman Requests Pursuant to 29 CFR Section 1904.35(b)(2)
[EXTERNAL SENDER]
I already sent it but here it is again:
https://nfiaiLgoogle.corn/rnail/u/0/?ik=2c35811dd3&view=pt&search=all&perrtirTisgid=msg-f%3A1732398227166823423&dsqt=1 &simpl=msg-f%3A173... 1/10
8/2/22, 9:12 AM Liberty Man Law, RC. Mail - Liche Le and Said Zaman Requests Pursuant to 29 CFR Section 1904.35(b)(2)
https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/standardinterpretations/2005-09-09-0
Get Outlook for iOS
From: Jones, James T. (Sacramento)
Sent: Monday, May 9, 2022 3:14:29 PM
To: Joshua Falakassa ; Arash Khosrowshahi
Cc: Kasra Torabi ; Asano, Kelly (Sacramento) ; Morris,
Kelsey F. (Sacramento)
Subject: RE: Liche Le and Said Zaman Requests Pursuant to 29 CFR Section 1904.35(b)(2)
Can you send me the document where that quote comes from?
James T. Jones
o Attorney at Law
Jackson Lewis P.C.
400 Capitol Mall
Suite 1600
Sacramento, CA 95814
Direct: (916) 288-3020 | Main: (916) 341-0404
James.Jonestgijacksonlewis.com | wvyw.jacksonlewis.com
From: Joshua Falakassa
Sent: Monday, May 9, 2022 2:29 PM
To: Jones, James T. (Sacramento) ; Arash Khosrowshahi
Cc: Kasra Torabi ; Asano, Kelly (Sacramento) ; Morris,
Kelsey F. (Sacramento)
Subject: Re: Liche Le and Said Zaman Requests Pursuant to 29 CFR Section 1904.35(b)(2)
[EXTERNAL SENDER]
James,
https://mail.google.corTi/mail/u/0/?il<=2c35811 dd3&view=pt&search=all&pennmsgid=msg-f%3A1732398227166823423&dsqt=1 &simpl=msg-f%3A173... 2/10
8/2/22, 9;12 AM Liberty Man Law, RC. Mail - Liche Le and Said Zaman Requests Pursuant to 29 CFR Section 1904.35(b)(2)
As director Keith Goddard puts it:
"OSHA's regulation at 29 CFR 1904.35(b)(2) provides that employees, former employees, their personal
representatives, and authorized employee representatives have the right to access the current OSHA 300 Log,
as well as any stored OSHA 300 Log(s) for any establishment in which the employee or former employee has
worked."
So yes, the regulation would require all "current and stored" OSHA Logs, irrespective of date of employment. If
the company had OSHA logs stored for 10-30 years, we would require those, but frankly I doubt Liqui-Box would
have them stored going back further than 5 years as required by the OSHA regulation.
Get Outlook for iOS
From: Jones, James T. (Sacramento)
Sent: Monday, May 9, 2022 2:17:18 PM
To: Joshua Falakassa ; Arash Khosrowshahi
Cc: Kasra Torabi ; Asano, Kelly (Sacramento) ; Morris,
Kelsey F. (Sacramento)
Subject: RE: Liche Le and Said Zaman Requests Pursuant to 29 CFR Section 1904.35(b)(2)
If the language is so clear, applying common sense, please answer my question. 10 years? 20 years? 30 years? "For
as long as they both shall live"?
James T. Jones
o Attorney at Law
Jackson Lewis P.C.
400 Capitol Mall
Suite 1600
Sacramento, CA 95814
Direct: (916) 288-3020 | Main: (916) 341-0404
James.Jones(a>jacksonlewis.com | vww.jacksonlewis.com
From: Joshua Falakassa
Sent: Monday, May 9, 2022 12:25 PM
To: Jones, James T. (Sacramento) ; Arash Khosrowshahi
Cc: Kasra Torabi ; Asano, Kelly (Sacramento) ; Morris,
https://mail.google.corTi/mail/u/0/?lk=2c35811dd3&view=pt&search=all&pemfimsgid=msg-f%3A1732398227166823423&dsqt=1&simpl=msg-fyo3A173... 3/10
8/2/22, 9:12 AM Liberty Man Law, RC. Mail - Liche Le and Said Zaman Requests Pursuant to 29 CFR Section 1904.35(b)(2)
Kelsey F. (Sacramento)
Subject: Re: Liche Le and Said Zaman Requests Pursuant to 29 CFR Section 1904.35(b)(2)
[EXTERNAL SENDER]
James,
Your interpretation fails to rely on "common sense," which would give the words they're actually meaning.
The clear language of the regulation plainly requires that the employer produce all the "current or stored" 300 Logs to a
former employee upon request.
I highly urge you to reconsider after reviewing the US Dept of Labor "OSHA Standards interpretation" on this topic.
See https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/standardinterpretations/2005-09-09-0
The interpretation by OSHA US Dept of Labor clearly provides that:
"OSHA's regulation at 29 CFR 1904.35(b)(2) provides that employees, former employees, their personal
representatives, and authorized employee representatives have the right to access the current OSHA 300 Log,
as well as any stored OSHA 300 Log(s) for any establishment in which the employee or former employee has
worked. The employer must provide to the requester one free copy of the OSHA 300 Log(s) by the end of the
next business day."
"OSHA has determined that it is important for employees, former employees, and their representatives to have
complete access to the entire 300 Log, including all names of employees listed on the form. The Agency's long
standing practice of providing access to all of the information on the 300 Log permits employees and their
representatives to be totally informed about the employer's recordkeeping practices, and the occupational
injuries and illnesses recorded in the workplace. The data included on the 300 Log assists employees and their
representatives in their voluntary efforts to uncover and eliminate workplace safety and health hazards. In
addition, the name of the employee listed on the 300 Log is important in understanding and verifying recordable
cases. In many cases it may be necessary to speak with a specific employee to determine the conditions that
lead to the injury or illness, and this is impossible without access to employee names. The removal of non-union
employees listed on the 300 Log would diminish an employee representative's ability to uncover and prevent
safety and health hazards in the workplace."
Get Outlook for iOS
From: Jones, James T. (Sacramento)
Sent: Monday, May 9, 2022 11:53 AM
To: Joshua Falakassa ; Arash Khosrowshahi
Cc: Kasra Torabi ; Asano, Kelly (Sacramento) ; Morris,
Kelsey F. (Sacramento)
Subject: RE: Liche Le and Said Zaman Requests Pursuant to 29 CFR Section 1904.35(b)(2)
Saber-rattling does not influence our decision-making. I disagree with your interpretation, it ignores the word "relevant,"
ignores the word "or," and most of all ignores common sense. If an 18 year old employee worked for one day and quit,
could she demand OSHA logs for the next 50 years? If your answer is yes, then your answer is silly. If your answer is
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ik=2c35811 dd3&view=pt&search=all&pemimsgid=msg-f%3A1732398227166823423&dsqt=1 &slmpl=msg-f%3A173... 4/10
8/2/22, 9;12 AM Liberty Man Law, RC. Mail - Liche Le and Said Zaman Requests Pursuant to 29 CFR Section 1904.35(b)(2)
no, then you concede the right does not extend onward and forever past the period of employment. Thus, there would be
a limit - as common sense dictates.
James T. Jones
o Attorney at L a w
Jackson Lewis P.C.
400 Capitol Mall
Suite 1600
Sacramento, CA 95814
Direct: (916) 288-3020 | Main: (916) 341-0404
James.Jones(3>jacksonlewis.com | www.jacksonlewis.com
From: Joshua Falakassa
Sent: Monday, May 9, 2022 11:03 AM
To: Jones, James T. (Sacramento) ; Arash Khosrowshahi
Cc: Kasra Torabi ; Asano, Kelly (Sacramento) ; Morris,
Kelsey F. (Sacramento)
Subject: Re: Liche Le and Said Zaman Requests Pursuant to 29 CFR Section 1904.35(b)(2)
[EXTERNAL SENDER]
James,
Your interpretation is unreasonable as the "relevant" OSHA logs clearly refers to the "current or stored" logs which we
requested (and as referred to in the same regulation.)
Unlike the Labor Code, here there is no rule that pending litigation changes the employer's obligation under the
statute/regulation. Can you send me any law or authority for your baseless position? I don't think so.
James, enough with creating false limitations to our client's rights.
