Preview
Raymond P. Boucher, State Bar No. 115364 ELECTRONICALLY FILED
ray@boucher.la Superior Court of California,
Mania L. Weitz, State Bar No. 268100 Coupty of Blacer
weitz@boucher.la
Neal Butala, State Bar No. 289197
By: Cecilia Henderson, Deputy Clerk
butala@boucher.la
BOUCHER LLP
21600 Oxnard Street, Suite 600
Woodland Hills, Califomia 91367-4903
Te: (818) 340-5400
Fax: (818) 340-5401
Steve Mikhov, Esq., State Bar No. 224676
stevem@knit aw.com
Amy Morse, Esq., State Bar No. 290502
ni aw.com,
KNIGHT LAW GROUP LLP
10250 Constellation Boulevard, Suite 2500
10 Los les, CA 90067
Te: 310) 552-2250
11 Fax: (310) 552-7973
12 Attorneys for Plaintiff, J erry Michael
13 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
14 COUNTY OF PLACER
15
16 JERRY A. MICHAEL, Case No. S-CV-0042129
17 Plaintiff, PLAINTIFF'S EX PARTE APPLICATION
REQUESTING AN ORDER
18 Vv. SHORTENING TIME TO HEAR
PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL
19 FCA US LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability THE DEPOSITION ATTENDANCE OF
Company; AUBURN CDJR, INC., a DEFENDANT FCA’S PERSON MOST
20 Califomia Corporation, dba AUBURN QUALIFIED AND PRODUCTION OF
CHRY SLER DODGE JEEP RAM; and DOES DOCUMENTS TO SEPT. 18, 2020;
21 1 through 10, inclusive, DECLARATION OF NEAL BUTALA
22 Defendants.
23
Date: Sopher 4, 2020
24 Time:
Dept. 3
25
Action Filed: November 14, 2018
26 Trial Date: October 19, 2020
27
28
PLAINTIFF’ S EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER SHORTENING TIME
TO THE COURT AND ALL PARTIES AND THEIR RESPECTIVE ATTORNEYS
OF RECORD:
PLAINTIFF HEREBY APPLIES EX PARTE for an order shortening time on Plaintiff’ s
Motion to Compel the Deposition Attendance of Defendant FCA’s Person Most Qualified and
Custodian of Records and Request for Sanctions (“Motion”) to September 18, 2020 or such date
as the Court deems fit provided that Plaintiff’ s Motion is heard before the commencement of trial.
The ex parte application is based upon Defendants failure to produce a person most
qualified for deposition on August 25, 2020, the upcoming October 19, 2020 trial date, the
discovery motion cut-off date of October 4, 2020, and Plaintiff’ s inability to reserve a regularly
10 scheduled hearing on Plaintiff’ s motion date prior to the discovery motion cut-off date, this
11 Pleading; the attached Memorandum of Points and Authorities, the Declaration of Neal S. Butala,
12 the pleadings filed in connection with this case and such other evidence and testimony as the court
13 may allow.
14
15 DATED: September
3, 2020 BOUCHER LLP
16
17
By:
18 RAYMOND P. BOUCHER
MARIA L. WEITZ
19 NEAL BUTALA
Attomeys for Plaintiff, Jemy Michael
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
PLAINTIFF’ S EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER SHORTENING TIME
I INTRODUCTION
The Court should grant this ex parte application as Defendant FCA US LLC (“FCA” or
“Defendant’) has apparently taken the extreme position that defects in the February Deposition.
notice foreclose any further attempt to depose FCA on any issue in this case—even
as to new
topics of examination first included in the August Deposition notice. As explained in Plaintiff’ s
Motion to Compel the Deposition Attendance of Defendant FCA’s Person Most Qualified and
Custodian of Records and Request for Sanctions (“Motion”), the law does not support FCA’s
refusal to produce documents and submit to cross examination. What’s more, this marks Plaintiff’ s
eighth motion to compel discovery on issues that are critical for trial preparation. Being prevented.
10 from taking the deposition of FCA’ s person most qualified will cause irreparable harm to Plaintiff
11 in his ability to prepare adequately for trial.
12 Plaintiff Jey A. Michael (“Plaintiff”) seeks to compel Defendant
to produce its Person
13 Most Qualified (“PMQ”) for deposition. This is Plaintiff’ s second attempt to compel FCA’s
14 deposition due to Defendant’ s lack of cooperation and communication. Plaintiff first noticed
15 FCA’s deposition for February 13, 2020 [the “February Deposition”]. While FCA is located in
16 Newport Beach, Califomia, FCA’s counsel is located in Roseville, Califomia. Seeking a mutually
17 convenient compromise, Plaintiff set the February deposition near the airport in Sacramento,
18 Califomia. Defendant refused to attend the deposition unless it was rescheduled at defense
19 counsel’ s office in Roseville. The Court denied Plaintiff's motion to compel, filed April 20, 2020
20 and heard August 14, 2020, because the Sacramento location, despite its courtesy, did not comply
21 with Code of Civil Procedure section 2025.250(b). Butala Decl., 42
22 Heeding the Court’s instruction
and facing an October 19 trial date, Plaintiff immediately
23 served a location-compliant deposition notice by personal service on August 14, 2020. Butala
24 Decl., 3; Ex. A. Defendant’
s counsel did not respond
to Plaintiff’s counsel’
s offer to set the
25 deposition on a more convenient date. Instead, FCA objected and did not appear for its properly
26 noticed August 25, 2020 deposition [the “August Deposition”]. Butala Decl., 14; Ex. B. Plaintiff's
27 counsel twice reached out to FCA’s counsel in an attemptto remedy the non-appearance
without
28 resort to further motion practice. FCA’s counsel responded: “Plaintiff’s motion to compel the FCA
3
PLAINTIFF’ S EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER SHORTENING TIME
PMK was denied
by the court.” Hours later, Plaintiffs counsel provided detailed authority
showing why the Court’s order regarding the February Deposition
does not excuse FCA from the
August Deposition. Plaintiff expressed the urgency of this issue and asked that Defendant’ s
counsel provide contrary authority or an agreed-upon date for the deposition to go forward.
Defendant's counsel did not respond. Butala Decl., 15; Ex. C.
Immediately after Defendant 's failure to appear for the August 25, 2020 deposition,
Plaintiff reserved the first available hearing date for his motion to compel, October 9, 2020. Butala
Decl., 416 This first-available date falls after the current cut-off for discovery motions to be heard
based on the October 19, 2020 trial date. Plaintiff therefore seeks an order from this Court
10 shortening time so that his Motion may be heard concurrently with the other discovery motions set
11 on September 18, 2020, or on any other date prior to the October 4, 2020 discovery motion cut-
12 off.
13 Il. EX PARTE RELIEF IS WARRANTED UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES
14 Code Civ. Proc. § 1005 prescribes the times for written notice of motions and for the
15 service and filing of supporting and opposing papers. However, Code Civ. Proc. § 1005(b)
16 provides that “[t]he court, orajudge thereof, may prescribe a shorter time.” See also, Califomia
17 Rules of Court, rule 3.1300(b). Good cause exists to shorten time for the hearing of Plaintiff’ s
18 Motion. Plaintiff acted with diligence in noticing the deposition immediately upon the Court’s
19 denial of the motion to compel February Deposition. Plaintiff also reserved a hearing date for
20 Plaintiff’s Motion immediately after Defendant’ s non-appearance on August 25, 2020. The earliest
21 available date was October 9, 2020, which is after the current discovery motion cut-off date of
22 October 4, 2020. Butala Decl., {16 Thereafter, Plaintiff attempted to resolve this matter informally
23 by sending a detailed statement of his legal position to Defendant’
s counsel and requesting their
24 opposing authority. Defendant’s counsel did not respond, apparently declining
to engage
in the
25 meet and confer process. Butala Decl., 15; Ex. C. It would be efficient for this motion
26 concurrently with the multiple other discovery motions now set to be heard on September 18,
27 2020. Altematively, setting this Motion for October 2, 2020 would provide full notice, and would
28 also be within the current discovery motion cut-off.
4
PLAINTIFF’ S EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER SHORTENING TIME
If ex parte relief is not granted, Plaintiff will be unable
to depose FCA’s PMQ. The
importance of this deposition cannot
be understated: FCA has sole and exclusive possession
of
information from the fire-cause investigation related to Plaintiff s truck ! Plaintiff filed this
action on November 14, 2018. (Ibid.) A year later, FCA initiated
a recall of all 2015 Dodge Ram.
