Preview
& COOPER LLP
3
os
SAN FRANCIBED, CA B4
REET
on
COOPER, WHITE
wi
ELECTRONICALLY
COOPER, WHITE & COOPER LLP
JOHN R. EPPERSON (SBN 183347) FILED
201 California Street, 17" Floor Superior Court of California,
San Francisco, California 94111 County of San Francisco
Telephone: (415) 433-1900 12/10/2015
Facsimile: (415) 433-5530 Clerk of the Court
jepperson@cewclaw.com BY:EDNALEEN JAVIER
Deputy Clerk
Attorneys for Defendant
SHAGHAL LTD.
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
JOHN MOORE, CASE NO. CGC-15-547580
Plaintiff,
SHAGHAL LTD.’S ANSWER TO
Ma COMPLAINT FOR CIVIL PENALTIES
AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
SHAGHAL LTD.; FRY’S ELECTRONICS,
INC. AND DOES 1 — 150, inclusive,
Defendants.
Defendant Shaghal Ltd. ("Defendant") hereby responds to the unverified complaint for
civil penalties and injunctive relief filed by Plaintiff John Moore as follows:
GENERAL DENIAL
Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 431.30, Defendant denies the allegations of
Plaintiff's complaint, and each cause of action, and every part thereof.
FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
As and for its first and separate affirmative defense, Defendant alleges that the Plaintiff's
complaint fails to state a cause of action against Defendant under any theory of recovery.
SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DE
NSE
As and for its second and separate affirmative defense, Defendant alleges that the products
in question do not expose consumers to di(2-ethylhexy])phthalate (“DEHP”) and, if such exposure
1
SHAGHAL LTD’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT1 || does occur, in amounts requiring a warning as specified in Title 27, Cal. Admin. Code §25601
2 THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
As and for its third and separate affirmative defense, Defendant alleges that they have not
or reproductive toxicity.
3
4 || knowingly, willfully, or intentionally exposed any individual to a chemical known to cause cancer
5
6 FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
As and for its fourth and separate affirmative defense, Defendant alleges that the claims
asserted by Plaintiff in the complaint are barred by the applicable statute of limitations, including
ec oe NK
but not limited to California Code of Civil Procedure § §337, 337.1, 337.15, 338, 339, 340 and
10 || 343.
11 FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
12 As and for its fifth and separate affirmative defense, Defendant alleges that exposure to
13 || DEHP at the levels contained in the products which are the subject of this action, if such exposure
14 || occurs, poses no observable reproductive effect at one thousand times the level in question, within
15 || the meaning of Proposition 65 and its implementing regulations.
16 SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
17 As and for its sixth and separate affirmative defense, Defendant alleges that the complaint
18 || is barred due to Plaintiff's failure to join all necessary parties to this action.
19 SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
20 As and for its seventh and separate affirmative defense, Defendant alleges that an adequate
21 || remedy at law exists for Plaintiff's claim, and that Plaintiff therefore is not entitled to injunctive
22 || relief.
23 EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
24 As and for its eighth and separate affirmative defense, Defendant alleges that Plaintiff has
25 || waived any claim against it arising out of the facts set forth in the complaint.
26 NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
27 As and for its ninth and separate affirmative defense, Defendant alleges that all conduct
28 || and activities by Defendant conformed to applicable statutes, regulations and industry standards in
COOPER, WHITE
& COOPERLLP a _ 2 a
201 oa Ponnia Seer SHAGHAL LTD’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
‘si
SAIFRANCIBCO, CA BETTY1 || effect at the time the products at issue in this action were sold.
2
3 WHEREFORE, Defendant prays for judgment as follows:
4 1, That Plaintiff take nothing by its complaint;
5 2. That judgment be entered in favor of Defendant and against Plaintiff on the
6 || complaint;
7 3, For costs of suit and attorneys fees; and,
8 4. For such other and further relief as the court deems just and proper,
10 || DATED: December 10, 2015 COOPER, WHITE & COOPER LLP
John R. Epperson |
B Attorneys for Defendant Shaghal Ltd.
1053890,1
COOPER, WHITE
& COOPER LLP a 3
7 CATORWA STREET SHAGHAL LTD’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
SROUFRANCISCO, CAATCody DA HW ke Ww NY
Nowy MY NY NY N NY SF BSB BR Be Be Be Be Be eB
YQ Aas BN = SF CBA DAH BH NY SB SS
28
COOPER, WHITE
& COOPER LLP
‘ATTORNEYS ATLAW
201 CALIFORNIA STREET
SANFRANCISCO, CA 94111-5002
PROOF OF SERVICE
lam a resident of the State of California. I am over the age of eighteen years, and not a
party to this action. My business address is 201 California Street, Seventeenth Floor, San
Francisco, CA 94111-5002.
On December 10, 2015, I served true copies of the following document(s):
SHAGHAL LTD.’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT FOR CIVIL PENALTIES AND
INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
on each of the parties listed below at the following addresses:
Brian C. Johnson, Esq. William H. Curtis, Esq.
The Chanler Group Fry’s Electronics, Inc.
2560 Ninth Street 600 E. Brokaw Road
Parker Plaza, Suite 214 San Jose, CA 95112
Berkeley, CA 94710-2565
BY MAIL: I am readily familiar with the business practice at my place of business for
collection and processing of correspondence for mailing with the United States Postal Service.
Correspondence so collected and processed is deposited with the United States Postal Service that
same day in the ordinary course of business. On the date specified above, as to each of the parties
identified in the above service list, a true copy of the above-referenced document(s) was placed for
deposit in the United States Postal Service in a sealed envelope, with postage fully prepaid; and on
that same date that envelope was placed for collection in the firm's daily mail processing center,
located at San Francisco, California following ordinary business practices.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the
foregoing is true and correct.