Please send us the "current or stored" OSHA logs as requested without limitation to 2019.
Again, your continued recalcitrance will leave us with no choice but to seek all legal remedies available.
https://mail.google.corTi/mail/u/0/?ik=2c35811dd3&view=pt&search=all&permmsgid=msg-f%3A1732398227166823423&dsqt=1&simpl=msg-f%3A173... 5/10
8/2/22, 9:12 AM Liberty Man Law, RC. Mail - Liche Le and Said Zaman Requests Pursuant to 29 CFR Section 1904.35(b)(2)
Thank you.
Joshua
Get Outlook for iOS
From: Jones, James T. (Sacramento)
Sent: Monday, May 9, 2022 10:49:27 AM
To: Joshua Falakassa ; Arash Khosrowshahi
Cc: Kasra Torabi ; Asano, Kelly (Sacramento) ; Morris,
Kelsey F. (Sacramento)
Subject: RE: Liche Le and Said Zaman Requests Pursuant to 29 CFR Section 1904.35(b)(2)
How long into the future does he get to demand OSHA logs? For the next 20 years? The regulation says "you must give
the requester a copy of the relevant OSHA Log(s)." I think my interpretation is far more reasonable than yours. Do you
have law that the term "relevant OSHA Log(s)° would extend into time unrelated to a person's employment. I believe the
regulation means that former employees such as your clients can get the relevant stored OSHA logs - and they will get
them.
As these matters are in litigation, anything outside the period of employment should be something you pursue through
discovery. (An analogous example would be the Labor Code rule that a personnel file would have to be obtained through
discovery once litigation commences.)
I told you that we were producing the logs today. I do not agree that they are late. However, arguing about that would be
academic.
James T. Jones
Attorney at L a w
Jackson Lewis P.C.
400 Capitol Mall
Suite 1600
Sacramento, CA 95814
Direct: (916) 288-3020 | Main: (916) 341-0404
James.Jones(S)jacksonlewis.com | wv>/w.jacksonlewis.com
From: Joshua Falakassa
Sent: Monday, May 9, 2022 8:34 AM
To: Jones, James T. (Sacramento) ; Arash Khosrowshahi
Cc: Kasra Torabi ; Asano, Kelly (Sacramento) ; Morris,
https://mail.google.confVmail/u/0/?ik=2c35811dd3&view=pt&search=all&penTimsgid=msg-f%3A1732398227166823423&dsqt=1&simpl=msg-f%3A173... 6/10
8/2/22, 9:12 AM Liberty Man Law, RC. Mail - Liche Le and Said Zaman Requests Pursuant to 29 CFR Section 1904.35(b)(2)
Kelsey F. (Sacramento)
Subject: Re: Liche Le and Said Zaman Requests Pursuant to 29 CFR Section 1904.35(b)(2)
[EXTERNAL SENDER]
James,
Your interpretation is misguided, and the production is already late. Mr. Le and Ms. Zaman are former employees who
have made demands for Liqui-Box's "current" 300 Logs for the establishment they worked in. Again, there is no limitation
to the date of employment and you have cited to no law or even made any reasonable argument. If you continue to create
problems or fail to produce what is required under the statute, we will not hesitate to take any and all legal avenues
available.
Please confirm you will be sending the current 300 Logs for the Liqui-Box Sacramento establishment.
Let me know if you wish to discuss.
Get Outlook for iOS
From: Jones, James T. (Sacramento)
Sent: Monday, May 9, 2022 8:26:51 AM
To: Joshua Falakassa ; Arash Khosrowshahi
Cc: Kasra Torabi ; Asano, Kelly (Sacramento) ; Morris,
Kelsey F. (Sacramento)
Subject: RE: Liche Le and Said Zaman Requests Pursuant to 29 CFR Section 1904.35(b)(2)
Apologies,
You are correct. I did not see your email from May 5 until now. I am responding here to your comment on what logs are
due. I think the regulation limits the production to the period that is "relevant." It would make no sense to interpret it to
mean that a former employee can continue to demand logs long after their employment ended. I believe "relevant" must
mean those logs related to the employment period at issue, which in this case ends in 2019. I will be providing those
today.
James T. Jones
o Attorney at Law
Jackson Lewis P.C.
400 Capitol Mall
Suite 1600
Sacramento, CA 95814
Direct: (916) 288-3020 | Main: (916) 341-0404
James.Jones@.jacksonlewis.com | www.jacksonlewis.com
From: Joshua Falakassa
Sent: Monday, May 9, 2022 8:16 AM
To: Jones, James T. (Sacramento) ; Arash Khosrowshahi
Cc: Kasra Torabi ; Asano, Kelly (Sacramento) ; Morris,
Kelsey F. (Sacramento)
Subject: Re: Liche Le and Said Zaman Requests Pursuant to 29 CFR Section 1904.35(b)(2)
[EXTERNAL SENDER]
James, Thanks, but you did receive Ms. Zaman's authorization, which was sent on May 5.
Get Outlook for iOS
From: Jones, James T. (Sacramento)
Sent: Monday, May 9, 2022 8:14:04 AM
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ik=2c35811 dd3&view=pt&search=all&pennmsgid=msg-f%3A1732398227166823423&dsqt=1 &simpl=msg-f%3A173... 7/10
8/2/22, 9:12 AM Liberty Man Law, RC. Mail - Liche Le and Said Zaman Requests Pursuant to 29 CFR Section 1904.35(b)(2)
To: Arash Khosrowshahi
Cc: Joshua Falakassa ; Kasra Torabi ; Asano, Kelly
(Sacramento) ; Morris, Kelsey F. (Sacramento)
Subject: RE: Liche Le and Said Zaman Requests Pursuant to 29 CFR Section 1904.35(b)(2)
Hello Ash,
We received the written authorization from Mr. Le on Friday. So I believe they are actually due today. We did not receive
an authorization for Ms. Zaman, but the logs we will be providing today would be the same for her anyway. I will be
providing them today.
James T. Jones
o Attorney at Law
J a c k s o n Lewis P.C.
400 Capitol Mall
Suite 1600
Sacramento, CA 95814
Direct: (916) 288-3020 | Main: (916) 341-0404
James.Jones(3!jacksonlewis.com | www.jacksonlewis.com
From: Arash Khosrowshahi
Sent: Monday, May 9, 2022 8:00 AM
To: Jones, James T. (Sacramento)
Cc: Joshua Falakassa ; Kasra Torabi ; Asano, Kelly
(Sacramento) ; Morris, Kelsey F. (Sacramento)
Subject: Re: Liche Le and Said Zaman Requests Pursuant to 29 CFR Section 1904.35(b)(2)
[EXTERNAL SENDER]
Hi James,
Please provide us an update on producing the OSHA 300 Logs, which were due Friday, May 6, 2022.
Regards,
Arash "Ash" Khosrowshahi, Esq. (he/him)
Liberty Man Law, P.C.
1010 F Street, Ste. 300
Sacramento, CA 95814
Tel.: (916) 573-0469
Fax: (866) 700-0787
ash@llbertymanlaw.com
www.libertymanlaw.com
"The victorious win and then go to war, the defeated go to war and then seek to win." ~ Sun Tzu
CONFIDENTIAL NOTICE:
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or
entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the sender. This message
contains confidential information and Is intended only for the individual named. I f y o u are not the named
addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-
mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. If you are not the
intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the
contents of this information is strictly prohibited.
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ik=2c35811 dd3&view=pt&search=all&permmsgid=msg-f%3A1732398227166823423&dsqt=1 &simpl=msg-f%3A173... 8/10
8/2/22, 9:12 AM Liberty Man Law, RC. Mail - Liche Le and Said Zaman Requests Pursuant to 29 CFR Section 1904.35(b)(2)
On Fri, May 6, 2022 at 11:31 AM Jones, James T. (Sacramento) wrote:
Thank you Josh.
James T. Jones
o Attomey at Law
Jackson Lewis P.C.
400 Capitol Mall
Suite 1600
Sacramento, CA 95814
Direct: (916) 288-3020 | Main: (916) 341-0404
James. Jonestgijacksonlewis.com | www.jacksonlewis.com
From: Joshua Falakassa
Sent: Thursday, May 5, 2022 6:45 PM
To: Jones, James T. (Sacramento)
Cc: Arash Khosrowshahi ; Kasra Torabi ; Asano, Kelly
(Sacramento) ; Morris, Kelsey F. (Sacramento)
Subject: Re: Liche Le and Said Zaman Requests Pursuant to 29 CFR Section 1904.35(b)(2)
[EXTERNAL SENDER]
James,
Attached is the Authorization Form for Mr Le.
