arrow left
arrow right
  • ALI TAGHAVI  vs.  THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY, A CALIFORNIA NONPROFIT CORPORATION, et al(36) Unlimited Wrongful Termination document preview
  • ALI TAGHAVI  vs.  THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY, A CALIFORNIA NONPROFIT CORPORATION, et al(36) Unlimited Wrongful Termination document preview
  • ALI TAGHAVI  vs.  THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY, A CALIFORNIA NONPROFIT CORPORATION, et al(36) Unlimited Wrongful Termination document preview
  • ALI TAGHAVI  vs.  THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY, A CALIFORNIA NONPROFIT CORPORATION, et al(36) Unlimited Wrongful Termination document preview
  • ALI TAGHAVI  vs.  THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY, A CALIFORNIA NONPROFIT CORPORATION, et al(36) Unlimited Wrongful Termination document preview
  • ALI TAGHAVI  vs.  THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY, A CALIFORNIA NONPROFIT CORPORATION, et al(36) Unlimited Wrongful Termination document preview
						
                                

Preview

A?” 3 (3N \93M MARCIE ISOM FITZSIMMONS (SBN: 226906) F E E: E B AMBER A. EKLOF (SBN. 305750) SAN MATEO COUNTY GORDON REES SCULLY MANSUKHANI LLP NOV 0 9 2018 275 Battery Street, Suite 2000 AWN San Francisco, CA 941 11 Telephone: (415) 986-5900 Facsimile: (415) 986-8054 misom@grsm.com aeklof@grsm.com 17-6,m>———\g ‘_ QQLII ' f NOT I Attorneys for Defendant Imago gUNUNRDUN UN as l///II/ll/Illlll/li/II/llI/l/l/II/lIli/l SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA 1o COUNTY OF SAN MATEO 11 LLP 12 ALI TAGHAVI, an individual, ) CASE NO. 17CIV04570 2000 11 941 Mansukhani, 13 Plaintiff, g DEFENDANT STANFORD’S AMENDED Suite ) NOTICE OF MOTION TO QUASH CA 14 vs. INDIGO PARTNERS SUBPOENA AND WW ) Street, REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS ) Scully 15 Francisco, THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR ) UNIVERSITY, a California nonprofit STANFORD \ Battery Rees 16 corporation, doing business as ) Date: (9/9°//g San UNIVERSITY; ALTICOR, INC, a ) Time: 9:00 a.m. 275 17 Michigan corporation; and DOES 1-1 0, ) Dept: Law and Motion Gordon inclusive, 18 g Defendants. ) 19 ) Trial Date: December l7, 2018 20 21 TO PLAINTIFF AND HIS ATTORNEY OF RECORD: 22 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on November 26, 2018 at 9:00 am. in the Law and 23 Motion Department, or as soon thereafter as counsel may be heard by the above-entitled Court, 24 Defendant STANFORD UNIVERSITY will and hereby does move the Court, for an order 25 quashing the subpoena served on Indigo Partners and for sanctions in the amount 0f $2,600. 26 This motion is based upon this notice of motion and motion; the accompanying 27 memorandum of points and authorities; the declarations of Marcie Isom Fitzsimmons and Judy 28 Logan and exhibits attached thereto; the separate statement; all pleadings and papers on file in -1- DEFENDANT STANFORD’S AMENDED NOTICE 0F MOTION TO QUASH INDIGO PARTNERS SUBPOENA AND REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS this action; and upon such argument of counsel and other matters as may be presented to the Court at the time of this hearing. Dated: November 8, 201‘8 GORDON REES SCULLY MANSUKHANI, LLP Marcie Isom Fitzsimmons Amber A. Eklof Attorneys for Defendant TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD \ooo'xxouxh A JUNIOR UNIVERSITY, erroneously sued as THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY 10, 11 LLP 12‘ 2000 94111 Mansukhani, 13 Suite CA l4 Street, Scully 15 Francisco, Battery 1‘6 Rees San 275 17 Gordon 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 112] 340/41 I449OB\'.I -2- DEFENDANT STANFORD’S AMENDED NOTICE 0F MOTION T0 QUASH INDIGO PARTNERS SUBPOENA AND REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS Ali Taghavz' v. The Leiand Stanfon liversity San Mateo Superior Court Case N0. 17CIV045 70 PROOF OF SERVICE I am a resident of the State of California, over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to the within action. My business address ls: Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani, LLP 275 Battery Street, Suite 2000, San Francisco, CA 941 11. On the date below, I served the within documents. A DEFENDANT STANFORD’S AMENDED NOTICE OF MOTION TO QUASH INDIGO PARTNERS SUBPOENA AND REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS Via Hand Delivery: By instructing Nationwide Messengers to hand deliver the flaw document(s) listed above to the person(s) at the address(es) set forth below. Via Electronic Transmission: By transmitting via electronic mail the document(s) listed above t0 the e-mail address(es) set forth below. Via FedEx: By placing a true copy thereof enclosed in a sealed envelope, at a station designated for collection and processing of envelopes and packages for overnight delivery by FedEx as part of the ordinary business practices of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani, LLP described below, addressed as follows: 10 Via U. S. Mail. By placing the document(s) listed above 1n a sealed envelope with postage thereon fully prepaid, in United States mail 1n the State of California at San Francisco, 11 addressed as set forth below. 12 Fredrick A. Hagen BERDING & WEIL LLP 2175 N. California Blvd, Suite 500 13 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 14 Telephone: 925-838-2090 Facsimile: 925-820-5592 15 fhagen@berdingweil.com Plaintiff’s Counsel 16 David P. Zins VKaren J. Kubin 17 MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP 707 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 6000 425 Market Street 18 Los Angeles, CA 94105 San Francisco, CA 94105 Telephone: 213-892-5200 Telephone: 415-268-7000 Facsimile: 213-892-5454 Facsimile: 415-268-7522 19 dzins@mofo.com kkubin@mofb.com 20 Counselfor DefendantA/ticor, Inc. Counselfor Defendant Alticor, Inc. I am readily familiar with the firm’s practice of collection and processing correspondence 21 for mailing. Under that practice it would be deposited with the U. S. Postal Service 0n that same 22 day with postage thereon fully prepaid m the ordinary course of business. I am aware that on motion of the party served, service is presumed invalid if postal cancellation date or postage 23 meter date lsmore than one day after the date of deposit for mailing 1n affidavit. I declare under penalty 0f perjury under the laws of the State 0f California that the above 24 is true and correct. 25 Executed 0n November 8, 201 8 at San Francisco, California. 26 27 Z/éflp K 24: 74K Meg Naizghy 28 Ill l340/36366909v l PROOF OF SERVICE