1500 EcoDiesel trucks due to risk of spontaneous vehicle fires caused by a defective engine
component. Information related to the recall is also uniquely within FCA’s possession, custody,
and control. Butala Decl., 17; Ex. D. And, as the Court acknowledged in its August 14, 2020
Order, discovery into this recall and the cause of the fire are “critical” to Plaintiff's case. on topics
the Court (see Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1202(c).) If relief is not granted, Plaintiff will not have
10 access to this essential discovery despite his diligence. Butala Decl., 19
11 II. PLAINTIFF COMPLIED WITH CALIFORNIA RULES OF COURT
12 As stated in the Declaration of Neal Butala, filed herewith, counsel has duly complied with
13 the notice requirements of Califomia Rules of Court, rule 3.1203(a) and Califomia Rules of Court,
14 rule 3.1204(b). Defendant indicated
it will appear and will oppose this request.
15 IV. CONCLUSION
16 In view of the foregoing facts and authorities, and the matters set forth in the Declaration
17 of Neal Butala filed herewith, Plaintiff hereby submits that good cause exists for an ex parte Order
18 shortening time for notice and hearing of Plaintiff's Motion.
19 DATED: September
3, 2020 BOUCHER LLP
20 By:
21 RAYMOND P. BOUCHER
MARIA L. WEITZ
22 NEAL BUTALA
Attomeys for Plaintiff, Jey Michael
23
24
1 In response to Plaintiff’ s request for assistance from FCA, FCA informed Plaintiff that it
25 engaged a third-party, Bosch Automotive Services, to perform a vehicle inspection related to the
cause of the fire. Based on Bosch’s inspection, FCA informed Plaintiff that it had no responsibility
26 for his damages. Plaintiff timely attempted to obtain information from Bosch by subpoena. Bosch.
responded that it does not maintain records ing individual vehicles, including Plaintiff’ s
27
vehicle, and that no documents relating to Plaintiff’ s truck exist within its possession, custody, or
28 control. Butala Decl., 18; Ex. E and F.
5
PLAINTIFF’ S EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER SHORTENING TIME
DECLARATION OF NEAL BUTALA
I, Neal Butala, declare as follows:
1 Taman attomey duly admitted to practice before this Court. I aman associate with
Boucher LLP, attomeys of record for Plaintiff, Jey Michael. I have personal knowledge of the
facts set forth herein, and if called
as a witness, I could and would competently
testify thereto. I
make this declaration in support of Plaintiff's Ex Parte Application Requesting an Order
Shortening Time to Hear Plaintiff's Motion to Compel the Deposition Attendance of Defendant
Fca’s Person Most Qualified and Production of Documents to Sept. 18, 2020.
2. This is Plaintiff’s second attempt to compel FCA’s deposition due to Defendant’s
10 lack of cooperation and communication. Plaintiff first noticed FCA’s deposition for February 13,
11 2020 [the “February Deposition’”]. While FCA is located in Newport Beach, Califomia, FCA’s
12 counsel is located in Roseville, Califomia. Seeking a mutually convenient compromise, Plaintiff
13 set the February deposition near the airport in Sacramento, Califomia. Defendant refused to attend
14 the deposition unless it was rescheduled at defense counsel’ s office in Roseville. The Court denied
15 Plaintiff’ s motion to compel, filed April 20, 2020 and heard August 14, 2020, because the
16 Sacramento location, despite its courtesy, did not comply with Code of Civil Procedure section.
17 2025.250(b).
18 3, Heeding the Court’ s instruction and facing an October 19 trial date, I caused
to be
19 served a location-compliant deposition notice by personal service on August 14, 2020. Attached.
20 hereto as Exhibit A is a true and correct copy of Plaintiff's Notice of Deposition.
21 4. FCA objected and did not appear for its properly noticed August 25, 2020
22 deposition. Attached hereto as Exhibit B is a true and correct copy of Defendant's Objections.
23 5, I reached
out twice to FCA’s counsel in an attempt to remedy the non-appearance
24 without resort to further motion practice. FCA’s counsel responded: “Plaintiffs motion to compel
25 the FCA PMK was denied by the court.” Hours later, I provided detailed authority showing why
26 the Court’s order regarding the February Deposition does not excuse FCA from the August
27 Deposition. I expressed the urgency of this issue and asked that Defendant's counsel provide
28 contrary authority or an agreed-upon date for the deposition to go forward. Defendant's counsel
6
PLAINTIFF’ S EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER SHORTENING TIME
did not respond. Attached hereto as Exhibit C is a true and correct copy of my e-mail
communications with FCA's counsel.
6. Immediately after Defendant 's failure to appear for the August 25, 2020 deposition,
my office reserved the first available hearing date for Plaintiff's motion to compel, October 9,
2020.
7, Plaintiff filed this action on November 14, 2018 alleging violations of the Song-
Beverly Act, negligent repair, and fraudulent concealment. A year after Plaintiff filed this action,
FCA initiated
a recall of all 2015 Dodge
Ram 1500 EcoDiesel trucks due to risk of spontaneous
vehicle fires caused by a defective engine component. Information related to the recall is also
10 uniquely within FCA’s possession, custody, and control. Attached hereto as Exhibit D is a true
11 and correct copy of Defendant's recall notice.
12 8. Tn response to Plaintiff’ s request for assistance from FCA, FCA informed Plaintiff
13 that it engaged a third-party, Bosch Automotive Services, to perform a vehicle inspection related
14 to the cause of the fire. Based on Bosch’s inspection, FCA informed Plaintiff that it had no
15 responsibility for his damages. Plaintiff timely attempted to obtain information from Bosch by
16 subpoena. Bosch responded that it does not maintain records regarding individual vehicles,
17 including Plaintiff’ s vehicle, and that no documents relating to Plaintiff’s truck exist within its
18 possession, custody, or control. Attached hereto as Exhibit E is a true and correct copy of
19 Defendant's letter to Plaintiff informing Plaintiff that it had engaged Bosch Automotive Services.
20 Attached hereto as Exhibit F is a true and correct copy of the Bosch's response
to Plaintiff's
21 subpoena.
22 9. If relief is not granted, Plaintiff will not have access to this essential discovery
23 despite his diligent and best efforts.
24 10. The name, address and telephone number of Defendant's attomey is: Jon Universal,
25 Universal & Shannon, LLP, 2240 Douglas Blvd Ste 290, Roseville, CA 95661-3874, (916) 780-
26 4050.
27 11. On September 3, 2020, at 9:57a.m., I notified Defendant's counsel, Jon Universal
28 by e-mail that this Ex Parte Application
would be presented to this Court at 8:00am. on
7
PLAINTIFF’ S EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER SHORTENING TIME
1| September4, 2020. Defendant's attomey stated that she would oppose this Application.
2 I declare
under penalty of perjury
under the laws of the State of Califomia
that the
3 foregoing is true and correct.