Thank you,
Joshua
Get Outlook for iOS
From: Joshua Falakassa
Sent: Thursday, May 5, 2022 4:07:07 PM
To: Jones, James T. (Sacramento)
Cc: Arash Khosrowshahi ; Kasra Torabi ; Asano, Kelly
(Sacramento) ; Morris, Kelsey F. (Sacramento)
Subject: Re: Liche Le and Said Zaman Requests Pursuant to 29 CFR Section 1904.35(b)(2)
James,
Please see attached signed authorization form for Ms. Zaman.
Per OSHA's standards under 29 USC 1904.35(b)(2)(iii):
"When an employee, former employee, personal representative, or authorized employee representative asks for copies
of your current or stored OSHA 300 Log(s) for an establishment the employee or former employee has worked in, you
must give the requester a copy of the relevant OSHA 300 Log(s) by the end of the next business day."
As you can see, the employee is entitled to "your current or stored" OSHA 300 Logs, and there is NO limitation in the
regulation as to the date employment ended. Indeed, a "former employee" is explicitly included and is entitled to the
"current or stored" logs.
Please get back to us promptly.
Thank you,
Joshua Falakassa
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ik=2c35811 dd3&view=pt&search=all&permmsgid=msg-f%3A1732398227166823423&dsqt=1 &slmpl=msg-f%3A173... 9/10
8/2/22, 9:12 AM Liberty Man Law, RC. Mail - Liche Le and Said Zaman Requests Pursuant to 29 CFR Section 1904.35(b)(2)
From: Jones, James T. (Sacramento)
Sent: Thursday, May 5, 2022 2:36 PM
To: Joshua Falakassa
Cc: Arash Khosrowshahi; Kasra Torabi; Asano, Kelly (Sacramento); Moms, Kelsey F. (Sacramento)
Subject: RE: Liche Le and Said Zaman Requests Pursuant to 29 CFR Section 1904.35(b)(2)
Hello Josh,
I have a couple of questions. First, can you please provide the written authorizations we need from Ms. Zaman and Mr.
Le. I noted under the regulation that we can provide the information to an attorney for a deceased or incapacitated
former employee, but need the written authorizations othenvise. I do not mean to be overiy formal about this, but
because there are privacy issues related to releasing records with employee names and injury information, we have to
do this in strict compliance with the regulations.
Also, because both Plaintiffs were separated from employment in 2019, we believe they are entitled to information only
through that year. Are you aware of any authority that they are entitled to reports that do not relate to their employment
periods?
[cid:image832345.png@F75E9BC8.12443DBB]
James
T
Jones
Attorney at Law
Jackson Lewis P.C.
400 Capitol Mall
Suite 1600
Sacramento, CA 95814
Direct: (916) 288-3020 | Main: (916) 341-0404
James.Jones@jacksonlewis.com | www.jacksonlewis.com
—Original M e s s a g e —
From: Joshua Falakassa
Sent: Tuesday, May 3, 2022 5:09 PM
To: Jones, James T. (Sacramento)
Cc: Arash Khosrowshahi ; Kasra Torabi ; Asano, Kelly
(Sacramento) ; Morris, Kelsey F. (Sacramento)
Subject: Liche Le and Said Zaman Requests Pursuant to 29 CFR Section 1904.35(b)(2)
[EXTERNAL SENDER]
Dear Mr Jones,
Please see the attached correspondence from my office.
Your prompt attention is required.
Best Regards,
Joshua Falakassa
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ik=2c35811 dd3&view=pt&search=all&pemimsgid=msg-f%3A1732398227166823423&dsqt=1 &simpl=msg-f%3A17... 10/10
EXHIBIT C
OSHA's Form 300A ip^.ovzm Year 20^ 6_
Summary of Work'-Related Injuries and Illnesses UrS. Depariment of Labor
0««i—llnwl a « M r aod H M W AOnkiMraUm
OMB mx ISIMin
MesteblbhmBnts mmed tffW 1904 mat caijipl^
ft) vsfdy (fiat (to OTdritefiraoofnpla/B anrf aocusfs AiTftro oonipteOh(7
(AtigltotogioowitffwhalMiAja/ene^syou/riaf^s^A^ TftenmftBltoMabtetmKnnN^sunyouVeaddBc/ltaentAsfhm //yau £stabHsAiiieiit fnTonnatlon
la(lnocases,mlle'0.'
Crriplqee^tanwrenviA^ses;ancf(MriBpres9nlBlta^ ThQ'atofmJMIM access (offie05Hllft»m 30) or ItnrMUUHnwalaim* H b a y ^0<*-,
equhafent. See 29 Cffl f S(M.3% OS>i4'8 iBoanftsep^
Wufjiber o f C a s e s .
Ibtal number of Ibtal nombcT of Ibtal number of Iblal nmnber of loduAr denrfptioo (e^.. Jl£njf/&c&uv ^ffurpr omJb (fsiba)
deaths cases with days cases ^di job other recordable
awayfromwork transfer or restricdon cases Stinlinl ladmaU dmifialiog (SIC), iTfawmi (e^, J7J5)
(Q) (H) OR
Nonh Aimricm ladnitriil Ctsaifiotion (NAICS), Iffawnn (a.^ 33<212)
Uw-nher of Days
Ibtal number of days away Ibtal number of days ofJob Eniplevmeiit Inrermatlon (jTiwibiithiwAaijigna^ m ifa
from work transfer or restricdon WMHaamlinlcdi^ilibpi^aalliiait.)
'Ho
Annua)
(K» Ibtal bouts worked al) emptojret Izst year
fiijory and Illness Types
Ibtal number of.. Knowingly laliifylng tfalj document may result In B fine.
(M)
(1) Injuries (4) Fbisonings
(5) Hearing loss docoroent and that to the but of my
(2) Skin disorders accurate, and conjslete.
(B) All other illnesses
P) Respiratory conations
Post Ihfs SwiWianr page hotn Pebmary f te April 30 of tbe irear fWlotirfiig Vie year eo*ai«( b r Ihe tann.
ftblk RpovOnjf burte Tar Ibli collKOon er hbraiallm b ciUnntal lo wemgo SB mlnuhi fmr mpoiut, tnctMUng UmB lo nvlow Iho ImtnicUoiu, Icvth •nd gillier UM diU nctdcd. mi
eemplele md Rvtew Oio eoHedlon ortaTomulIoa Penons ire nol leqabtd lo nipond le OH oUedlon cf lnfoin»Uon unten II dbpl^ • cumnllf ivlld OMB conlral monbcr. Vim bm
cenininli «beul QicR odrnttei OC im elher a^Bcfi of (hu doU cvQtcllaQ, Qonlac^
WtajMngten, DO Kma Do nol Knd OM conptclol rernii (o Ihb oflln
OSHA's Fonn 30QA ioi1t.related Injuries and illnesses OSHA^ fiaoonftftpfrig ndM
Attention: This tbrm contains Information relating
to employee health and must t>e used In a manner
O S H A ' s F o r m 300 (Rev. 01/2004) that protects (tie confidentiality of emptoyees to the Year 2017
extent possible while the information is being used
Log of Work-Related Injuries and Illnesses for occupational safety and health purposes. U.S. Department of Labor
OccupaUonal Safety and Health Administretion
You must record information about every woi1i.telated In{u7 or Illness tiat Involves loss of consdoiisness. rsstdcled work activity or job transfer, days away fiom wodi, or medical treatment
beyond SrsI aid. You must dso record slgnWcant work^elatad injuries and iHnessss thai are diagnosed by a physidsn or lioensed healdi care prafesskmal. You musl also record »ork.related Form approved OMB no. 1218.0178
Injuiles and illnesses that meat eny of the spedlic recording criteria Ested in 2g CFR 1S04.8 Ihicugh 19D4.1Z Feal free to use Iwo Unes for a single case if you need lo. You musl complete
Establishment name LIqul-Box
an inJuiy and OIness Incident report (OSHA Form 301) or equivalent fonn fbr each Injury or illness recorded cn this Ibnn. if you're not sure wheths a case is recsnlable. call your local OSHA
office kir help.
