Preview
1 KENNETH R. VAN VLECK, State Bar No. 168313
E. DAVID MARKS, State Bar No. 136567
2 GCA LAW PARTNERS LLP
2570 W. El Camino Real, Suite 400
3 Mountain View, CA 94040
Telephone: (650) 428-3900
4 Facsimile: (650) 428-3901
5 Attorneys for Defendants BOGDAN RYCZKOWSKI,
And AGPA, LLC
6
7
8 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
9 COUNTY OF SAN MATEO
10 UNLIMITED JURISDICTION
11
12 ZHI HU, an individual No. 23-CIV-02311
13 Plaintiff,
14 vs. BOGDAN RYCZKOWSKI and AGPA,
LLC’s SEPARATE STATEMENT IN
15 BOGDAN RYCZKOWSKI, an individual; OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR
AGPA, LLC, a California limited liability SUMMARY JUDGMENT
16 company; and DOES 1 through 10 inclusive
17 Defendants Action filed: May 22, 2023
Trial date: None
18
19
20 Date: May 17, 2024
Time: 9:00 am
21 Dept.: 24
22 Judge: Hon. Jeffrey R. Finigan
23
24
25 Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 437c, subdivision (b), and
26 California Rule of Court 3.1350, Defendants Bogdan Ryczkowski and AGPA, LLC
27 (“Defendants”)respectfully submits this Separate Statement of Undisputed Material
28 Facts, together with references to supporting evidence, in support of its Motion for
SEPARATE STATEMENT OPPOSITION TO -0-
GCA Law Partners LLP
2570 W. El Camino Real, Suite 400 MSJ - CASE NO: 23-CIV-02311
Mountain View, CA 94040
(650)428-3900
1 Summary Judgment or, in the Alternative, Summary Adjudication:
2 Moving Parties’ Issue No. 1: Plaintiff Zhi Hu’s First Cause of Action: Breach of
3 Contract
4
5
UMF Moving Parties’ Undisputed Opposing Party’s Responses and
6 No. Material Facts and Supporting Supporting Evidence
Evidence
7
1. Plaintiff ZHI HU entered into a loan Not Disputed
8
agreement, loaning $130,000.00, to
9 defendants BOGDAN RYCZKOWSKI
and AGPA, LLC, a California
10 Limited Liability, Co., evidenced by
11 executed promissory note date
April 20, 2022.
12
13
Dec. ZHI HU ¶3, Lines 27-28, Line 1
14
Ex. “1” Page 3
15
16
17 2. Terms of the loan: unsecured loan, Disputed. The terms of the note were
no prepayment penalties, 0% changed by oral agreement, supported
18 interest, must be paid back due in by additional consideration.
19 full in 65 days, approx. 6/27/2022,
or within 5 days of closing on 2256 Plaintiff requested that Defendants
20 Poplar Avenue East Palo Alto, CA perform construction work on a home
home purchase, sale closed on Plaintiff was purchasing , with an
21 estimated value of $350,000. Plaintiff
9/6/2022.
22 loaned Defendants $130,000 to pay for
Dec. ZHI HU ¶4, Line 2-5 materials and labor for that work, with
23 the understanding that if escrow
closed on the purchase, the note would
24 be forgiven.
Ex. “1” Page 3
25
Defendants performed the work,
26 escrow closed, but Plaintiff did not
forgive the loan, as agreed.
27
Declaration of Bogdon Ryczkowski,
28
paragraphs 2 through 13.
SEPARATE STATEMENT OPPOSITION TO -1-
GCA Law Partners LLP
2570 W. El Camino Real, Suite 400 MSJ - CASE NO: 23-CIV-02311
Mountain View, CA 94040
(650)428-3900
1
UMF Moving Parties’ Undisputed Opposing Party’s Responses and
2 No. Material Facts and Supporting Supporting Evidence
3 Evidence
4 3. On April 22, 2022, plaintiff ZHI HU Not Disputed
transferred the $130,000.00 to
5 defendants BOGDAN RYCZKOWSKI
6 and AGPZ, LLC, a California Limited
Liability, Co. by wire transfer from
7 plaintiffs bank, California Trust
Bank, to defendant bank, Polam
8 Bank CU.
9
10
Dec. ZHI HU ¶5-7, Lines 6-18
11
Ex. “2” Page 4-8
12
Ex. “3” Pages 9-10
13
14 4. Both deadlines for repayment Disputed. The terms of the note were
expired and no part of the fund changed by oral agreement, supported
15 loaned by plaintiff ZHI HU to by additional consideration.