4 Executed on this 3rd day of September, 2020, at Woodland Hills, Califomia.
EO
FEA-
Neal Butala
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
8
PLAINTIFF’ S EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER SHORTENING TIME
EXHIBIT A
Raymond P. Boucher, State Bar No. 115364
ray@ boucher.la
Maria L. Weitz, State Bar No. 268100
weitz@ boucher.la
Neal Butala, State Bar No. 289197
butala@ boucher.la
BOUCHER LLP
21600 Oxnard Street, Suite 600
Woodland Hills, California 91367-4903
Tel: (818) 340-5400
Fax: (818) 340-5401
Steve Mikhov, Esgq., State Bar No. 224676
stevem@ knightlaw.com
Amy Morse, Esgq., State Bar No. 290502
amym@ knightlaw.com
KNIGHT LAW GROUP LLP
10250 Constellation Boulevard, Suite 2500
10 Los Angeles, CA 90067
Tel: (310) 552-2250
11 Fax: (310) 552-7973
12 Attorneys for Plaintiff, Jerry Michael
13 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
14 COUNTY OF PLACER
15
16 JERRY A. MICHAEL, Case No. S-CV-0042129
17 Plaintiff, NOTICE OF DEPOSITION OF
DEFENDANT’S PERSONG) MOST
18 Vv QUALIFIED AND CUSTODIANG) OF
RECORDS
19 FCA US LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability
Company; AUBURN CDJR, INC., a Action Filed: November 14, 2018
20 Califormia Corporation, dba AUBURN Trial Date: October 19, 2020
CHRY SLER DODGE JEEP RAM; and DOES
21 1 through 10, inclusive,
22 Defendants.
23
24 TO EACH PARTY AND TO THE COUNSEL OF RECORD FOR EACH PARTY:
25 YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED that on August 25, 2020at 10:00 A.M., before a
26 Certified Court Reporter, at 21600 Oxnard St, Suite 600, Woodland Hills, CA 91367, Plaintiff
27 JERRY A. MICHAEL, through counsel, will take the deposition of FCA US LLC’s Person(s)
28 Most Qualified and Custodian(s) of Record in the above matter.
NOTICE OF DEPOSITION OF DEFENDANT’S PERSON(S) MOST KNOWLEDGEABLE AND CUSTODIAN(S)
OF RECORDS
This deposition will be taken for the purpose of discovery and/or for use as evidence in
said matter. This deposition will be taken before a certified shorthand reporter who is authorized
to administer an oath. If the deposition is not completed on the date set out above, the taking of
the deposition will continue from day to day thereafter, except for weekends and holidays, at the
same place, until completed.
PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE that Plaintiff will conduct this deposition using
web-based or other video teleconferencing services with remote/virtual access for those parties
wishing to participate via the internet and/or telephone. The court reporter and videographer will be
remote via one of the options above for the purposes of reporting and recording the proceeding, and
10 will not be in the presence of the deponent. All parties and the deposition witness shall be provided
11 via email link with the necessary credentials, call-in numbers, and other information to access the
12 deposition remotely. Each participating attorney may be visible to all other participants, and their
13 statements will be audible to all participants. In lieu of a paper set of exhibits, exhibits may be
14 provided and displayed digitally to deponents, parties, and counsel. All exhibits will be provided
15 simultaneously and electronically to the witness and all participants. Instant visual display of
16 testimony may be used pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure §2025.220. The audio-visual recording
17 may be used at trial, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure §2025.620. The deposition may be
18 recorded electronically.
19 PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE that pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section
20 2025.230, Defendant shall designate and produce at the deposition those of its officers, directors,
21 managing agents, employees, or agents who are most qualified to testify on its behalf as to the
22 existence, authenticity, and manner of keeping of the DOCUMENTS described in Exhibit
A, and if
23 such persons differ, the officers, directors, managing agents, employees, or agents who are most
24 qualified to testify as to the contents and interpretation of such DOCUMENTS. To facilitate the
25 timely transfer of exhibits to the court reporter for this video conference deposition, the
26 DOCUMENTS shall be produced to counsel for Plaintiff no later than five (5) business days prior
27 to the date set for the deposition. In the event that the deposition is continued by agreement or for
28 any other reason, all DOCUMENTS shall be produced by 10:00 a.m. on the date originally set above
2
NOTICE OF DEPOSITION OF DEFENDANT’S PERSON(S) MOST KNOWLEDGEABLE AND CUSTODIAN(S)
OF RECORDS
for deposition, regardless of such continuation, unless otherwise agreed to by the parties.
DEFINITIONS
1. The word “DOCUMENT” refers to all matters that would fall within the definition of
Evidence Code §250, and includes written or printed matter of any kind, including the originals
and all non-identical copies thereof, whether different from the original by reason of any notation
made on such copies or otherwise including, but not limited to, the following: advertisements,
booklets, brochures, pamphlets, circulars, Amended Notices, periodicals, papers, contracts,
agreements, photographs, minutes, memoranda, messages, appraisals, analyses, reports, financial
calculations and representations, invoices, accounting and diary entries, inventory sheets, diaries,
10 appointment books or calendars, teletypes, facsimiles, ledgers, trial balances, correspondence,
11 telegrams, press releases, notes, working papers, drawings, schedules, tabulations, projections,
12 mails, information or programs stored in a computer (whether or not ever printed out or
13 displayed), and all drafts, alterations, modifications, changes or amendments of any of the
14 foregoing, and all graphic or manual records or representations of any kind including, but not
15 limited to, the following: microfiche, microfilm, audiotapes, videotapes, recordings and motion
16 pictures, and all electronic, mechanical or electronic records or representations of any kind
17 including, but not limited to, the following: Tapes, cassettes, discs, magnetic cards and
18 recordings. Note: This definition includes electronic mail.
19 2. The words “FCA”, “YOU”, and “Y OUR” refer to FCA US LLC and/or any related
20 entity, predecessor, parent, subsidiary and/or affiliate, employee, agent, or any person acting or
21 purporting to act on Defendant, FCA US LLC’s behalf.
22 3. “PERSON?” includes any natural person, firm, association, organization, partnership,
23 business, trust, corporation, or public entity.
24 4. “SUBJECT VEHICLE” refers to the 2015 Dodge Ram 1500, VIN:
25 #1C6RR7LM9FS710636 (the “SUBJECT VEHICLE”).
26 5. “INCIDENT” shall refer to the vehicle fire that consumed and destroyed the SUBJECT
27 VEHICLE onor about January 24, 2018.
28 6. “RECALL” shall refer to NHTSA Recall 19V-757.
3
NOTICE OF DEPOSITION OF DEFENDANT’S PERSON(S) MOST KNOWLEDGEABLE AND CUSTODIAN(S)
OF RECORDS
7. “EGR COOLER” shall refer to the exhaust gas recirculation cooler in 2014-2019 Dodge
Ram 1500 vehicles equipped with the 3.0L Eco Diesel engine.
8. “ENGINE” shall refer to the 3.0L Eco Diesel engine equipped in 2014-2019 Dodge
Ram 1500 vehicles.
MATTERS FOR EXAMINATION
1 JERRY A MICHAEL’s (referred to hereafter as “Plaintiff”’) requests for
reimbursement, repurchase, or other assistance related to the loss of the SUBJECT VEHICLE.
2 All communications with Plaintiff or anyone acting on their behalf regarding the
INCIDENT.
10 3 All claims made upon Y OU by anyone with regard to the INCIDENT.
11 4 All repairs and service performed on the SUBJECT VEHICLE.
12 5, All DOCUMENTS that Y OU reviewed, if any, in determining YOUR response of
13 February 19, 2018 to Plaintiff about the INCIDENT.
14 6 All DOCUMENTS that Y OU reviewed, if any, in investigating the cause of the
15 INCIDENT.
16 7 All persons that Y OU talked to or interviewed or made any other type of inquiries
17 from, in determining Y OUR response to Plaintiff or anyone acting on Plaintiff’s behalf about the
18 INCIDENT.
19 8 Any other investigation that YOU conducted or that was conducted on YOUR
20 behalf in determining Y OUR response to the INCIDENT.
21 9 All telephone calls made by anyone (including Plaintiff) to YOUR 1-800 customer
22 assistance number regarding the INCIDENT.
23 10. The results of any failure mode analysis, warranty parts return analysis, or other
24 analysis or evaluation conducted by Y OU, Y OUR agents, or by any other person or entity known
25 to Y OU, pertaining to the INCIDENT.
26 11. YOUR policies, procedures, or other guidelines regarding responding to consumer
27 complaints in which the consumer alleges that a FCA vehicle is defective from 2014 to present.
28 12. YOUR policies, procedures, or other guidelines for repurchasing or replacing
4
NOTICE OF DEPOSITION OF DEFENDANT’S PERSON(S) MOST KNOWLEDGEABLE AND CUSTODIAN(S)
OF RECORDS
vehicles under the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act.
13. All DOCUMENTS (including all recordings) produced by Y OU in this litigation
thus far.
14. The nature of Y OUR relationship with/to Enginering Bosch Automotive or any
other company who handles calls from consumers to FCA’s 1-800 number.
15. The policies and procedures to be followed by Impartial Services Group when
receiving a call from a consumer regarding a FCA vehicle.
16. Y OUR oversight of Impartial Services Group or any other company who handles
calls from consumers to YOUR 1-800 number.
10 17. Y OUR policies and procedures (including proposals) for reduction of warranty
11 claim buybacks under California lemon law from 2014 to present.