City Sacramento State California
Describe the case Classify the case
Enter ttw number of
(A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) CHECK ONLY ONE box fbr each case based on days the injured or ill Check Ihe 'Injury* column or choose one type of
Case Empkiyee's Mame Job TWe (e.g., Date of Where the event occurred Describe Injury or illness, parts of body affected, and the most serious outcome for ttiat case: worker was: Illness:
No. Welder) injury or (e.g. Loading dock north object/substance that directiy injured or made person
onset of end) III (e.g. Second degree bums on right foreann from (M)
Illness
Preview
1 JOSHUA S. FALAKASSA (SBN: 295045) FALAKASSA LAW, P.C. 2 1901 Avenue ofthe Stars Suite # 450 3 Los Angeles, Califomia 90067 Tel.: (818) 456-6168; Fax: (888) 505-0868 4 Email: josh@falakassalaw.com 5 ARASH S. KHOSROWSHAHI (SBN: 293246) 6 LIBERTY MAN LAW, P.C. 1010 F Street, Ste. 300 AUG - 3 2022 7 Sacramento, Califomia 95814 Tel.: (916) 573-0469; Fax: (866) 700-0787 By:. H. PEMELTON 8 Email: ash@libertymanlaw.com Deputy Clerk 9 Attomeys for Plaintiff, 10 SAJIDA ZAMAN 11 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA 12 COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO 13 14 SAJIDA ZAMAN, CASE NO.: 34-2019-00252121 15 RESERVATION ID: 2664201 Plaintiff, 16 DECLARATION OF ARASH S. vs. KHOSROWSHAHI IN SUPPORT OF 17 MOTION TO COJVIPEL FURTHER LIQUI-BOX CORPORATION, and DOES 1 RESPONSES TO PLAINTIFF SAJIDA 18 through 20, inclusive, ZAMAN'S SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET THREE, 19 Defendants. AND MONETARY SANCTIONS 20 Date: October 18, 2022 Time: 1:30pm 21 Dept.: 53 B\ FAX 22 Trial Date: September 12, 2022 23 I, ARASH KHOSROWSHAHI, declare as follows: 24 1. I am an attomey licensed to practice law in the State of Califomia. My State Bar Numbei 25 is 293246. 26 2. I represent Plaintiff Sajida Zaman ("Plaintiff') in the above-entitled action. I have 27 knowledge ofthe facts stated herein and can testify competently thereto. 28 DECLARATION OF ARASH KHOSROWSHAHI IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO COMPEL 1 of 6 1 3. On May 3,2022, co-counsel Joshua S. Falakassa sent counsel for Defendant James T. Jones 2 a letter requesting Defendant's OSHA 300 Logs and annual summaries of recordable 3 occupational injuries and illnesses from 2017 to 2022, as well as OSHA 301 Incident 4 Reports describing any and all injuries or illnesses to Plaintiff. (Attached as Exhibit A is a 5 tme and conect copy of the May 3, 2022 letter.) 6 4. On May 5, 2022, Mr. Jones requested written authorization from Plaintiff, and attempted 7 to limit the scope of the production from when Plaintiff was terminated in 2019 onward 8 (Attached as Exhibit B is a tme and conect copy of the May 5 through 9, 2022 meet and 9 confer emails.) Mr. Falakassa responded that day claiming that Plaintiff was entitled to all 10 "cunent or stored" OSHA logs with no limitation in the regulation as to the date 11 employment ended. (See Exhibit B.) 12 5. However, by May 9, 2022, Mr. Jones had still not provided the documents, and instead 13 continued to quibble about the scope of the regulation, claiming the production ofthe 14 records should be limited to what was "relevant", and that he would only provide logs from 15 2019 onward. {Id.) Mr. Falakassa responded that day arguing that Defendant was already 16 late in its production and cited no law in support of its position. {Id.) Instead, Mr. Jones 17 went down an interpretative rabbit-hole, claiming that Plaintiff was requesting records as 18 far back as 20 years, and that the scope of the regulation was not that broad. {Id.) Mr, 19 Falakassa responded that Mr. Jones was quibbling about the term "relevant" when it simply 20 meant "current or stored" logs, and that he was creating false limitations on Plaintiffs 21 rights. {Id.) 22 6. Then Mr. Jones engaged in hypotheticals, asking if an 18-year-old employee who worked 23 for an employer one day could request OSHA logs as far back as 50 years. {Id.) Mr 24 Falakassa responded in detail, citing OSHA's own standard interpretation ofthe regulation 25 requiring the disclosure of all cunent and stored OSHA logs, but Mr. Jones continued to 26 bicker about the scope of the regulation going into the past forever. {Id.) Mr. Falakassa 27 responded that per OSHA regulations employers were only supposed to keep such logs for 28 DECLARATION OF ARASH KHOSROWSHAHI IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO COMPEL 2 of 6 1 afive-yearperiod, and that Plaintiff was entitled to any logs Defendant had, regardless ol 2 when they were drafted—thus, Mr. Jones was simply "making things up." (M) 3 7. Thereafter Defendant produced a piecemeal version ofthe logs, which was missing OSHA 4 Form 300 for years 2019 through 2021, OSHA 300a logs, and OSHA Form 301 Incident 5 Reports. (Attached as Exhibit C is a tme and conect copy of the piecemeal production; 6 attached as Exhibit D are counsel's communications re: the production being piecemeal 7 and late.) 8 8. Not tmsting Defendant's piecemeal production, and given Defendant's history of 9 gamesmanship. Plaintiff thereafter served her Special Intenogatories, Set Three, on oi 10 about May 18, 2022, asking (1) identifying information of persons responsible for drafting 11 OSHA 300,300a, and 301 logs ("OSHA logs") at Defendant's Sacramento facility (Special 12 Intenogatory, Set Three, No. 30); (2) identifying information of persons responsible for 13 storing OSHA logs at Defendant's Sacramento facility {Id., No. 31); (3) identifying 14 information of persons with knowledge of Defendant's procedures relating to the drafting 15 and storing of the OSHA logs at the Sacramento facility {Id., No. 32); and (4) to describe 16 where the OSHA logs are stored at the Sacramento facility {Id., No. 33). (Attached as 17 Exhibit E is a tme and conect copy of Plaintiff Sajida Zaman's Special Intenogatories to 18 Defendant Liqui-Box Corporation (Set Three).) 19 9. While waiting for Defendant's responses, on June 15, 2022 I sent a follow-up email as to 20 the status of Plaintiffs OSHA 301 Incident Log related to her work-related injury leading 21 to her termination of employment. (Attached as Exhibit F is a tme and correct copy ol 22 counsel's June 15 meet and confer emails.) Mr. Jones responded that Defendant could not 23 find it and continued to make arguments about how the document would not state anything 24 different than other documents in the matter, causing further delay and obstmction. (See 25 Exhibit F.) 26 10. On June 20,2022, Mr. Falakassa followed up on when the OSHA logs would be produced, 27 to which Mr. Jones repeated that the only one not sent was Plaintiffs OSHA 301 log 28 DECLARATION OF ARASH KHOSROWSHAHI IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO COMPEL 3 of 6 1 (Attached as Exhibit G is a tme and conect copy of counsel's June 20 to July 12 meet and 2 confer emails.) 