defendants BOGDAN RYCZKOWSKI
16 Plaintiff requested that Defendants
and AGPA, LLC, a California
17 Limited Liability Co. has been paid perform construction work on a home
to date after repeated collection Plaintiff was purchasing , with an
18 attempts. estimated value of $350,000. Plaintiff
loaned Defendants $130,000 to pay for
19
materials and labor for that work, with
20 the understanding that if escrow
Dec. ZHI HU ¶8-10, Lines 19-25 closed on the purchase, the note would
21 be forgiven.
Ex. “4” Page 11-32
22 Defendants performed the work,
23 escrow closed, and so the note was
fully paid, under this oral modification.
24
Declaration of Bogdon Ryczkowski,
25 paragraphs 2 through 13.
26
5. Plaintiff ZHI HU made repeated Not Disputed that Plaintiff made
27 attempts to collect, some evidence multiple threatening demands.
by text message, from defendant Disputed that money was owed.
28 phone numbers ending XXX-5892
SEPARATE STATEMENT OPPOSITION TO -2-
GCA Law Partners LLP
2570 W. El Camino Real, Suite 400 MSJ - CASE NO: 23-CIV-02311
Mountain View, CA 94040
(650)428-3900
1
UMF Moving Parties’ Undisputed Opposing Party’s Responses and
2 No. Material Facts and Supporting Supporting Evidence
3 Evidence
and plaintiffs phone number
4 ending XXX-3646. Declaration of Bogdon Ryczkowski,
paragraphs 2 through 13.
5 Dec. ZHI HU ¶11-116
6
Ex. “4” Page 11-32
7
6. Defendants BOGDAN RYCZKOWSKI Disputed. Objection to Evidence.
8 and AGPA, LLC, a California
Limited Liability Co. repeated via “Evidence that a person has, in
9 compromise or from humanitarian
text message admits owing plaintiff
10 ZHI HU the loan funds totaling motives, furnished or offered or
$130,000.00 and makes offers to promised to furnish money or any
11 pay and settle. other thing, act, or service to another
who has sustained or will sustain or
12 Dec. ZHI HU ¶11-16 claims that he or she has sustained or
13 will sustain loss or damage, as well as
Ex. “4” Page 11-32 any conduct or statements made in
14 negotiation thereof, is inadmissible to
prove his or her liability for the loss or
15
damage or any part of it.”
16
Cal. Evid. Code § 1152
17
7. Defendants BOGDAN RYCZKOWSKI Disputed.
18 and AGPA, LLC, a California
Limited Liability Co. owe plaintiff Defendants owe no money to Plaintiff
19
ZHI HU $130,000.00 and no sum to and the entire note has been repaid, as
20 date has been paid. agreed, by performance of $350,000 in
construction work for Plaintiff.
21
Declaration of Bogdon Ryczkowski,
22 Dec. ZHI HU ¶1-16 paragraphs 2 through 13.
23
Ex. “1-4” Pages 2-32
24
25
ADDITIONAL MATERIAL FACTS THAT PRECLUDE SUMMARY
26 JUDGMENT ON ISSUE NO. 1
27 Defendants submits the following statement of additional material facts that
28 raise a triable issue as to issue no. 1—whether the claim for intentional interference
SEPARATE STATEMENT OPPOSITION TO -3-
GCA Law Partners LLP
2570 W. El Camino Real, Suite 400 MSJ - CASE NO: 23-CIV-02311
Mountain View, CA 94040
(650)428-3900
1 with contractual relations is time barred—together with references to supporting
2 evidence.
3 Issue No. 1: Defendants raised .
4
AMF Additional Disputed Facts Supporting Evidence
5 No.
6 1. Bogdon Ryczkowski is a licensed general Declaration of Bogdon
contractor, license number 799440 Ryczkowski para. 1
7
8 2. On April 5, 2022, AGPA, LLC, purchased Declaration of Bogdon
2256 Poplar Ave., East Palo Alto, CA Ryczkowski para. 2
9 intending to make minor upgrades – such
as paint and carpet – and flip the home.