12 18. Y OUR goal for Impartial Services Group to reduce the number of repurchases or
13 vehicle replacements in California from 2014 to present.
14 19. All tasks and duties YOU authorized Impartial Services Group to perform in
15 connection with the handling, management, implementation, decision making, review, auditing,
16 and implementation of any claims made related to a FCA vehicle pursuant to the Song Beverly
17 Act from 2014 to present.
18 20. Any guidance provided by Y OU to Impartial Services Group regarding what
19 constitutes a “non-conformity” under the Song Beverly Act from 2014 to present.
20 21. Any guidance provided by Y OU to Impartial Services Group regarding what
21 constitutes a “reasonable number of repair attempts” under the Song Beverly Act from 2014 to
22 present
23 22. All policies and procedures related to YOUR auditing of Impartial Services
24 Group’s handling of customer complaints under the Song-Beverly Act.
25 23. Y OUR understanding of any and all changes in Impartial Services Group’s policies
26 and procedures for handling customer complaints, which were directed to FCA, relating to the
27 Song Beverly Act from 2014 to present.
28 24. Y OUR policies and procedures for the implementation of any changes, alterations,
5
NOTICE OF DEPOSITION OF DEFENDANT’S PERSON(S) MOST KNOWLEDGEABLE AND CUSTODIAN(S)
OF RECORDS
interpretations in new case law or other modifications of its policies in administering its
obligations under the Song-Beverly Act.
25. All changes in Y OUR policies and procedures related to handling customer
complaints in California from 2014 to present.
26. The number of repurchases or replacements that Y OU offered California
consumers in response to their personal request for a repurchase (i.e. a consumer request without
an attomney involved) for each year from 2014 to present, including:
a. The number of vehicles repurchased or replaced pursuant to goodwill / Customer
Loyalty Program.
10 b. The number of vehicles repurchased or replaced that were determined to be lemon law
11 eligible.
12 c. The number of personal requests for a repurchase that were denied.
13 d. The number of cash settlements (not a repurchase) offered in response to a personal
14 request for a repurchase.
15 27. The specific design or manufacturing issues that FCA or its suppliers have
16 identified, with respect to FCA’s defective electrical architectures, that can cause or has caused
17 any vehicle systems to fail, including the results of any tests conducted by FCA or its suppliers to
18 identify problems with FCA’s PowerNet.
19 28. Average repair rates and costs at 18 months in service for FCA vehicles equipped
20 with FCA’s defective electrical architectures, and conditions per thousand (C/1000) from 2010 to
21 the present date related to stalling, hesitation, loss of power and no start conditions.
22 29. FCA’s analyses of the root cause(s) of vehicle stalling, hesitation, loss of power,
23 and no crank/no start symptoms in FCA vehicles equipped with FCA’s defective electrical
24 architectures &, including summaries and reports.
25 30. The rate and frequency of warranty repairs to correct symptoms of vehicle stalling,
26 hesitation, loss of power, or no crank/no start symptoms in FCA vehicles equipped with FCA’s
27 defective electrical architectures, including summaries and reports.
28 31. All documents reflecting the failure rates for FCA’s defective electrical
6
NOTICE OF DEPOSITION OF DEFENDANT’S PERSON(S) MOST KNOWLEDGEABLE AND CUSTODIAN(S)
OF RECORDS
architectures used in FCA vehicles equipped with a PowerNet-related system, including
summaries and reports.
32. FCA’s policies and procedures, that were in effect from 2009 to present, related to
tracking similar customer complaints for the same year, make, and model vehicles with FCA’s
defective electrical architectures.
33. FCA’s policies and procedures, that were in effect from 2009 to present, related to
tracking similar warranty repairs for the same year, make, and model vehicles with FCA’s
defective electrical architectures.
34. The specific design or manufacturing issues that FCA or its suppliers have
10 identified, with respect to FCA’s defective electrical architectures, that can cause or has caused
11 any vehicle systems to fail, including the results of any tests conducted by FCA or its suppliers to
12 identify problems with the EGR COOLER.
13 35. Average repair rates and costs at 18 months in service for FCA vehicles equipped
14 with FCA’s defective EGR COOLER, and conditions per thousand (C/1000) from 2014 to the
15 present date related to vehicle fires, stalling, hesitation, loss of power and no start conditions.
16 36. FCA’s analyses of the root cause(s) of vehicle fires, vehicle stalling, hesitation, loss
17 of power, and no crank/no start symptoms in FCA vehicles equipped with FCA’s defective EGR
18 COOLER, including summaries and reports.
19 37. The rate and frequency of warranty repairs to correct symptoms of vehicle fires,
20 vehicle stalling, hesitation, loss of power, or no crank/no start symptoms in FCA vehicles
21 equipped with FCA’s defective EGR COOLER, including summaries and reports.
22 38. All documents reflecting the failure rates for FCA’s defective EGR COOLER used
23 in FCA vehicles equipped with the ENGINE, including summaries and reports.
24 39. FCA’s policies and procedures, that were in effect from 2014 to present, related to
25 tracking similar customer complaints for the same year, make, and model vehicles with FCA’s
26 defective electrical architectures.
27 40. FCA’s policies and procedures, that were in effect from 2014 to present, related to
28 tracking similar warranty repairs for the same year, make, and model vehicles with FCA’s
7
NOTICE OF DEPOSITION OF DEFENDANT’S PERSON(S) MOST KNOWLEDGEABLE AND CUSTODIAN(S)
OF RECORDS
defective EGR COOLER.
41. Any factors that contributed to FCA’s decision to issue the RECALL.
42. Any investigation conducted by FCA into vehicle fires in vehicles with a defective
EGR COOLER from 2014 to present.
43. The specific design or manufacturing issues that FCA or its suppliers have
identified, with respect to FCA’s defective EGR COOLER, that can cause or has caused any
vehicle systems to fail, including the results of any tests conducted by FCA or its suppliers to
identify problems with FCA’s EGR COOLER.
44. The specific design or manufacturing issues that FCA or its suppliers have identified,
10 with respect to FCA’s defective ENGINE, that can cause or has caused any vehicle systems to fail,
11 including the results of any tests conducted by FCA or its suppliers to identify problems with
12 FCA’s ENGINE.
13 DATED: August 14, 2020 BOUCHER LLP
14
15
By: ve.
16 RAYMOND P. BOUCHER
MARIA L, WEITZ
17 NEAL BUTALA
Attomeys for Plaintiff, Jerry Michael
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
8
NOTICE OF DEPOSITION OF DEFENDANT’S PERSON(S) MOST KNOWLEDGEABLE AND CUSTODIAN(S)
OF RECORDS
EXHIBITA
Definitions
1 The term “DOCUMENTS” shall mean “writing” as defined in Evidence Code § 250,
which reads in its entirety: “‘Writing’ means handwriting, typewriting, printing, photostating,
photographing, photocopying, transmitting by electronic mail or facsimile, and every other means
of recording upon any tangible thing, any form of communication or representation, including
letters, words, pictures, sounds, or symbols, or combinations thereof, and any record thereby created,
regardless of the manner in which the record has been stored.” The term “DOCUMENTS” also
includes each copy of a document which is not identical in all respects with or which contains any
10
notations or marks not appearing on said DOCUMENTS.
11
2 The term “CORRESPONDENCE” shall mean any correspondence in any manner,
12
whether by memorandum, letter, memorializations and/or transcriptions of conversations,
13
handwritten note, typewritten note, mail, fax, personal delivery, messenger, e-mail, electronic
14
document of any type or sort, instant message, text message, modem or other electronic, mechanical
15
or manual means.
16
Request
for Production
17
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 1:
18
All DOCUMENTS which evidence or discuss Y OUR decision to issue recall 19V-757.
19
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 2:
20
All surveys, reports, summaries, and other DOCUMENTS in which owners of 2014 - 2019
21
Dodge Ram 1500 vehicles have reported to Y OU concerns with vehicle fires.