3 11. Thereafter, on or about June 21,2022, rather than provided responses. Defendant continued 4 its obstmction by serving only objections to Plaintiffs intenogatories. (Attached as 5 Exhibit H is a tme and conect copy of Defendant Liqui-Box Corporation's Response to 6 Plaintiff Sajida Zaman's Special Intenogatories, Set Three.) The objections were that the 7 intenogatories: (1) were vague and ambiguous (Response to Special Interrogatories, Set 8 Three, Nos. 30-33); (2) compound {Id., Nos. 30-31); (3) called for speculation {Id. Nos. 9 30-33); (4) overbroad {Id.); (5) inelevant/not calculated to lead to the discovery ol 10 admissible evidence {Id., Nos. 30-31); and (6) were protected by the attomey-client 11 privilege/attomey work-product doctrine {Id., Nos. 30-33). (See Exhibit H.) 12 12. On June 22, 2022, Plaintiff sent a detailed, seven-page meet and confer letter arguing why 13 each and every objection to the intenogatories were without merit. (Attached as Exhibit I 14 is a tme and conect copy of the June 22, 2022 meet and confer letter.) Not having heard 15 from Defendant, on July 8, 2022 counsel sent follow-up emails as to Defendant's 16 incomplete and late production of the OSHA logs and lack of meet and confer response 17 (Khos Deck, 14; see Exhibit G and Exhibit I.) 18 13. In response to the logs requested in Plaintiffs original May 3, 2022 letter, Mr. Jones 19 incredulously asked what was still outstanding, despite it being Defendant's obligation to 20 maintain the records. (See Exhibit G.) Once again Mr. Falakassa reiterated that the OSHA 21 300 Logs of Work Related Injuries/Illnesses for 2017-2021 and all OSHA 301 Incident 22 Reports, including Plaintiffs, from 2017-2021 were missing. {Id.) Mr. Jones then 23 responded once again that Plaintiff was only entitled, and Defendant would only produce, 24 logs during Plaintiffs employment period, in clear contravention of the OSHA regulation 25 met and confened about a month prior. {Id.) Mr. Falakassa once again cited OSHA's 26 standard interpretation of its own regulations that Plaintiff was entitled to all "current and 27 stored" logs. {Id.) Mr. Jones then went back to his hypothetical scenarios, arguing that Mr, 28 DECLARATION OF ARASH KHOSROWSHAHI IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO COMPEL 4 of 6 1 Falakassa's interpretation was too broad because a hypothetical employee could request 2 records 80 years into the future. {Id.) Mr. Falakassa responded that he was simply citing 3 OSHA's own interpretation documents, and that Mr. Jones's hypothetical scenarios were 4 contrived and missed the point, and further even offered to compromise that names and 5 contact information be redacted to alleviate privacy concems. {Id.) Then Mr. Jones argued 6 that Plaintiff was only entitled to her OSHA logs, not the logs of other employees, and that 7 either her logs no longer existed or could not be located. {Id.) 8 14. In response to the June 22,2022 meet and confer letter, Mr. Jones responded July 10,2022 9 arguing that Special Intenogatory No. 30 did not define the time period of which 10 individuals were responsible for drafting the OSHA logs. (See Exhibit I.) As to Special 11 Intenogatories Nos. 31-33, Defendant continued to bicker about the meanings the plain 12 terms "responsible for storing OSHA logs" and "describe where they are stored". {Id.) 13 However, Mr. Jones represented that responses would be provided. {Id.) On July 29,2022, 14 1 responded, (1) agreeing to a scope of five years prior to Plaintiffs termination ol 15 employment to the present as to Special Intenogatory No. 30, and (2) asking when the 16 responded to Special Intenogatories Nos. 31-33 would be provided after having met and 17 confened in good faith. (M) On August 1, 2022 I sent a follow up email, stating the 18 motions to compel deadlines were fast approaching, and given discovery motions seeking 19 sanctions against Defendant already filed as to other discovery requests he hoped the 20 parties could come to an agreement to resolve the outstanding issues. {Id.) But as of this 21 writing no response was provided. 22 15.1 am a graduate ofthe University of Califomia, Berkeley School of Law ("Boah Hall"), a 23 Top 14 law school. I further graduated with a Bachelor of Science in Mathematics (Honors) 24 and a Bachelor of Arts in Philosophy (Highest Honors) from the University of Califomia, 25 Davis in 2009.1 mn a solo practice in Sacramento, Califomia, and have been practicing 26 law since December 2013.1 primarily handle unlimited civil litigation cases in employment 27 law, which include class-action wage-and-hour cases as well as wrongful termination 28 DECLARATION OF ARASH KHOSROWSHAHI IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO COMPEL 5 of 6 1 cases. 1 practice throughout the State of Califomia, having litigated cases successfiilly in 2 the greater Sacramento Area, the Bay Area, and the greater Los Angeles area. 1 have also 3 negotiated six-figure/seven-figure settlements for class-action wage-and-hour matters as 4 well as six-figure settlements for wrongful termination matters. 1 was selected as a Super 5 Lawyer Rising Star in Northem Califomia in 2020, 2021, and 2022, a distinction that is 6 reserved for the top 2.5% of lawyers practicing less than 10 years. For these reasons, 1 7 believe an hourly rate of $500 is a reasonable hourly rate. 8 16.1 spent 9.7 hours researching and drafting this instant Motion and related documents herein 9 resulting in $4,850.00 in reasonable attomey's fees. Further, Plaintiff incurs a $60 motion 10 filing fee. I therefore respectfiilly request sanctions in the amount of $4,910.00 for 11 reasonable costs and attomey's fees. 12 1 declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Califomia that the 13 foregoing is tme and conect. 14 Dated: August 2, 2022 15 16 17 Arash S. Khosrowshahi Attomey for Plaintiff Sajida Zaman 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 DECLARATION OF ARASH KHOSROWSHAHI IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO COMPEL 6 of 6 EXHIBIT A Joshua S. I';t]:iknss:t FALAKASSA LAW, RC. Telephone: Klti-456-6168 .Arash Klu».sro\vshflhi A Professional Corporation IJacsimile: 888-5n5-08&H Sender's email: iosh(y)f:ilak:»ssala\v.com 1901 .Avcnoc iif ilic S!:irs. Suiic' S4.iO I.us ;\rij;i-ics, California 91)1)0"' www.fulaka.ssalaw.com May 3, 2022 VIA EMAIL ONLY james.JonesfSljacksonlewis.com ATTN: Safety Manager Liqui-Box Corporation C/O James T. Jones Jackson Lewis P.C. 400 Capitol Mall Suite 1600 Sacramento, CA 95814 Subject: Request pursuant to OSHA regulations 29 CFR 1904.35(b)(2) Former Employee: Sajida Zaman Establishment: Liqui-Box Corporation Dear Mr. Jones: As the personal representative of Sajida Zaman, this is a time-sensitive formal request to your client Liqui-Box, made pursuant to 29 CFR 1904.35(b)(2). Please immediately inform the undersigned ifyou require direct service of a copy of this request to Liqui-Box. Request is hereby made for a tme and correct copy of: 1. All Liqui-Box OSHA 300 Logs and atmual summaries of recordable occupational injuries and illnesses (OSHA Form 300) for the period of 2017 - 2022 for the entire establishment; 2. All OSHA 301 Incident Reports describing any and all injuries or ilbiesses to said former employee. As per the OSHA regulation § 1904.35,1 expect you to fulfill this request by the end of the business day following your receipt of this dated request. As required by Section 1904.35(b)(2)(iv), you must not remove the names of the employees or any other information from the OSHA 300 Log before providing the copies, except for allowed "privacy cases" as defmed in the OSHA regulation. Please confirm your receipt of this request. Sincerely yours, Joshua Falakassa, Esq. EXHIBIT B 8/2/22, 9:12 AM Liberty Man Law, P.C. Mail - Liche Le and Said Zaman Requests Pursuant to 29 CFR Section 1904.35(b)(2) ^ 7 m 311 Arash Khosrowshahi Liche Le and Said Zaman Requests Pursuant to 29 CFR Section 1904.35(b)(2) Joshua Falakassa Mon, May 9, 2022 at 5:48 PM To: "Jones, James T. (Sacrannento)" , Arash Khosrowshahi Cc: Kasra Torabi , "Asano, Kelly (Sacramento)" , "Morris, Kelsey F. (Sacramento)" James, We are not asking for all OSHA logs from "forever", rather we are requesting the OSHA logs that are "stored" by the employer Indeed, an employer is not required to keep/store the logs for more than 5 years. I think you are making things up now and have lost all credibility on this. The regulation clearly says "former employee" and you have cited to no limitation on that. Josh