10
11 3. Before any work had been done, Mr. Hu Declaration of Bogdon
offered to purchase the property for Ryczkowski para. 3
12 $1,250,000, contingent upon an appraisal
with a VA lender
13
14 4. Plaintiff asked Defendants to remodel the Declaration of Bogdon
house, inside out including front and back Ryczkowski para. 4
15 landscaping. On April 15, 2022, Mr. Hu
executed a scope sheet identifying the
16 things to be performed in the property. A
17 copy of the scope of work Mr. Hu
requested in writing is attached to Bogdon
18 Ryczkowski’s declaration as Exhibit A.
19 5. This work was not part of the purchase Declaration of Bogdon
20 contract, but defendants agreed to perform Ryczkowski para. 5
the work, without seeking additional
21 compensation
22 6. Defendants could no longer do this as a Declaration of Bogdon
23 quick flip in a hot real estate market, as it Ryczkowski para. 6.
required permits and inspections.
24
7. But because of the unprecedented drop in Declaration of Bogdon
25 market value because of COVID, the Ryczkowski para. 7
26 property was worth less at close of escrow.
Mr Hu lowered his price to $ 1.1 MM,
27 saying he would otherwise demand his
money back
28
SEPARATE STATEMENT OPPOSITION TO -4-
GCA Law Partners LLP
2570 W. El Camino Real, Suite 400 MSJ - CASE NO: 23-CIV-02311
Mountain View, CA 94040
(650)428-3900
1
8. Mr. Hu’s requested upgrades to the Declaration of Bogdon
2 Property comprised: Ryczkowski para. 8
3
Upgrading the flooring throughout.
4
Custom door and placement.
5
Re-purchase and re-installation of the
6 front door to swing to the opposite side.
7
Custom thermostat for HVAC system.
8
Custom door locks for interior and
9 exterior.
10 Custom shower glass.
11
Custom fabrication of stone vs
12 prefabricated for countertop and island
13 Custom backsplash design.
14 Custom shower enclosure order and
15 installation.
16 Custom tub enclosure.
17 Custom black fixtures for bathroom
shower tub faucets.
18
19 Custom floating vanity.
20 Custom exterior motion lights with WIFI
capacity.
21
Custom Ring doorbell.
22
23 Custom pendant lights.
24 Running new reverse osmosis line for
refrigeration.
25
New windows purchase and configuration
26 done according to buyers’ requirements.
27
Custom fencing on the right side of the
28 property and modification of the rest
SEPARATE STATEMENT OPPOSITION TO -5-
GCA Law Partners LLP
2570 W. El Camino Real, Suite 400 MSJ - CASE NO: 23-CIV-02311
Mountain View, CA 94040
(650)428-3900
1 beyond original agreement.
2 Custom color Stucco wall on right side of
3 property.
4 Trimming of exterior trees additional to
the original requests.
5
Installed new bark for landscaping.
6
7 New tankless water heater installation.
8 9. The upgrades requested by Mr. Hu were Declaration of Bogdon
valued at approximately $350,000. Ryczkowski para. 9
9
10. Defendants could not afford to perform Declaration of Bogdon
10
this work, as the materials and labor Ryczkowski para. 10
11 would cost well over $130,000. Mr. Hu
offered to “loan” the $130,000 to AGPA,
12 LLC for materials and labor, saying that if
13 the work was performed and escrow
closed, the loan would be forgiven.
14
11. If escrow did not close, AGPA, LLC would Declaration of Bogdon
15 retain ownership of the property and Ryczkowski para. 11
would repay the loan
16
17 12. Defendants performed all the work on the Declaration of Bogdon
scope sheet, and escrow closed and the Ryczkowski para. 12
18 property sold on September 9, 2022
19 13. Although Mr. Hu received the Property Declaration of Bogdon
20 with approximately $350,000 of upgrades Ryczkowski para. 13
he did not pay for, Mr. Hu did not forgive
21 the $130,000 loan as agreed.