22
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 3:
23
All DOCUMENTS evidencing, describing, or tracking complaints by owners of 2014 -
24
2019 Dodge Ram 1500 vehicles regarding concems with the EGR COOLER.
25
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 4:
26
All DOCUMENTS evidencing, describing, or tracking vehicle repurchases made by YOU
27
of 2015 Dodge Ram 1500 vehicles and allegedly containing conditions, defects, or
28
9
NOTICE OF DEPOSITION OF DEFENDANT’S PERSON(S) MOST KNOWLEDGEABLE AND CUSTODIAN(S)
OF RECORDS
nonconformities regarding concerms with the EGR COOLER.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 5:
All surveys, reports, summaries, and other DOCUMENTS provided by YOU to NHTSA in
which owners of 2014 - 2019 Dodge Ram 1500 vehicles have reported to Y OU vehicle fires.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 6
All DOCUMENTS evidencing and/or describing Y OUR offers to consumers of vehicle
payments for vehicles manufactured by Y OU with a defective EGR COOLER.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 7:
All DOCUMENTS which evidence any predictive model used to determine if a vehicle
10 equipped with the Eco Diesel 3.0L engine will be repurchased.
11 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 8:
12 All DOCUMENTS which evidence or discuss vehicle fire concems in 2014 — 2019 Dodge
13 Ram 1500 vehicles due to the EGR COOLER.
14 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 9:
15 All of YOUR memorandum regarding failure rates of the EGR COOLER in the Eco Diesel
16 3.0L engine.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 10:
17
All DOCUMENTS evidencing, describing, analyzing, or tracking repair presentations by
18
owners of 2014 - 2019 Dodge Ram 1500 vehicles in which the dealer found thermal fatigue of the
19
EGR COOLER.
20
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 11:
21
All DOCUMENTS which evidence or discuss vehicle fire concems in 2014 — 2019 Dodge
22
Ram 1500 vehicles due to the EGR COOLER.
23
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 12:
24
All of YOUR memorandum regarding thermal fatigue with the EGR COOLER.
25
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 13:
26
All DOCUMENTS evidencing, describing, analyzing, or tracking repair presentations by
27
owners of 2014 — 2019 Dodge Ram 1500 vehicles in which the dealer repaired or replaced the
28
10
NOTICE OF DEPOSITION OF DEFENDANT’S PERSON(S) MOST KNOWLEDGEABLE AND CUSTODIAN(S)
OF RECORDS
EGR COOLER.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 14:
All DOCUMENTS evidencing quality problems identified by YOU in the EGR COOLER
used in the 3.0L Eco Diesel Engine from 2014 to present.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 15:
All DOCUMENTS evidencing any Failure Mode and Effects Analyses (“FMEA”)
generated by Y OU or provided to YOU concerning the 3.0L Eco Diesel engine or any of its parts,
components, sub-components, systems, assemblies, or sub-assemblies.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 16:
10 All DOCUMENTS from 2014 to the present date that reflect the relative frequency of
11 engine repairs (R/1000) for Dodge 1500 vehicles equipped with the 3.0L Eco Diesel engine
12 including, but not limited to, all such DOCUMENTS that reflect any comparison of other R/1000
13 rates with the frequency of 3.0L Eco Diesel engine repairs (R/1000).
14 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 17:
15 All DOCUMENTS reflecting any written reports, recorded statements, or communications
16 made by any of YOUR employees (other than FCA’s legal counsel), to any other employee (other
17 than FCA’s legal counsel), that refer or relate in any manner to vehicle fire concems associated
18 with vehicles equipped with the 3.0L Eco Diesel engine during any period (whether monthly,
19 quarterly, semi-annually, annually, or cumulatively) from 2014 to the present date.
20 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 18:
21 All DOCUMENTS evidencing the agenda and/or the meeting minutes of each meeting at
22 which one or more quality concerns in the EGR COOLER were addressed or discussed by YOU
23 with any person other than YOUR attomey.
24 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 19:
25 All DOCUMENTS reflecting the agenda and/or meeting minutes of each meeting at which
26 Y OUR warranty spending or reacquired vehicle spending pertaining to vehicles equipped with the
27 EGR COOLER was addressed or discussed by Y OU with any person other than Y OUR attorney.
28
11
NOTICE OF DEPOSITION OF DEFENDANT’S PERSON(S) MOST KNOWLEDGEABLE AND CUSTODIAN(S)
OF RECORDS
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 20:
All DOCUMENTS pertaining to the design, manufacturing, performance, and
modifications of the 3.0L Eco Diesel Engine thatY OU have included in any disclosure, response,
summary, or compilation.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 21:
All DOCUMENTS pertaining to advertising campaigns for FCA vehicles that contained
the 3.0L Eco Diesel engine.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 22:
All DOCUMENTS evidencing Y OUR research, testing, or analyses regarding the EGR
10 COOLER.
11 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 23:
12 All DOCUMENTS evidencing Y OUR research, testing, or analyses regarding the 3.0L
13 Eco Diesel engine.
14 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 24:
15 All DOCUMENTS evidencing Y OUR pre-release research, testing, or analyses regarding
16 the EGR COOLER.
17 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 25:
18 All DOCUMENTS evidencing Y OUR pre-release research, testing, or analyses regarding
19 the 3.0L Eco Diesel engine.
20 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 26:
21 All DOCUMENTS evidencing Y OUR post-release research, testing, or analyses regarding
22 the EGR COOLER.
23 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 27:
24 All DOCUMENTS evidencing Y OUR post-release research, testing, or analyses regarding
25 the 3.0L Eco Diesel engine.
26 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 28:
27 All of Y OUR internal correspondence regarding problems or repair strategies for the EGR
28 COOLER.
12
NOTICE OF DEPOSITION OF DEFENDANT’S PERSON(S) MOST KNOWLEDGEABLE AND CUSTODIAN(S)
OF RECORDS
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 29:
All of Y OUR internal correspondence regarding problems or repair strategies for the 3.0L
Eco Diesel engine.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 30:
All DOCUMENTS which describe or discuss Y OUR average repair rates to 2014 — 2019
Dodge Ram 1500 vehicles.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 31:
All of Y OUR internal correspondence regarding repair rates for the EGR COOLER.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 32:
10 All of Y OUR internal correspondence regarding repair rates for the 3.0L Eco Diesel
11 engine.
12 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 33:
13 All of Y OUR internal correspondence regarding thermal fatigue with the EGR COOLER.
14 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 34:
15 All of YOUR correspondence to component manufacturers regarding problems with the
16 EGR COOLER.
17 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 35:
18 All of YOUR correspondence to component manufacturers regarding problems with the
19 3.0L Eco Diesel engine.
20 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 36:
21 All DOCUMENTS which evidence or describe engine failure in 2014 — 2019 Dodge Ram
22 1500 vehicles equipped with the 3.0L Eco Diesel engine.
23 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 37:
24 All DOCUMENTS produced by Y OU in response to any NHTSA investigation pertaining
25 to the EGR COOLER.
26 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 38:
27 All DOCUMENTS produced by Y OU in response to any regulatory investigation
28 pertaining to the EGR COOLER.