Get Outlook for iOS From: Jones, James T. (Sacramento) Sent: Monday, May 9, 2022 4:08:58 PM To: Joshua Falakassa ; Arash Khosrowshahi Cc: Kasra Torabi ; Asano, Kelly (Sacramento) ; Morris, Kelsey R (Sacramento) Subject: RE: Liche Le and Said Zaman Requests Pursuant to 29 CFR Section 1904.35(b)(2) I don't agree with your interpretation of that response. It made no comment on whether a former employee could obtain records that do not relate to the time they were employed. Nothing in that response supports your argument that a former employee has access forever. James T. Jones Attomey at Law Jackson Lewis P.C. 400 Capitol Mall Suite 1600 Sacramento, CA 95814 Direct: (916) 288-3020 | Main: (916) 341-0404 James.Jones@.iacksonlewis.com | www.iacksonlewis.com From: Joshua Falakassa Sent: Monday, May 9, 2022 3:17 PM To: Jones, James T. (Sacramento) ; Arash Khosrowshahi Cc: Kasra Torabi ; Asano, Kelly (Sacramento) ; Morris, Kelsey F. (Sacramento) Subject: Re: Liche Le and Said Zaman Requests Pursuant to 29 CFR Section 1904.35(b)(2) [EXTERNAL SENDER] I already sent it but here it is again: https://nfiaiLgoogle.corn/rnail/u/0/?ik=2c35811dd3&view=pt&search=all&perrtirTisgid=msg-f%3A1732398227166823423&dsqt=1 &simpl=msg-f%3A173... 1/10 8/2/22, 9:12 AM Liberty Man Law, RC. Mail - Liche Le and Said Zaman Requests Pursuant to 29 CFR Section 1904.35(b)(2) https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/standardinterpretations/2005-09-09-0 Get Outlook for iOS From: Jones, James T. (Sacramento) Sent: Monday, May 9, 2022 3:14:29 PM To: Joshua Falakassa ; Arash Khosrowshahi Cc: Kasra Torabi ; Asano, Kelly (Sacramento) ; Morris, Kelsey F. (Sacramento) Subject: RE: Liche Le and Said Zaman Requests Pursuant to 29 CFR Section 1904.35(b)(2) Can you send me the document where that quote comes from? James T. Jones o Attorney at Law Jackson Lewis P.C. 400 Capitol Mall Suite 1600 Sacramento, CA 95814 Direct: (916) 288-3020 | Main: (916) 341-0404 James.Jonestgijacksonlewis.com | wvyw.jacksonlewis.com From: Joshua Falakassa Sent: Monday, May 9, 2022 2:29 PM To: Jones, James T. (Sacramento) ; Arash Khosrowshahi Cc: Kasra Torabi ; Asano, Kelly (Sacramento) ; Morris, Kelsey F. (Sacramento) Subject: Re: Liche Le and Said Zaman Requests Pursuant to 29 CFR Section 1904.35(b)(2) [EXTERNAL SENDER] James, https://mail.google.corTi/mail/u/0/?il<=2c35811 dd3&view=pt&search=all&pennmsgid=msg-f%3A1732398227166823423&dsqt=1 &simpl=msg-f%3A173... 2/10 8/2/22, 9;12 AM Liberty Man Law, RC. Mail - Liche Le and Said Zaman Requests Pursuant to 29 CFR Section 1904.35(b)(2) As director Keith Goddard puts it: "OSHA's regulation at 29 CFR 1904.35(b)(2) provides that employees, former employees, their personal representatives, and authorized employee representatives have the right to access the current OSHA 300 Log, as well as any stored OSHA 300 Log(s) for any establishment in which the employee or former employee has worked." So yes, the regulation would require all "current and stored" OSHA Logs, irrespective of date of employment. If the company had OSHA logs stored for 10-30 years, we would require those, but frankly I doubt Liqui-Box would have them stored going back further than 5 years as required by the OSHA regulation. Get Outlook for iOS From: Jones, James T. (Sacramento) Sent: Monday, May 9, 2022 2:17:18 PM To: Joshua Falakassa ; Arash Khosrowshahi Cc: Kasra Torabi ; Asano, Kelly (Sacramento) ; Morris, Kelsey F. (Sacramento) Subject: RE: Liche Le and Said Zaman Requests Pursuant to 29 CFR Section 1904.35(b)(2) If the language is so clear, applying common sense, please answer my question. 10 years? 20 years? 30 years? "For as long as they both shall live"? James T. Jones o Attorney at Law Jackson Lewis P.C. 400 Capitol Mall Suite 1600 Sacramento, CA 95814 Direct: (916) 288-3020 | Main: (916) 341-0404 James.Jones(a>jacksonlewis.com | vww.jacksonlewis.com From: Joshua Falakassa Sent: Monday, May 9, 2022 12:25 PM To: Jones, James T. (Sacramento) ; Arash Khosrowshahi Cc: Kasra Torabi ; Asano, Kelly (Sacramento) ; Morris, https://mail.google.corTi/mail/u/0/?lk=2c35811dd3&view=pt&search=all&pemfimsgid=msg-f%3A1732398227166823423&dsqt=1&simpl=msg-fyo3A173... 3/10 8/2/22, 9:12 AM Liberty Man Law, RC. Mail - Liche Le and Said Zaman Requests Pursuant to 29 CFR Section 1904.35(b)(2) Kelsey F. (Sacramento) Subject: Re: Liche Le and Said Zaman Requests Pursuant to 29 CFR Section 1904.35(b)(2) [EXTERNAL SENDER] James, Your interpretation fails to rely on "common sense," which would give the words they're actually meaning. The clear language of the regulation plainly requires that the employer produce all the "current or stored" 300 Logs to a former employee upon request. I highly urge you to reconsider after reviewing the US Dept of Labor "OSHA Standards interpretation" on this topic. See https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/standardinterpretations/2005-09-09-0 The interpretation by OSHA US Dept of Labor clearly provides that: "OSHA's regulation at 29 CFR 1904.35(b)(2) provides that employees, former employees, their personal representatives, and authorized employee representatives have the right to access the current OSHA 300 Log, as well as any stored OSHA 300 Log(s) for any establishment in which the employee or former employee has worked. The employer must provide to the requester one free copy of the OSHA 300 Log(s) by the end of the next business day." "OSHA has determined that it is important for employees, former employees, and their representatives to have complete access to the entire 300 Log, including all names of employees listed on the form. The Agency's long standing practice of providing access to all of the information on the 300 Log permits employees and their representatives to be totally informed about the employer's recordkeeping practices, and the occupational injuries and illnesses recorded in the workplace. The data included on the 300 Log assists employees and their representatives in their voluntary efforts to uncover and eliminate workplace safety and health hazards. In addition, the name of the employee listed on the 300 Log is important in understanding and verifying recordable cases. In many cases it may be necessary to speak with a specific employee to determine the conditions that lead to the injury or illness, and this is impossible without access to employee names. The removal of non-union employees listed on the 300 Log would diminish an employee representative's ability to uncover and prevent safety and health hazards in the workplace." Get Outlook for iOS From: Jones, James T. (Sacramento) Sent: Monday, May 9, 2022 11:53 AM To: Joshua Falakassa ; Arash Khosrowshahi Cc: Kasra Torabi ; Asano, Kelly (Sacramento) ; Morris, Kelsey F. (Sacramento) Subject: RE: Liche Le and Said Zaman Requests Pursuant to 29 CFR Section 1904.35(b)(2) Saber-rattling does not influence our decision-making. I disagree with your interpretation, it ignores the word "relevant," ignores the word "or," and most of all ignores common sense. If an 18 year old employee worked for one day and quit, could she demand OSHA logs for the next 50 years? If your answer is yes, then your answer is silly. If your answer is https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ik=2c35811 dd3&view=pt&search=all&pemimsgid=msg-f%3A1732398227166823423&dsqt=1 &slmpl=msg-f%3A173... 