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
SEPARATE STATEMENT OPPOSITION TO -6-
GCA Law Partners LLP
2570 W. El Camino Real, Suite 400 MSJ - CASE NO: 23-CIV-02311
Mountain View, CA 94040
(650)428-3900
1 Dated: April 30, 2024 GCA LAW PARTNERS LLP
2
3
By
4
KENNETH R. VAN VLECK
5 Attorneys for Defendants
BOGDAN RYCZKOWSKI,
6 And AGPA, LLC
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
SEPARATE STATEMENT OPPOSITION TO -7-
GCA Law Partners LLP
2570 W. El Camino Real, Suite 400 MSJ - CASE NO: 23-CIV-02311
Mountain View, CA 94040
(650)428-3900
Preview
1 KENNETH R. VAN VLECK, State Bar No. 168313 E. DAVID MARKS, State Bar No. 136567 2 GCA LAW PARTNERS LLP 2570 W. El Camino Real, Suite 400 3 Mountain View, CA 94040 Telephone: (650) 428-3900 4 Facsimile: (650) 428-3901 5 Attorneys for Defendants BOGDAN RYCZKOWSKI, And AGPA, LLC 6 7 8 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 9 COUNTY OF SAN MATEO 10 UNLIMITED JURISDICTION 11 12 ZHI HU, an individual No. 23-CIV-02311 13 Plaintiff, 14 vs. BOGDAN RYCZKOWSKI and AGPA, LLC’s SEPARATE STATEMENT IN 15 BOGDAN RYCZKOWSKI, an individual; OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR AGPA, LLC, a California limited liability SUMMARY JUDGMENT 16 company; and DOES 1 through 10 inclusive 17 Defendants Action filed: May 22, 2023 Trial date: None 18 19 20 Date: May 17, 2024 Time: 9:00 am 21 Dept.: 24 22 Judge: Hon. Jeffrey R. Finigan 23 24 25 Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 437c, subdivision (b), and 26 California Rule of Court 3.1350, Defendants Bogdan Ryczkowski and AGPA, LLC 27 (“Defendants”)respectfully submits this Separate Statement of Undisputed Material 28 Facts, together with references to supporting evidence, in support of its Motion for SEPARATE STATEMENT OPPOSITION TO -0- GCA Law Partners LLP 2570 W. El Camino Real, Suite 400 MSJ - CASE NO: 23-CIV-02311 Mountain View, CA 94040 (650)428-3900 1 Summary Judgment or, in the Alternative, Summary Adjudication: 2 Moving Parties’ Issue No. 1: Plaintiff Zhi Hu’s First Cause of Action: Breach of 3 Contract 4 5 UMF Moving Parties’ Undisputed Opposing Party’s Responses and 6 No. Material Facts and Supporting Supporting Evidence Evidence 7 1. Plaintiff ZHI HU entered into a loan Not Disputed 8 agreement, loaning $130,000.00, to 9 defendants BOGDAN RYCZKOWSKI and AGPA, LLC, a California 10 Limited Liability, Co., evidenced by 11 executed promissory note date April 20, 2022. 12 13 Dec. ZHI HU ¶3, Lines 27-28, Line 1 14 Ex. “1” Page 3 15 16 17 2. Terms of the loan: unsecured loan, Disputed. The terms of the note were no prepayment penalties, 0% changed by oral agreement, supported 18 interest, must be paid back due in by additional consideration. 19 full in 65 days, approx. 6/27/2022, or within 5 days of closing on 2256 Plaintiff requested that Defendants 20 Poplar Avenue East Palo Alto, CA perform construction work on a home home purchase, sale closed on Plaintiff was purchasing , with an 21 estimated value of $350,000. Plaintiff 9/6/2022. 22 loaned Defendants $130,000 to pay for Dec. ZHI HU ¶4, Line 2-5 materials and labor for that work, with 23 the understanding that if escrow closed on the purchase, the note would 24 be forgiven. Ex. “1” Page 3 25 Defendants performed the work, 26 escrow closed, but Plaintiff did not forgive the loan, as agreed. 27 Declaration of Bogdon Ryczkowski, 28 paragraphs 2 through 13. SEPARATE STATEMENT OPPOSITION TO -1- GCA Law Partners LLP 2570 W. El Camino Real, Suite 400 MSJ - CASE NO: 23-CIV-02311 Mountain View, CA 94040 (650)428-3900 1 UMF Moving Parties’ Undisputed Opposing Party’s Responses and 2 No. Material Facts and Supporting Supporting Evidence 3 Evidence 4 3. On April 22, 2022, plaintiff ZHI HU Not Disputed transferred the $130,000.00 to 5 defendants BOGDAN RYCZKOWSKI 6 and AGPZ, LLC, a California Limited Liability, Co. by wire transfer from 7 plaintiffs bank, California Trust Bank, to defendant bank, Polam 8 Bank CU. 9 10 Dec. ZHI HU ¶5-7, Lines 6-18 11 Ex. “2” Page 4-8 12 Ex. “3” Pages 9-10 13 14 4. Both deadlines for repayment Disputed. The terms of the note were expired and no part of the fund changed by oral agreement, supported 15 loaned by plaintiff ZHI HU to by additional consideration. defendants BOGDAN RYCZKOWSKI 16 Plaintiff requested that Defendants and AGPA, LLC, a California 17 Limited Liability Co. has been paid perform construction work on a home to date after repeated collection Plaintiff was purchasing , with an 18 attempts. estimated value of $350,000. Plaintiff loaned Defendants $130,000 to pay for 19 materials and labor for that work, with 20 the understanding that if escrow Dec. ZHI HU ¶8-10, Lines 19-25 closed on the purchase, the note would 21 be forgiven. Ex. “4” Page 11-32 22 Defendants performed the work, 23 escrow closed, and so the note was fully paid, under this oral modification. 24 Declaration of Bogdon Ryczkowski, 25 paragraphs 2 through 13. 26 5. Plaintiff ZHI HU made repeated Not Disputed that Plaintiff made 27 attempts to collect, some evidence multiple threatening demands. by text message, from defendant Disputed that money was owed. 28 phone numbers ending XXX-5892 SEPARATE STATEMENT OPPOSITION TO -2- GCA Law Partners LLP 2570 W. El Camino Real, Suite 400 MSJ - CASE NO: 23-CIV-02311 Mountain View, CA 94040 (650)428-3900 1 UMF Moving Parties’ Undisputed Opposing Party’s Responses and 2 No. Material Facts and Supporting Supporting Evidence 3 Evidence and plaintiffs phone number 4 ending XXX-3646. Declaration of Bogdon Ryczkowski, paragraphs 2 through 13. 5 Dec. ZHI HU ¶11-116 6 Ex. “4” Page 11-32 7 6. Defendants BOGDAN RYCZKOWSKI Disputed. Objection to Evidence. 8 and AGPA, LLC, a California Limited Liability Co. repeated via “Evidence that a person has, in 9 compromise or from humanitarian text message admits owing plaintiff 10 ZHI HU the loan funds totaling motives, furnished or offered or $130,000.00 and makes offers to promised to furnish money or any 11 pay and settle. other thing, act, or service to another who has sustained or will sustain or 12 Dec. ZHI HU ¶11-16 claims that he or she has sustained or 13 will sustain loss or damage, as well as Ex. “4” Page 11-32 any conduct or statements made in 14 negotiation thereof, is inadmissible to prove his or her liability for the loss or 15 damage or any part of it.” 16 Cal. Evid. Code § 1152 17 7. Defendants BOGDAN RYCZKOWSKI Disputed. 18 and AGPA, LLC, a California Limited Liability Co. owe plaintiff Defendants owe no money to Plaintiff 19 ZHI HU $130,000.00 and no sum to and the entire note has been repaid, as 20 date has been paid. agreed, by performance of $350,000 in construction work for Plaintiff. 21 Declaration of Bogdon Ryczkowski, 22 Dec. ZHI HU ¶1-16 paragraphs 2 through 13. 23 Ex. “1-4” Pages 2-32 24 25 ADDITIONAL MATERIAL FACTS THAT PRECLUDE SUMMARY 26 JUDGMENT ON ISSUE NO. 1 27 Defendants submits the following statement of additional material facts that 28 raise a triable issue as to issue no. 1—whether the claim for intentional interference SEPARATE STATEMENT OPPOSITION TO -3- GCA Law Partners LLP 2570 W. El Camino Real, Suite 400 MSJ - CASE NO: 23-CIV-02311 Mountain View, CA 94040 (650)428-3900 1 with contractual relations is time barred—together with references to supporting 2 evidence. 3 Issue No. 1: Defendants raised . 4 AMF Additional Disputed Facts Supporting Evidence 5 No. 6 1. Bogdon Ryczkowski is a licensed general Declaration of Bogdon contractor, license number 799440 Ryczkowski para. 1 7 8 2. On April 5, 2022, AGPA, LLC, purchased Declaration of Bogdon 2256 Poplar Ave., East Palo Alto, CA Ryczkowski para. 2 9 intending to make minor upgrades – such as paint and carpet – and flip the home. 10 11 3. Before any work had been done, Mr. Hu Declaration of Bogdon offered to purchase the property for Ryczkowski para. 3 12 $1,250,000, contingent upon an appraisal with a VA lender 13 14 4. Plaintiff asked Defendants to remodel the Declaration of