13
NOTICE OF DEPOSITION OF DEFENDANT’S PERSON(S) M
Preview
Raymond P. Boucher, State Bar No. 115364 ELECTRONICALLY FILED ray@boucher.la Superior Court of California, Mania L. Weitz, State Bar No. 268100 Coupty of Blacer weitz@boucher.la Neal Butala, State Bar No. 289197 By: Cecilia Henderson, Deputy Clerk butala@boucher.la BOUCHER LLP 21600 Oxnard Street, Suite 600 Woodland Hills, Califomia 91367-4903 Te: (818) 340-5400 Fax: (818) 340-5401 Steve Mikhov, Esq., State Bar No. 224676 stevem@knit aw.com Amy Morse, Esq., State Bar No. 290502 ni aw.com, KNIGHT LAW GROUP LLP 10250 Constellation Boulevard, Suite 2500 10 Los les, CA 90067 Te: 310) 552-2250 11 Fax: (310) 552-7973 12 Attorneys for Plaintiff, J erry Michael 13 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 14 COUNTY OF PLACER 15 16 JERRY A. MICHAEL, Case No. S-CV-0042129 17 Plaintiff, PLAINTIFF'S EX PARTE APPLICATION REQUESTING AN ORDER 18 Vv. SHORTENING TIME TO HEAR PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL 19 FCA US LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability THE DEPOSITION ATTENDANCE OF Company; AUBURN CDJR, INC., a DEFENDANT FCA’S PERSON MOST 20 Califomia Corporation, dba AUBURN QUALIFIED AND PRODUCTION OF CHRY SLER DODGE JEEP RAM; and DOES DOCUMENTS TO SEPT. 18, 2020; 21 1 through 10, inclusive, DECLARATION OF NEAL BUTALA 22 Defendants. 23 Date: Sopher 4, 2020 24 Time: Dept. 3 25 Action Filed: November 14, 2018 26 Trial Date: October 19, 2020 27 28 PLAINTIFF’ S EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER SHORTENING TIME TO THE COURT AND ALL PARTIES AND THEIR RESPECTIVE ATTORNEYS OF RECORD: PLAINTIFF HEREBY APPLIES EX PARTE for an order shortening time on Plaintiff’ s Motion to Compel the Deposition Attendance of Defendant FCA’s Person Most Qualified and Custodian of Records and Request for Sanctions (“Motion”) to September 18, 2020 or such date as the Court deems fit provided that Plaintiff’ s Motion is heard before the commencement of trial. The ex parte application is based upon Defendants failure to produce a person most qualified for deposition on August 25, 2020, the upcoming October 19, 2020 trial date, the discovery motion cut-off date of October 4, 2020, and Plaintiff’ s inability to reserve a regularly 10 scheduled hearing on Plaintiff’ s motion date prior to the discovery motion cut-off date, this 11 Pleading; the attached Memorandum of Points and Authorities, the Declaration of Neal S. Butala, 12 the pleadings filed in connection with this case and such other evidence and testimony as the court 13 may allow. 14 15 DATED: September 3, 2020 BOUCHER LLP 16 17 By: 18 RAYMOND P. BOUCHER MARIA L. WEITZ 19 NEAL BUTALA Attomeys for Plaintiff, Jemy Michael 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 PLAINTIFF’ S EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER SHORTENING TIME I INTRODUCTION The Court should grant this ex parte application as Defendant FCA US LLC (“FCA” or “Defendant’) has apparently taken the extreme position that defects in the February Deposition. notice foreclose any further attempt to depose FCA on any issue in this case—even as to new topics of examination first included in the August Deposition notice. As explained in Plaintiff’ s Motion to Compel the Deposition Attendance of Defendant FCA’s Person Most Qualified and Custodian of Records and Request for Sanctions (“Motion”), the law does not support FCA’s refusal to produce documents and submit to cross examination. What’s more, this marks Plaintiff’ s eighth motion to compel discovery on issues that are critical for trial preparation. Being prevented. 10 from taking the deposition of FCA’ s person most qualified will cause irreparable harm to Plaintiff 11 in his ability to prepare adequately for trial. 12 Plaintiff Jey A. Michael (“Plaintiff”) seeks to compel Defendant to produce its Person 13 Most Qualified (“PMQ”) for deposition. This is Plaintiff’ s second attempt to compel FCA’s 14 deposition due to Defendant’ s lack of cooperation and communication. Plaintiff first noticed 15 FCA’s deposition for February 13, 2020 [the “February Deposition”]. While FCA is located in 16 Newport Beach, Califomia, FCA’s counsel is located in Roseville, Califomia. Seeking a mutually 17 convenient compromise, Plaintiff set the February deposition near the airport in Sacramento, 18 Califomia. Defendant refused to attend the deposition unless it was rescheduled at defense 19 counsel’ s office in Roseville. The Court denied Plaintiff's motion to compel, filed April 20, 2020 20 and heard August 14, 2020, because the Sacramento location, despite its courtesy, did not comply 21 with Code of Civil Procedure section 2025.250(b). Butala Decl., 42 22 Heeding the Court’s instruction and facing an October 19 trial date, Plaintiff immediately 23 served a location-compliant deposition notice by personal service on August 14, 2020. Butala 24 Decl., 3; Ex. A. Defendant’ s counsel did not respond to Plaintiff’s counsel’ s offer to set the 25 deposition on a more convenient date. Instead, FCA objected and did not appear for its properly 26 noticed August 25, 2020 deposition [the “August Deposition”]. Butala Decl., 14; Ex. B. Plaintiff's 27 counsel twice reached out to FCA’s counsel in an attemptto remedy the non-appearance without 28 resort to further motion practice. FCA’s counsel responded: “Plaintiff’s motion to compel the FCA 3 PLAINTIFF’ S EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER SHORTENING TIME PMK was denied by the court.” Hours later, Plaintiffs counsel provided detailed authority showing why the Court’s order regarding the February Deposition does not excuse FCA from the August Deposition. Plaintiff expressed the urgency of this issue and asked that Defendant’ s counsel provide contrary authority or an agreed-upon date for the deposition to go forward. Defendant's counsel did not respond. Butala Decl., 15; Ex. C. Immediately after Defendant 's failure to appear for the August 25, 2020 deposition, Plaintiff reserved the first available hearing date for his motion to compel, October 9, 2020. Butala Decl., 416 This first-available date falls after the current cut-off for discovery motions to be heard based on the October 19, 2020 trial date. Plaintiff therefore seeks an order from this Court 10 shortening time so that his Motion may be heard concurrently with the other discovery motions set 11 on September 18, 2020, or on any other date prior to the October 4, 2020 discovery motion cut- 12 off. 13 Il. EX PARTE RELIEF IS WARRANTED UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES 14 Code Civ. Proc. § 1005 prescribes the times for written notice of motions and for the 15 service and filing of supporting and opposing papers. However, Code Civ. Proc. § 1005(b) 16 provides that “[t]he court, orajudge thereof, may prescribe a shorter time.” See also, Califomia 17 Rules of Court, rule 3.1300(b). Good cause exists to shorten time for the hearing of Plaintiff’ s 18 Motion. Plaintiff acted with diligence in noticing the deposition immediately upon the Court’s 19 denial of the motion to compel February Deposition. Plaintiff also reserved a hearing date for 20 Plaintiff’s Motion immediately after Defendant’ s non-appearance on August 25, 2020. The earliest 21 available date was October 9, 2020, which is after the current discovery motion cut-off date of 22 October 4, 2020. Butala Decl., {16 Thereafter, Plaintiff attempted to resolve this matter informally 23 by sending a detailed statement of his legal position to Defendant’ s counsel and requesting their 24 opposing authority. Defendant’s counsel did not respond, apparently declining to engage in the 25 meet and confer process. Butala Decl., 15; Ex. C. It would be efficient for this motion 26 concurrently with the multiple other discovery motions now set to be heard on September 18, 27 2020. Altematively, setting this Motion for October 2, 2020 would provide full notice, and would 28 also be within the current discovery motion cut-off. 4 PLAINTIFF’ S EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER SHORTENING TIME If ex parte relief is not granted, Plaintiff will be unable to depose FCA’s PMQ. The importance of this deposition cannot be understated: FCA has sole and exclusive possession of information from the fire-cause investigation related to Plaintiff s truck ! Plaintiff filed this action on November 14, 2018. (Ibid.) A year later, FCA initiated a recall of all 2015 Dodge Ram. 1500 EcoDiesel trucks due to risk of spontaneous vehicle fires caused by a defective engine component. Information related to the recall is also uniquely within FCA’s possession, custody, and control. Butala Decl., 17; Ex. D. And, as the Court acknowledged in its August 14, 2020 Order, discovery into this recall and the cause of the fire are “critical” to Plaintiff's case. on topics the Court (see Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1202(c).) If relief is not granted, Plaintiff will not have 10 access to this essential discovery despite his diligence. Butala Decl., 19 11 II. PLAINTIFF COMPLIED WITH CALIFORNIA RULES OF COURT 12 As stated in the Declaration of Neal Butala, filed herewith, counsel has duly complied with 13 the notice requirements of Califomia Rules of Court, rule 3.1203(a) and Califomia Rules of Court, 14 rule 3.1204(b). Defendant indicated it will appear and will oppose this request. 