4/10 8/2/22, 9;12 AM Liberty Man Law, RC. Mail - Liche Le and Said Zaman Requests Pursuant to 29 CFR Section 1904.35(b)(2) no, then you concede the right does not extend onward and forever past the period of employment. Thus, there would be a limit - as common sense dictates. James T. Jones o Attorney at L a w Jackson Lewis P.C. 400 Capitol Mall Suite 1600 Sacramento, CA 95814 Direct: (916) 288-3020 | Main: (916) 341-0404 James.Jones(3>jacksonlewis.com | www.jacksonlewis.com From: Joshua Falakassa Sent: Monday, May 9, 2022 11:03 AM To: Jones, James T. (Sacramento) ; Arash Khosrowshahi Cc: Kasra Torabi ; Asano, Kelly (Sacramento) ; Morris, Kelsey F. (Sacramento) Subject: Re: Liche Le and Said Zaman Requests Pursuant to 29 CFR Section 1904.35(b)(2) [EXTERNAL SENDER] James, Your interpretation is unreasonable as the "relevant" OSHA logs clearly refers to the "current or stored" logs which we requested (and as referred to in the same regulation.) Unlike the Labor Code, here there is no rule that pending litigation changes the employer's obligation under the statute/regulation. Can you send me any law or authority for your baseless position? I don't think so. James, enough with creating false limitations to our client's rights. Please send us the "current or stored" OSHA logs as requested without limitation to 2019. Again, your continued recalcitrance will leave us with no choice but to seek all legal remedies available. https://mail.google.corTi/mail/u/0/?ik=2c35811dd3&view=pt&search=all&permmsgid=msg-f%3A1732398227166823423&dsqt=1&simpl=msg-f%3A173... 5/10 8/2/22, 9:12 AM Liberty Man Law, RC. Mail - Liche Le and Said Zaman Requests Pursuant to 29 CFR Section 1904.35(b)(2) Thank you. Joshua Get Outlook for iOS From: Jones, James T. (Sacramento) Sent: Monday, May 9, 2022 10:49:27 AM To: Joshua Falakassa ; Arash Khosrowshahi Cc: Kasra Torabi ; Asano, Kelly (Sacramento) ; Morris, Kelsey F. (Sacramento) Subject: RE: Liche Le and Said Zaman Requests Pursuant to 29 CFR Section 1904.35(b)(2) How long into the future does he get to demand OSHA logs? For the next 20 years? The regulation says "you must give the requester a copy of the relevant OSHA Log(s)." I think my interpretation is far more reasonable than yours. Do you have law that the term "relevant OSHA Log(s)° would extend into time unrelated to a person's employment. I believe the regulation means that former employees such as your clients can get the relevant stored OSHA logs - and they will get them. As these matters are in litigation, anything outside the period of employment should be something you pursue through discovery. (An analogous example would be the Labor Code rule that a personnel file would have to be obtained through discovery once litigation commences.) I told you that we were producing the logs today. I do not agree that they are late. However, arguing about that would be academic. James T. Jones Attorney at L a w Jackson Lewis P.C. 400 Capitol Mall Suite 1600 Sacramento, CA 95814 Direct: (916) 288-3020 | Main: (916) 341-0404 James.Jones(S)jacksonlewis.com | wv>/w.jacksonlewis.com From: Joshua Falakassa Sent: Monday, May 9, 2022 8:34 AM To: Jones, James T. (Sacramento) ; Arash Khosrowshahi Cc: Kasra Torabi ; Asano, Kelly (Sacramento) ; Morris, https://mail.google.confVmail/u/0/?ik=2c35811dd3&view=pt&search=all&penTimsgid=msg-f%3A1732398227166823423&dsqt=1&simpl=msg-f%3A173... 6/10 8/2/22, 9:12 AM Liberty Man Law, RC. Mail - Liche Le and Said Zaman Requests Pursuant to 29 CFR Section 1904.35(b)(2) Kelsey F. (Sacramento) Subject: Re: Liche Le and Said Zaman Requests Pursuant to 29 CFR Section 1904.35(b)(2) [EXTERNAL SENDER] James, Your interpretation is misguided, and the production is already late. Mr. Le and Ms. Zaman are former employees who have made demands for Liqui-Box's "current" 300 Logs for the establishment they worked in. Again, there is no limitation to the date of employment and you have cited to no law or even made any reasonable argument. If you continue to create problems or fail to produce what is required under the statute, we will not hesitate to take any and all legal avenues available. Please confirm you will be sending the current 300 Logs for the Liqui-Box Sacramento establishment. Let me know if you wish to discuss. Get Outlook for iOS From: Jones, James T. (Sacramento) Sent: Monday, May 9, 2022 8:26:51 AM To: Joshua Falakassa ; Arash Khosrowshahi Cc: Kasra Torabi ; Asano, Kelly (Sacramento) ; Morris, Kelsey F. (Sacramento) Subject: RE: Liche Le and Said Zaman Requests Pursuant to 29 CFR Section 1904.35(b)(2) Apologies, You are correct. I did not see your email from May 5 until now. I am responding here to your comment on what logs are due. I think the regulation limits the production to the period that is "relevant." It would make no sense to interpret it to mean that a former employee can continue to demand logs long after their employment ended. I believe "relevant" must mean those logs related to the employment period at issue, which in this case ends in 2019. I will be providing those today. James T. Jones o Attorney at Law Jackson Lewis P.C. 400 Capitol Mall Suite 1600 Sacramento, CA 95814 Direct: (916) 288-3020 | Main: (916) 341-0404 James.Jones@.jacksonlewis.com | www.jacksonlewis.com From: Joshua Falakassa Sent: Monday, May 9, 2022 8:16 AM To: Jones, James T. (Sacramento) ; Arash Khosrowshahi Cc: Kasra Torabi ; Asano, Kelly (Sacramento) ; Morris, Kelsey F. (Sacramento) Subject: Re: Liche Le and Said Zaman Requests Pursuant to 29 CFR Section 1904.35(b)(2) [EXTERNAL SENDER] James, Thanks, but you did receive Ms. Zaman's authorization, which was sent on May 5. Get Outlook for iOS From: Jones, James T. (Sacramento) Sent: Monday, May 9, 2022 8:14:04 AM https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ik=2c35811 dd3&view=pt&search=all&pennmsgid=msg-f%3A1732398227166823423&dsqt=1 &simpl=msg-f%3A173... 7/10 8/2/22, 9:12 AM Liberty Man Law, RC. Mail - Liche Le and Said Zaman Requests Pursuant to 29 CFR Section 1904.35(b)(2) To: Arash Khosrowshahi Cc: Joshua Falakassa ; Kasra Torabi ; Asano, Kelly (Sacramento) ; Morris, Kelsey F. (Sacramento) Subject: RE: Liche Le and Said Zaman Requests Pursuant to 29 CFR Section 1904.35(b)(2) Hello Ash, We received the written authorization from Mr. Le on Friday. So I believe they are actually due today. We did not receive an authorization for Ms. Zaman, but the logs we will be providing today would be the same for her anyway. I will be providing them today. James T. Jones o Attorney at Law J a c k s o n Lewis P.C. 400 Capitol Mall Suite 1600 Sacramento, CA 95814 Direct: (916) 288-3020 | Main: (916) 341-0404 James.Jones(3!jacksonlewis.com | www.jacksonlewis.com From: Arash Khosrowshahi Sent: Monday, May 9, 2022 8:00 AM To: Jones, James T. (Sacramento) Cc: Joshua Falakassa ; Kasra Torabi ; Asano, Kelly (Sacramento) ; Morris, Kelsey F. (Sacramento) Subject: Re: Liche Le and Said Zaman Requests Pursuant to 29 CFR Section 1904.35(b)(2) [EXTERNAL SENDER] Hi James, Please provide us an update on producing the OSHA 300 Logs, which were due Friday, May 6, 2022. Regards, Arash "Ash" Khosrowshahi, Esq. (he/him) Liberty Man Law, P.C. 1010 F Street, Ste. 300 Sacramento, CA 95814 Tel.: (916) 573-0469 Fax: (866) 700-0787 ash@llbertymanlaw.com www.libertymanlaw.com "The victorious win and then go to war, the defeated go to war and then seek to win." ~ Sun Tzu CONFIDENTIAL NOTICE: This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the sender. This message contains confidential information and Is intended only for the individual named. I f y o u are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e- mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ik=2c35811 dd3&view=pt&search=all&permmsgid=msg-f%3A1732398227166823423&dsqt=1 &simpl=msg-f%3A173... 