On October 28, 2015 a
Conference
was filed
involving a dispute between
Chi-Kan Liu,
Li-Yuan Liu,
Patrick Lin,
Sherry Hsieh,
Yeao-Nan Hsieh,
and
Jemmy Lin,
May Lin,
Min Chou,
Patrick Lin,
Rosa Wang,
Sherry Hsieh,
for Other Petition (Not Spec) Unlimited (43)
in the District Court of Santa Clara County.
Preview
SHERRY HSIEH
52 Dunbanon Court
San Ramon, CA 94583
Tel: (408) 981-6201
Email: shinchyi@comcast.net
Pro Se Defendants
\OOO\IO\
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
10
COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA
11
UNLIMITED JURISDICTION
12
13 PATRICK LIN, Case No. 115CV287361
Plaintiffs,
14 Mandatory settlement conference statement
of the defendant
VS.
15
16 SHERRY HSIEH,
VVVVVVVVVVVVV
Date: October 17,2018
17 Defendants. Time: 1:30PM
n
.‘
Dept: 9
2‘27
18
Trial Date: October 22, 2018
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Sherry Hsieh’s oppose Plaintiff’s mandatory settlement conference statements
Page 1 of 4
Terminology
Acucomm: The name of the company that Patrick Lin founded and shut down in the yea:
2002.
Classmates: Plaintiff Patrick Lin and Defendant Sherry Hsieh’s husband are college
A
classmates. The Classmates refers to their roughly 22 college classmates.
Defendant Sherry Hsieh opposes Patrick Lin’s mandatory settlement conference statements:
\OOO\]O\LII
As following:
1. “Embezzlement” disappeared from Patrick Lin’s settlement conference statements. Based
10 on Plaintiff Patrick Lin’s amended complaint filed on February 2017, the main subject of the
11 complaint “Embezzlement”.
is Plaintiff Patrick Lin accused Defendant Sherry Hsieh of
12 publishing an email to tell his classmates that Patrick Lin embezzled his company’s funds. Based
13 on the mandatory settlement conference statement, Pattiek Lin did not mention “Embezzlement”
14
any more. Why? Because Defendant Sherry Hsieh found excellent evidence to prove that Patn'ck
15 Lin was sued by two banks for conversion from two classmates’ accusations 0f the following:
l6
Classmate Mr. Yeh Mu—Yang was the chairman of board of AcuComm and also invested
17
$200,000 in Acucomm. Mr. Yeh demanded the accounting books several times and never got
18
a chance to review the accounting books.
19
20
Classmate Mr. Thomas Tsai invested $500,000 to AcuComm and Thomas Tsai also collected
21
$500,000 from his friend to invest $500,000 to AcuComm. Based on Thomas Tsai’s
22
statements that he never has chance to review the accounting books and Patn'ck Lin collected
23
$200,000 from him as investing money in the year 2002 and afier about two months
24
AcuComm shut down operation. Thomas Tsai was very upset, he said he was misled that
25
AcuComm was running well so he invested $200,000.
26
27
2. Plaintiff Patrick Lin created some words for the accusations. For example “Thuggish” demeanor,
28
plague, mutts, “is a bitch through and through” “pig”, I do not know where these words come
Sherry Hsieh’s oppose Plaintiff‘s mandatmy settlement conference statements
Page 2 of 4
from. All those words are not on the amended complaint. I do not understand meaning of those
words and I believe that Patrick Lin did not understand those words a month ago. Afier Sherry
Hsieh talked to the Plaintiff’s attorney Jon Robb regarding the evidence in Sherry’s hand during
September 28’s deposition, Plaintiff’s changed his accusation. If he changed his accusation, this
implies that he has acknowledged that he
\OOONONUIAUJNt-d
lost.
3. Patrick Lin has no right to accuse Sherry Hsieh, even ifSherry Hsieh has said anything
regarding his son, daughter and wife. Only his son, daughter or wife can file a suit against
Sherry Hsieh. Sherry Hsieh only stated that his son, daughter and wife disgrace, dishonesty and
take advantages of Sherry Hsieh’s money.
4. Sherry Hsieh isonly responsible for her own published emails. The emails were published by
Min Chou, there Min Chou is responsible for them.
Conclusion: Defendant Patrick Lin stated that he routinely socialized with his college classmates and
gained business opportunities from classmates. Because Sherry Hsieh’s email, he no longer
socialized with classmates and lost business opportunities.
NNNNNNNNNv-‘v—‘Hv—dt—u—IHHHH
WNQMhWNHOOOOVQM&wN’—‘o
Sherry Hsieh’s husband Yeao-Nan Hsieh isalso member of his college classmates. Both Sherry
Hsieh and Yeao—Nan Hsieh assert that the only way for Patrick Lin to regain his reputation from his
classmates is to re-pay Sherry Hsieh’s $56000 loan and $220,000+ more unpaid rents, plus interests.
Classmate George Huang, he is executive of ACER Computer, used to work together with Patrick
Lin for ACER Computer and Patrick Lin is under his supervision indirectly, sent an email to
classmates including Patrick Lin and Sherry Hsieh on January 201 8 stated that the classmates
sympathy with Sherry Hsieh. He also said classmates wish to help resolve the matters with Patrick
Lin and could not help. Based on George Huang email, it isvery obvious that the Classmates are on
Sherry Hsieh’s side.
Sherry Hsieh’s oppose Plaintiff‘s mandatory settlement conference statements
Page 3 of 4
Sherry Hsieh also demands that Patrick Lin to provide proof of his income as management consulting
before November 201 5.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of State of California that the foregoing is true
and correct.