Executed on December 10, 2015, at San Francisco, California.
Martin Spence
10539711
Preview
& COOPER LLP 3 os SAN FRANCIBED, CA B4 REET on COOPER, WHITE wi ELECTRONICALLY COOPER, WHITE & COOPER LLP JOHN R. EPPERSON (SBN 183347) FILED 201 California Street, 17" Floor Superior Court of California, San Francisco, California 94111 County of San Francisco Telephone: (415) 433-1900 12/10/2015 Facsimile: (415) 433-5530 Clerk of the Court jepperson@cewclaw.com BY:EDNALEEN JAVIER Deputy Clerk Attorneys for Defendant SHAGHAL LTD. SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO JOHN MOORE, CASE NO. CGC-15-547580 Plaintiff, SHAGHAL LTD.’S ANSWER TO Ma COMPLAINT FOR CIVIL PENALTIES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF SHAGHAL LTD.; FRY’S ELECTRONICS, INC. AND DOES 1 — 150, inclusive, Defendants. Defendant Shaghal Ltd. ("Defendant") hereby responds to the unverified complaint for civil penalties and injunctive relief filed by Plaintiff John Moore as follows: GENERAL DENIAL Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 431.30, Defendant denies the allegations of Plaintiff's complaint, and each cause of action, and every part thereof. FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE As and for its first and separate affirmative defense, Defendant alleges that the Plaintiff's complaint fails to state a cause of action against Defendant under any theory of recovery. SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DE NSE As and for its second and separate affirmative defense, Defendant alleges that the products in question do not expose consumers to di(2-ethylhexy])phthalate (“DEHP”) and, if such exposure 1 SHAGHAL LTD’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT1 || does occur, in amounts requiring a warning as specified in Title 27, Cal. Admin. Code §25601 2 THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE As and for its third and separate affirmative defense, Defendant alleges that they have not or reproductive toxicity. 3 4 || knowingly, willfully, or intentionally exposed any individual to a chemical known to cause cancer 5 6 FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, As and for its fourth and separate affirmative defense, Defendant alleges that the claims asserted by Plaintiff in the complaint are barred by the applicable statute of limitations, including ec oe NK but not limited to California Code of Civil Procedure § §337, 337.1, 337.15, 338, 339, 340 and 10 || 343. 11 FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 12 As and for its fifth and separate affirmative defense, Defendant alleges that exposure to 13 || DEHP at the levels contained in the products which are the subject of this action, if such exposure 14 || occurs, poses no observable reproductive effect at one thousand times the level in question, within 15 || the meaning of Proposition 65 and its implementing regulations. 16 SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 17 As and for its sixth and separate affirmative defense, Defendant alleges that the complaint 18 || is barred due to Plaintiff's failure to join all necessary parties to this action. 19 SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 20 As and for its seventh and separate affirmative defense, Defendant alleges that an adequate 21 || remedy at law exists for Plaintiff's claim, and that Plaintiff therefore is not entitled to injunctive 22 || relief. 23 EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 24 As and for its eighth and separate affirmative defense, Defendant alleges that Plaintiff has 25 || waived any claim against it arising out of the facts set forth in the complaint. 26 NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 27 As and for its ninth and separate affirmative defense, Defendant alleges that all conduct 28 || and activities by Defendant conformed to applicable statutes, regulations and industry standards in COOPER, WHITE & COOPERLLP a _ 2 a 201 oa Ponnia Seer SHAGHAL LTD’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT ‘si SAIFRANCIBCO, CA BETTY1 || effect at the time the products at issue in this action were sold. 2 3 WHEREFORE, Defendant prays for judgment as follows: 4 1, That Plaintiff take nothing by its complaint; 5 2. That judgment be entered in favor of Defendant and against Plaintiff on the 6 || complaint; 7 3, For costs of suit and attorneys fees; and, 8 4. For such other and further relief as the court deems just and proper, 10 || DATED: December 10, 2015 COOPER, WHITE & COOPER LLP John R. Epperson | B Attorneys for Defendant Shaghal Ltd. 1053890,1 COOPER, WHITE & COOPER LLP a 3 7 CATORWA STREET SHAGHAL LTD’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT SROUFRANCISCO, CAATCody DA HW ke Ww NY Nowy MY NY NY N NY SF BSB BR Be Be Be Be Be eB YQ Aas BN = SF CBA DAH BH NY SB SS 28 COOPER, WHITE & COOPER LLP ‘ATTORNEYS ATLAW 201 CALIFORNIA STREET SANFRANCISCO, CA 94111-5002 PROOF OF SERVICE lam a resident of the State of California. I am over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to this action. My business address is 201 California Street, Seventeenth Floor, San Francisco, CA 94111-5002. On December 10, 2015, I served true copies of the following document(s): SHAGHAL LTD.’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT FOR CIVIL PENALTIES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF on each of the parties listed below at the following addresses: Brian C. Johnson, Esq. William H. Curtis, Esq. The Chanler Group Fry’s Electronics, Inc. 2560 Ninth Street 600 E. Brokaw Road Parker Plaza, Suite 214 San Jose, CA 95112 Berkeley, CA 94710-2565 BY MAIL: I am readily familiar with the business practice at my place of business for collection and processing of correspondence for mailing with the United States Postal Service. Correspondence so collected and processed is deposited with the United States Postal Service that same day in the ordinary course of business. On the date specified above, as to each of the parties identified in the above service list, a true copy of the above-referenced document(s) was placed for deposit in the United States Postal Service in a sealed envelope, with postage fully prepaid; and on that same date that envelope was placed for collection in the firm's daily mail processing center, located at San Francisco, California following ordinary business practices. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on December 10, 2015, at San Francisco, California. Martin Spence 10539711