15 IV. CONCLUSION 16 In view of the foregoing facts and authorities, and the matters set forth in the Declaration 17 of Neal Butala filed herewith, Plaintiff hereby submits that good cause exists for an ex parte Order 18 shortening time for notice and hearing of Plaintiff's Motion. 19 DATED: September 3, 2020 BOUCHER LLP 20 By: 21 RAYMOND P. BOUCHER MARIA L. WEITZ 22 NEAL BUTALA Attomeys for Plaintiff, Jey Michael 23 24 1 In response to Plaintiff’ s request for assistance from FCA, FCA informed Plaintiff that it 25 engaged a third-party, Bosch Automotive Services, to perform a vehicle inspection related to the cause of the fire. Based on Bosch’s inspection, FCA informed Plaintiff that it had no responsibility 26 for his damages. Plaintiff timely attempted to obtain information from Bosch by subpoena. Bosch. responded that it does not maintain records ing individual vehicles, including Plaintiff’ s 27 vehicle, and that no documents relating to Plaintiff’ s truck exist within its possession, custody, or 28 control. Butala Decl., 18; Ex. E and F. 5 PLAINTIFF’ S EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER SHORTENING TIME DECLARATION OF NEAL BUTALA I, Neal Butala, declare as follows: 1 Taman attomey duly admitted to practice before this Court. I aman associate with Boucher LLP, attomeys of record for Plaintiff, Jey Michael. I have personal knowledge of the facts set forth herein, and if called as a witness, I could and would competently testify thereto. I make this declaration in support of Plaintiff's Ex Parte Application Requesting an Order Shortening Time to Hear Plaintiff's Motion to Compel the Deposition Attendance of Defendant Fca’s Person Most Qualified and Production of Documents to Sept. 18, 2020. 2. This is Plaintiff’s second attempt to compel FCA’s deposition due to Defendant’s 10 lack of cooperation and communication. Plaintiff first noticed FCA’s deposition for February 13, 11 2020 [the “February Deposition’”]. While FCA is located in Newport Beach, Califomia, FCA’s 12 counsel is located in Roseville, Califomia. Seeking a mutually convenient compromise, Plaintiff 13 set the February deposition near the airport in Sacramento, Califomia. Defendant refused to attend 14 the deposition unless it was rescheduled at defense counsel’ s office in Roseville. The Court denied 15 Plaintiff’ s motion to compel, filed April 20, 2020 and heard August 14, 2020, because the 16 Sacramento location, despite its courtesy, did not comply with Code of Civil Procedure section. 17 2025.250(b). 18 3, Heeding the Court’ s instruction and facing an October 19 trial date, I caused to be 19 served a location-compliant deposition notice by personal service on August 14, 2020. Attached. 20 hereto as Exhibit A is a true and correct copy of Plaintiff's Notice of Deposition. 21 4. FCA objected and did not appear for its properly noticed August 25, 2020 22 deposition. Attached hereto as Exhibit B is a true and correct copy of Defendant's Objections. 23 5, I reached out twice to FCA’s counsel in an attempt to remedy the non-appearance 24 without resort to further motion practice. FCA’s counsel responded: “Plaintiffs motion to compel 25 the FCA PMK was denied by the court.” Hours later, I provided detailed authority showing why 26 the Court’s order regarding the February Deposition does not excuse FCA from the August 27 Deposition. I expressed the urgency of this issue and asked that Defendant's counsel provide 28 contrary authority or an agreed-upon date for the deposition to go forward. Defendant's counsel 6 PLAINTIFF’ S EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER SHORTENING TIME did not respond. Attached hereto as Exhibit C is a true and correct copy of my e-mail communications with FCA's counsel. 6. Immediately after Defendant 's failure to appear for the August 25, 2020 deposition, my office reserved the first available hearing date for Plaintiff's motion to compel, October 9, 2020. 7, Plaintiff filed this action on November 14, 2018 alleging violations of the Song- Beverly Act, negligent repair, and fraudulent concealment. A year after Plaintiff filed this action, FCA initiated a recall of all 2015 Dodge Ram 1500 EcoDiesel trucks due to risk of spontaneous vehicle fires caused by a defective engine component. Information related to the recall is also 10 uniquely within FCA’s possession, custody, and control. Attached hereto as Exhibit D is a true 11 and correct copy of Defendant's recall notice. 12 8. Tn response to Plaintiff’ s request for assistance from FCA, FCA informed Plaintiff 13 that it engaged a third-party, Bosch Automotive Services, to perform a vehicle inspection related 14 to the cause of the fire. Based on Bosch’s inspection, FCA informed Plaintiff that it had no 15 responsibility for his damages. Plaintiff timely attempted to obtain information from Bosch by 16 subpoena. Bosch responded that it does not maintain records regarding individual vehicles, 17 including Plaintiff’ s vehicle, and that no documents relating to Plaintiff’s truck exist within its 18 possession, custody, or control. Attached hereto as Exhibit E is a true and correct copy of 19 Defendant's letter to Plaintiff informing Plaintiff that it had engaged Bosch Automotive Services. 20 Attached hereto as Exhibit F is a true and correct copy of the Bosch's response to Plaintiff's 21 subpoena. 22 9. If relief is not granted, Plaintiff will not have access to this essential discovery 23 despite his diligent and best efforts. 24 10. The name, address and telephone number of Defendant's attomey is: Jon Universal, 25 Universal & Shannon, LLP, 2240 Douglas Blvd Ste 290, Roseville, CA 95661-3874, (916) 780- 26 4050. 27 11. On September 3, 2020, at 9:57a.m., I notified Defendant's counsel, Jon Universal 28 by e-mail that this Ex Parte Application would be presented to this Court at 8:00am. on 7 PLAINTIFF’ S EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER SHORTENING TIME 1| September4, 2020. Defendant's attomey stated that she would oppose this Application. 2 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Califomia that the 3 foregoing is true and correct. 4 Executed on this 3rd day of September, 2020, at Woodland Hills, Califomia. EO FEA- Neal Butala 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 8 PLAINTIFF’ S EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER SHORTENING TIME EXHIBIT A Raymond P. Boucher, State Bar No. 115364 ray@ boucher.la Maria L. Weitz, State Bar No. 268100 weitz@ boucher.la Neal Butala, State Bar No. 289197 butala@ boucher.la BOUCHER LLP 21600 Oxnard Street, Suite 600 Woodland Hills, California 91367-4903 Tel: (818) 340-5400 Fax: (818) 340-5401 Steve Mikhov, Esgq., State Bar No. 224676 stevem@ knightlaw.com Amy Morse, Esgq., State Bar No. 290502 amym@ knightlaw.com KNIGHT LAW GROUP LLP 10250 Constellation Boulevard, Suite 2500 10 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Tel: (310) 552-2250 11 Fax: (310) 552-7973 12 Attorneys for Plaintiff, Jerry Michael 13 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 14 COUNTY OF PLACER 15 16 JERRY A. MICHAEL, Case No. S-CV-0042129 17 Plaintiff, NOTICE OF DEPOSITION OF DEFENDANT’S PERSONG) MOST 18 Vv QUALIFIED AND CUSTODIANG) OF RECORDS 19 FCA US LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability Company; AUBURN CDJR, INC., a Action Filed: November 14, 2018 20 Califormia Corporation, dba AUBURN Trial Date: October 19, 2020 CHRY SLER DODGE JEEP RAM; and DOES 21 1 through 10, inclusive, 22 Defendants. 23 24 TO EACH PARTY AND TO THE COUNSEL OF RECORD FOR EACH PARTY: 25 YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED that on August 25, 2020at 10:00 A.M., before a 26 Certified Court Reporter, at 21600 Oxnard St, Suite 600, Woodland Hills, CA 91367, Plaintiff 27 JERRY A. MICHAEL, through counsel, will take the deposition of FCA US LLC’s Person(s) 28 Most Qualified and Custodian(s) of Record in the above matter. NOTICE OF DEPOSITION OF DEFENDANT’S PERSON(S) MOST KNOWLEDGEABLE AND CUSTODIAN(S) OF RECORDS This deposition will be taken for the purpose of discovery and/or for use as evidence in said matter. This deposition will be taken before a certified shorthand reporter who is authorized to administer an oath. If the deposition is not completed on the date set out above, the taking of the deposition will continue from day to day thereafter, except for weekends and holidays, at the same place, until completed. PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE that Plaintiff will conduct this deposition using web-based or other video teleconferencing services with remote/virtual access for those parties wishing to participate via the internet and/or telephone. The court reporter and videographer will be remote via one of the options above for the purposes of reporting and recording the proceeding, and 10 will not be in the presence of the deponent. All parties and the deposition witness shall be provided 11 via email link with the necessary credentials, call-in numbers, and other information to access the 12 deposition remotely. Each participating attorney may be visible to all other participants, and their 13 statements will be audible to all participants. In lieu of a paper set of exhibits, exhibits may be 14 provided and displayed digitally to deponents, parties, and counsel. All exhibits will be provided 15 simultaneously and electronically to the witness and all participants. Instant visual display of 16 testimony may be used pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure §2025.220. The audio-visual recording 17 may be used at trial, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure §2025.620. The deposition may be 18 recorded electronically. 