\OOO\IO\
10
11
12
MM
Date: October 16, 2018
13
14
15
16
mRRY HSIEH
17 Defendant
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Sherry Hsieh’s oppose Plaintiff‘s mandatory settlement conference statements
Page 4 of 4
Document Filed Date
October 17, 2018
Case Filing Date
October 28, 2015
Category
Other Petition (Not Spec) Unlimited (43)
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Preview
SHERRY HSIEH 52 Dunbanon Court San Ramon, CA 94583 Tel: (408) 981-6201 Email: shinchyi@comcast.net Pro Se Defendants \OOO\IO\ SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 10 COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA 11 UNLIMITED JURISDICTION 12 13 PATRICK LIN, Case No. 115CV287361 Plaintiffs, 14 Mandatory settlement conference statement of the defendant VS. 15 16 SHERRY HSIEH, VVVVVVVVVVVVV Date: October 17,2018 17 Defendants. Time: 1:30PM n .‘ Dept: 9 2‘27 18 Trial Date: October 22, 2018 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Sherry Hsieh’s oppose Plaintiff’s mandatory settlement conference statements Page 1 of 4 Terminology Acucomm: The name of the company that Patrick Lin founded and shut down in the yea: 2002. Classmates: Plaintiff Patrick Lin and Defendant Sherry Hsieh’s husband are college A classmates. The Classmates refers to their roughly 22 college classmates. Defendant Sherry Hsieh opposes Patrick Lin’s mandatory settlement conference statements: \OOO\]O\LII As following: 1. “Embezzlement” disappeared from Patrick Lin’s settlement conference statements. Based 10 on Plaintiff Patrick Lin’s amended complaint filed on February 2017, the main subject of the 11 complaint “Embezzlement”. is Plaintiff Patrick Lin accused Defendant Sherry Hsieh of 12 publishing an email to tell his classmates that Patrick Lin embezzled his company’s funds. Based 13 on the mandatory settlement conference statement, Pattiek Lin did not mention “Embezzlement” 14 any more. Why? Because Defendant Sherry Hsieh found excellent evidence to prove that Patn'ck 15 Lin was sued by two banks for conversion from two classmates’ accusations 0f the following: l6 Classmate Mr. Yeh Mu—Yang was the chairman of board of AcuComm and also invested 17 $200,000 in Acucomm. Mr. Yeh demanded the accounting books several times and never got 18 a chance to review the accounting books. 19 20 Classmate Mr. Thomas Tsai invested $500,000 to AcuComm and Thomas Tsai also collected 21 $500,000 from his friend to invest $500,000 to AcuComm. Based on Thomas Tsai’s 22 statements that he never has chance to review the accounting books and Patn'ck Lin collected 23 $200,000 from him as investing money in the year 2002 and afier about two months 24 AcuComm shut down operation. Thomas Tsai was very upset, he said he was misled that 25 AcuComm was running well so he invested $200,000. 26 27 2. Plaintiff Patrick Lin created some words for the accusations. For example “Thuggish” demeanor, 28 plague, mutts, “is a bitch through and through” “pig”, I do not know where these words come Sherry Hsieh’s oppose Plaintiff‘s mandatmy settlement conference statements Page 2 of 4 from. All those words are not on the amended complaint. I do not understand meaning of those words and I believe that Patrick Lin did not understand those words a month ago. Afier Sherry Hsieh talked to the Plaintiff’s attorney Jon Robb regarding the evidence in Sherry’s hand during September 28’s deposition, Plaintiff’s changed his accusation. If he changed his accusation, this implies that he has acknowledged that he \OOONONUIAUJNt-d lost. 3. Patrick Lin has no right to accuse Sherry Hsieh, even ifSherry Hsieh has said anything regarding his son, daughter and wife. Only his son, daughter or wife can file a suit against Sherry Hsieh. Sherry Hsieh only stated that his son, daughter and wife disgrace, dishonesty and take advantages of Sherry Hsieh’s money. 4. Sherry Hsieh isonly responsible for her own published emails. The emails were published by Min Chou, there Min Chou is responsible for them. Conclusion: Defendant Patrick Lin stated that he routinely socialized with his college classmates and gained business opportunities from classmates. Because Sherry Hsieh’s email, he no longer socialized with classmates and lost business opportunities. NNNNNNNNNv-‘v—‘Hv—dt—u—IHHHH WNQMhWNHOOOOVQM&wN’—‘o Sherry Hsieh’s husband Yeao-Nan Hsieh isalso member of his college classmates. Both Sherry Hsieh and Yeao—Nan Hsieh assert that the only way for Patrick Lin to regain his reputation from his classmates is to re-pay Sherry Hsieh’s $56000 loan and $220,000+ more unpaid rents, plus interests. Classmate George Huang, he is executive of ACER Computer, used to work together with Patrick Lin for ACER Computer and Patrick Lin is under his supervision indirectly, sent an email to classmates including Patrick Lin and Sherry Hsieh on January 201 8 stated that the classmates sympathy with Sherry Hsieh. He also said classmates wish to help resolve the matters with Patrick Lin and could not help. Based on George Huang email, it isvery obvious that the Classmates are on Sherry Hsieh’s side. Sherry Hsieh’s oppose Plaintiff‘s mandatory settlement conference statements Page 3 of 4 Sherry Hsieh also demands that Patrick Lin to provide proof of his income as management consulting before November 201 5. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. \OOO\IO\ 10 11 12 MM Date: October 16, 2018 13 14 15 16 mRRY HSIEH 17 Defendant 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Sherry Hsieh’s oppose Plaintiff‘s mandatory settlement conference statements Page 4 of 4