Bogdon house, inside out including front and back Ryczkowski para. 4 15 landscaping. On April 15, 2022, Mr. Hu executed a scope sheet identifying the 16 things to be performed in the property. A 17 copy of the scope of work Mr. Hu requested in writing is attached to Bogdon 18 Ryczkowski’s declaration as Exhibit A. 19 5. This work was not part of the purchase Declaration of Bogdon 20 contract, but defendants agreed to perform Ryczkowski para. 5 the work, without seeking additional 21 compensation 22 6. Defendants could no longer do this as a Declaration of Bogdon 23 quick flip in a hot real estate market, as it Ryczkowski para. 6. required permits and inspections. 24 7. But because of the unprecedented drop in Declaration of Bogdon 25 market value because of COVID, the Ryczkowski para. 7 26 property was worth less at close of escrow. Mr Hu lowered his price to $ 1.1 MM, 27 saying he would otherwise demand his money back 28 SEPARATE STATEMENT OPPOSITION TO -4- GCA Law Partners LLP 2570 W. El Camino Real, Suite 400 MSJ - CASE NO: 23-CIV-02311 Mountain View, CA 94040 (650)428-3900 1 8. Mr. Hu’s requested upgrades to the Declaration of Bogdon 2 Property comprised: Ryczkowski para. 8 3 Upgrading the flooring throughout. 4 Custom door and placement. 5 Re-purchase and re-installation of the 6 front door to swing to the opposite side. 7 Custom thermostat for HVAC system. 8 Custom door locks for interior and 9 exterior. 10 Custom shower glass. 11 Custom fabrication of stone vs 12 prefabricated for countertop and island 13 Custom backsplash design. 14 Custom shower enclosure order and 15 installation. 16 Custom tub enclosure. 17 Custom black fixtures for bathroom shower tub faucets. 18 19 Custom floating vanity. 20 Custom exterior motion lights with WIFI capacity. 21 Custom Ring doorbell. 22 23 Custom pendant lights. 24 Running new reverse osmosis line for refrigeration. 25 New windows purchase and configuration 26 done according to buyers’ requirements. 27 Custom fencing on the right side of the 28 property and modification of the rest SEPARATE STATEMENT OPPOSITION TO -5- GCA Law Partners LLP 2570 W. El Camino Real, Suite 400 MSJ - CASE NO: 23-CIV-02311 Mountain View, CA 94040 (650)428-3900 1 beyond original agreement. 2 Custom color Stucco wall on right side of 3 property. 4 Trimming of exterior trees additional to the original requests. 5 Installed new bark for landscaping. 6 7 New tankless water heater installation. 8 9. The upgrades requested by Mr. Hu were Declaration of Bogdon valued at approximately $350,000. Ryczkowski para. 9 9 10. Defendants could not afford to perform Declaration of Bogdon 10 this work, as the materials and labor Ryczkowski para. 10 11 would cost well over $130,000. Mr. Hu offered to “loan” the $130,000 to AGPA, 12 LLC for materials and labor, saying that if 13 the work was performed and escrow closed, the loan would be forgiven. 14 11. If escrow did not close, AGPA, LLC would Declaration of Bogdon 15 retain ownership of the property and Ryczkowski para. 11 would repay the loan 16 17 12. Defendants performed all the work on the Declaration of Bogdon scope sheet, and escrow closed and the Ryczkowski para. 12 18 property sold on September 9, 2022 19 13. Although Mr. Hu received the Property Declaration of Bogdon 20 with approximately $350,000 of upgrades Ryczkowski para. 13 he did not pay for, Mr. Hu did not forgive 21 the $130,000 loan as agreed. 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 SEPARATE STATEMENT OPPOSITION TO -6- GCA Law Partners LLP 2570 W. El Camino Real, Suite 400 MSJ - CASE NO: 23-CIV-02311 Mountain View, CA 94040 (650)428-3900 1 Dated: April 30, 2024 GCA LAW PARTNERS LLP 2 3 By 4 KENNETH R. VAN VLECK 5 Attorneys for Defendants BOGDAN RYCZKOWSKI, 6 And AGPA, LLC 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 SEPARATE STATEMENT OPPOSITION TO -7- GCA Law Partners LLP 2570 W. El Camino Real, Suite 400 MSJ - CASE NO: 23-CIV-02311 Mountain View, CA 94040 (650)428-3900