8/10 8/2/22, 9:12 AM Liberty Man Law, RC. Mail - Liche Le and Said Zaman Requests Pursuant to 29 CFR Section 1904.35(b)(2) On Fri, May 6, 2022 at 11:31 AM Jones, James T. (Sacramento) wrote: Thank you Josh. James T. Jones o Attomey at Law Jackson Lewis P.C. 400 Capitol Mall Suite 1600 Sacramento, CA 95814 Direct: (916) 288-3020 | Main: (916) 341-0404 James. Jonestgijacksonlewis.com | www.jacksonlewis.com From: Joshua Falakassa Sent: Thursday, May 5, 2022 6:45 PM To: Jones, James T. (Sacramento) Cc: Arash Khosrowshahi ; Kasra Torabi ; Asano, Kelly (Sacramento) ; Morris, Kelsey F. (Sacramento) Subject: Re: Liche Le and Said Zaman Requests Pursuant to 29 CFR Section 1904.35(b)(2) [EXTERNAL SENDER] James, Attached is the Authorization Form for Mr Le. Thank you, Joshua Get Outlook for iOS From: Joshua Falakassa Sent: Thursday, May 5, 2022 4:07:07 PM To: Jones, James T. (Sacramento) Cc: Arash Khosrowshahi ; Kasra Torabi ; Asano, Kelly (Sacramento) ; Morris, Kelsey F. (Sacramento) Subject: Re: Liche Le and Said Zaman Requests Pursuant to 29 CFR Section 1904.35(b)(2) James, Please see attached signed authorization form for Ms. Zaman. Per OSHA's standards under 29 USC 1904.35(b)(2)(iii): "When an employee, former employee, personal representative, or authorized employee representative asks for copies of your current or stored OSHA 300 Log(s) for an establishment the employee or former employee has worked in, you must give the requester a copy of the relevant OSHA 300 Log(s) by the end of the next business day." As you can see, the employee is entitled to "your current or stored" OSHA 300 Logs, and there is NO limitation in the regulation as to the date employment ended. Indeed, a "former employee" is explicitly included and is entitled to the "current or stored" logs. Please get back to us promptly. Thank you, Joshua Falakassa https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ik=2c35811 dd3&view=pt&search=all&permmsgid=msg-f%3A1732398227166823423&dsqt=1 &slmpl=msg-f%3A173... 9/10 8/2/22, 9:12 AM Liberty Man Law, RC. Mail - Liche Le and Said Zaman Requests Pursuant to 29 CFR Section 1904.35(b)(2) From: Jones, James T. (Sacramento) Sent: Thursday, May 5, 2022 2:36 PM To: Joshua Falakassa Cc: Arash Khosrowshahi; Kasra Torabi; Asano, Kelly (Sacramento); Moms, Kelsey F. (Sacramento) Subject: RE: Liche Le and Said Zaman Requests Pursuant to 29 CFR Section 1904.35(b)(2) Hello Josh, I have a couple of questions. First, can you please provide the written authorizations we need from Ms. Zaman and Mr. Le. I noted under the regulation that we can provide the information to an attorney for a deceased or incapacitated former employee, but need the written authorizations othenvise. I do not mean to be overiy formal about this, but because there are privacy issues related to releasing records with employee names and injury information, we have to do this in strict compliance with the regulations. Also, because both Plaintiffs were separated from employment in 2019, we believe they are entitled to information only through that year. Are you aware of any authority that they are entitled to reports that do not relate to their employment periods? [cid:image832345.png@F75E9BC8.12443DBB] James T Jones Attorney at Law Jackson Lewis P.C. 400 Capitol Mall Suite 1600 Sacramento, CA 95814 Direct: (916) 288-3020 | Main: (916) 341-0404 James.Jones@jacksonlewis.com | www.jacksonlewis.com —Original M e s s a g e — From: Joshua Falakassa Sent: Tuesday, May 3, 2022 5:09 PM To: Jones, James T. (Sacramento) Cc: Arash Khosrowshahi ; Kasra Torabi ; Asano, Kelly (Sacramento) ; Morris, Kelsey F. (Sacramento) Subject: Liche Le and Said Zaman Requests Pursuant to 29 CFR Section 1904.35(b)(2) [EXTERNAL SENDER] Dear Mr Jones, Please see the attached correspondence from my office. Your prompt attention is required. Best Regards, Joshua Falakassa https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ik=2c35811 dd3&view=pt&search=all&pemimsgid=msg-f%3A1732398227166823423&dsqt=1 &simpl=msg-f%3A17... 10/10 EXHIBIT C OSHA's Form 300A ip^.ovzm Year 20^ 6_ Summary of Work'-Related Injuries and Illnesses UrS. Depariment of Labor 0««i—llnwl a « M r aod H M W AOnkiMraUm OMB mx ISIMin MesteblbhmBnts mmed tffW 1904 mat caijipl^ ft) vsfdy (fiat (to OTdritefiraoofnpla/B anrf aocusfs AiTftro oonipteOh(7 (AtigltotogioowitffwhalMiAja/ene^syou/riaf^s^A^ TftenmftBltoMabtetmKnnN^sunyouVeaddBc/ltaentAsfhm //yau £stabHsAiiieiit fnTonnatlon la(lnocases,mlle'0.' Crriplqee^tanwrenviA^ses;ancf(MriBpres9nlBlta^ ThQ'atofmJMIM access (offie05Hllft»m 30) or ItnrMUUHnwalaim* H b a y ^0<*-, equhafent. See 29 Cffl f S(M.3% OS>i4'8 iBoanftsep^ Wufjiber o f C a s e s . Ibtal number of Ibtal nombcT of Ibtal number of Iblal nmnber of loduAr denrfptioo (e^.. Jl£njf/&c&uv ^ffurpr omJb (fsiba) deaths cases with days cases ^di job other recordable awayfromwork transfer or restricdon cases Stinlinl ladmaU dmifialiog (SIC), iTfawmi (e^, J7J5) (Q) (H) OR Nonh Aimricm ladnitriil Ctsaifiotion (NAICS), Iffawnn (a.^ 33<212) Uw-nher of Days Ibtal number of days away Ibtal number of days ofJob Eniplevmeiit Inrermatlon (jTiwibiithiwAaijigna^ m ifa from work transfer or restricdon WMHaamlinlcdi^ilibpi^aalliiait.) 'Ho Annua) (K» Ibtal bouts worked al) emptojret Izst year fiijory and Illness Types Ibtal number of.. Knowingly laliifylng tfalj document may result In B fine. (M) (1) Injuries (4) Fbisonings (5) Hearing loss docoroent and that to the but of my (2) Skin disorders accurate, and conjslete. (B) All other illnesses P) Respiratory conations Post Ihfs SwiWianr page hotn Pebmary f te April 30 of tbe irear fWlotirfiig Vie year eo*ai«( b r Ihe tann. ftblk RpovOnjf burte Tar Ibli collKOon er hbraiallm b ciUnntal lo wemgo SB mlnuhi fmr mpoiut, tnctMUng UmB lo nvlow Iho ImtnicUoiu, Icvth •nd gillier UM diU nctdcd. mi eemplele md Rvtew Oio eoHedlon ortaTomulIoa Penons ire nol leqabtd lo nipond le OH oUedlon cf lnfoin»Uon unten II dbpl^ • cumnllf ivlld OMB conlral monbcr. Vim bm cenininli «beul QicR odrnttei OC im elher a^Bcfi of (hu doU cvQtcllaQ, Qonlac^ WtajMngten, DO Kma Do nol Knd OM conptclol rernii (o Ihb oflln OSHA's Fonn 30QA ioi1t.related Injuries and illnesses OSHA^ fiaoonftftpfrig ndM Attention: This tbrm contains Information relating to employee health and must t>e used In a manner O S H A ' s F o r m 300 (Rev. 01/2004) that protects (tie confidentiality of emptoyees to the Year 2017 extent possible while the information is being used Log of Work-Related Injuries and Illnesses for occupational safety and health purposes. U.S. Department of Labor OccupaUonal Safety and Health Administretion You must record information about every woi1i.telated In{u7 or Illness tiat Involves loss of consdoiisness. rsstdcled work activity or job transfer, days away fiom wodi, or medical treatment beyond SrsI aid. You must dso record slgnWcant work^elatad injuries and iHnessss thai are diagnosed by a physidsn or lioensed healdi care prafesskmal. You musl also record »ork.related Form approved OMB no. 1218.0178 Injuiles and illnesses that meat eny of the spedlic recording criteria Ested in 2g CFR 1S04.8 Ihicugh 19D4.1Z Feal free to use Iwo Unes for a single case if you need lo. You musl complete Establishment name LIqul-Box an inJuiy and OIness Incident report (OSHA Form 301) or equivalent fonn fbr each Injury or illness recorded cn this Ibnn. if you're not sure wheths a case is recsnlable. call your local OSHA office kir help. City Sacramento State California Describe the case Classify the case Enter ttw number of (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) CHECK ONLY ONE box fbr each case based on days the injured or ill Check Ihe 'Injury* column or choose one type of Case Empkiyee's Mame Job TWe (e.g., Date of Where the event occurred Describe Injury or illness, parts of body affected, and the most serious outcome for ttiat case: worker was: Illness: No. Welder) injury or (e.g. Loading dock north object/substance that directiy injured or made person onset of end) III (e.g. Second degree bums on right foreann from (M) Illness