19 PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE that pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 20 2025.230, Defendant shall designate and produce at the deposition those of its officers, directors, 21 managing agents, employees, or agents who are most qualified to testify on its behalf as to the 22 existence, authenticity, and manner of keeping of the DOCUMENTS described in Exhibit A, and if 23 such persons differ, the officers, directors, managing agents, employees, or agents who are most 24 qualified to testify as to the contents and interpretation of such DOCUMENTS. To facilitate the 25 timely transfer of exhibits to the court reporter for this video conference deposition, the 26 DOCUMENTS shall be produced to counsel for Plaintiff no later than five (5) business days prior 27 to the date set for the deposition. In the event that the deposition is continued by agreement or for 28 any other reason, all DOCUMENTS shall be produced by 10:00 a.m. on the date originally set above 2 NOTICE OF DEPOSITION OF DEFENDANT’S PERSON(S) MOST KNOWLEDGEABLE AND CUSTODIAN(S) OF RECORDS for deposition, regardless of such continuation, unless otherwise agreed to by the parties. DEFINITIONS 1. The word “DOCUMENT” refers to all matters that would fall within the definition of Evidence Code §250, and includes written or printed matter of any kind, including the originals and all non-identical copies thereof, whether different from the original by reason of any notation made on such copies or otherwise including, but not limited to, the following: advertisements, booklets, brochures, pamphlets, circulars, Amended Notices, periodicals, papers, contracts, agreements, photographs, minutes, memoranda, messages, appraisals, analyses, reports, financial calculations and representations, invoices, accounting and diary entries, inventory sheets, diaries, 10 appointment books or calendars, teletypes, facsimiles, ledgers, trial balances, correspondence, 11 telegrams, press releases, notes, working papers, drawings, schedules, tabulations, projections, 12 mails, information or programs stored in a computer (whether or not ever printed out or 13 displayed), and all drafts, alterations, modifications, changes or amendments of any of the 14 foregoing, and all graphic or manual records or representations of any kind including, but not 15 limited to, the following: microfiche, microfilm, audiotapes, videotapes, recordings and motion 16 pictures, and all electronic, mechanical or electronic records or representations of any kind 17 including, but not limited to, the following: Tapes, cassettes, discs, magnetic cards and 18 recordings. Note: This definition includes electronic mail. 19 2. The words “FCA”, “YOU”, and “Y OUR” refer to FCA US LLC and/or any related 20 entity, predecessor, parent, subsidiary and/or affiliate, employee, agent, or any person acting or 21 purporting to act on Defendant, FCA US LLC’s behalf. 22 3. “PERSON?” includes any natural person, firm, association, organization, partnership, 23 business, trust, corporation, or public entity. 24 4. “SUBJECT VEHICLE” refers to the 2015 Dodge Ram 1500, VIN: 25 #1C6RR7LM9FS710636 (the “SUBJECT VEHICLE”). 26 5. “INCIDENT” shall refer to the vehicle fire that consumed and destroyed the SUBJECT 27 VEHICLE onor about January 24, 2018. 28 6. “RECALL” shall refer to NHTSA Recall 19V-757. 3 NOTICE OF DEPOSITION OF DEFENDANT’S PERSON(S) MOST KNOWLEDGEABLE AND CUSTODIAN(S) OF RECORDS 7. “EGR COOLER” shall refer to the exhaust gas recirculation cooler in 2014-2019 Dodge Ram 1500 vehicles equipped with the 3.0L Eco Diesel engine. 8. “ENGINE” shall refer to the 3.0L Eco Diesel engine equipped in 2014-2019 Dodge Ram 1500 vehicles. MATTERS FOR EXAMINATION 1 JERRY A MICHAEL’s (referred to hereafter as “Plaintiff”’) requests for reimbursement, repurchase, or other assistance related to the loss of the SUBJECT VEHICLE. 2 All communications with Plaintiff or anyone acting on their behalf regarding the INCIDENT. 10 3 All claims made upon Y OU by anyone with regard to the INCIDENT. 11 4 All repairs and service performed on the SUBJECT VEHICLE. 12 5, All DOCUMENTS that Y OU reviewed, if any, in determining YOUR response of 13 February 19, 2018 to Plaintiff about the INCIDENT. 14 6 All DOCUMENTS that Y OU reviewed, if any, in investigating the cause of the 15 INCIDENT. 16 7 All persons that Y OU talked to or interviewed or made any other type of inquiries 17 from, in determining Y OUR response to Plaintiff or anyone acting on Plaintiff’s behalf about the 18 INCIDENT. 19 8 Any other investigation that YOU conducted or that was conducted on YOUR 20 behalf in determining Y OUR response to the INCIDENT. 21 9 All telephone calls made by anyone (including Plaintiff) to YOUR 1-800 customer 22 assistance number regarding the INCIDENT. 23 10. The results of any failure mode analysis, warranty parts return analysis, or other 24 analysis or evaluation conducted by Y OU, Y OUR agents, or by any other person or entity known 25 to Y OU, pertaining to the INCIDENT. 26 11. YOUR policies, procedures, or other guidelines regarding responding to consumer 27 complaints in which the consumer alleges that a FCA vehicle is defective from 2014 to present. 28 12. YOUR policies, procedures, or other guidelines for repurchasing or replacing 4 NOTICE OF DEPOSITION OF DEFENDANT’S PERSON(S) MOST KNOWLEDGEABLE AND CUSTODIAN(S) OF RECORDS vehicles under the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act. 13. All DOCUMENTS (including all recordings) produced by Y OU in this litigation thus far. 14. The nature of Y OUR relationship with/to Enginering Bosch Automotive or any other company who handles calls from consumers to FCA’s 1-800 number. 15. The policies and procedures to be followed by Impartial Services Group when receiving a call from a consumer regarding a FCA vehicle. 16. Y OUR oversight of Impartial Services Group or any other company who handles calls from consumers to YOUR 1-800 number. 10 17. Y OUR policies and procedures (including proposals) for reduction of warranty 11 claim buybacks under California lemon law from 2014 to present. 12 18. Y OUR goal for Impartial Services Group to reduce the number of repurchases or 13 vehicle replacements in California from 2014 to present. 14 19. All tasks and duties YOU authorized Impartial Services Group to perform in 15 connection with the handling, management, implementation, decision making, review, auditing, 16 and implementation of any claims made related to a FCA vehicle pursuant to the Song Beverly 17 Act from 2014 to present. 18 20. Any guidance provided by Y OU to Impartial Services Group regarding what 19 constitutes a “non-conformity” under the Song Beverly Act from 2014 to present. 20 21. Any guidance provided by Y OU to Impartial Services Group regarding what 21 constitutes a “reasonable number of repair attempts” under the Song Beverly Act from 2014 to 22 present 23 22. All policies and procedures related to YOUR auditing of Impartial Services 24 Group’s handling of customer complaints under the Song-Beverly Act. 25 23. Y OUR understanding of any and all changes in Impartial Services Group’s policies 26 and procedures for handling customer complaints, which were directed to FCA, relating to the 27 Song Beverly Act from 2014 to present. 28 24. Y OUR policies and procedures for the implementation of any changes, alterations, 5 NOTICE OF DEPOSITION OF DEFENDANT’S PERSON(S) MOST KNOWLEDGEABLE AND CUSTODIAN(S) OF RECORDS interpretations in new case law or other modifications of its policies in administering its obligations under the Song-Beverly Act. 25. All changes in Y OUR policies and procedures related to handling customer complaints in California from 2014 to present. 26. The number of repurchases or replacements that Y OU offered California consumers in response to their personal request for a repurchase (i.e. a consumer request without an attomney involved) for each year from 2014 to present, including: a. The number of vehicles repurchased or replaced pursuant to goodwill / Customer Loyalty Program. 10 b. The number of vehicles repurchased or replaced that were determined to be lemon law 11 eligible. 12 c. The number of personal requests for a repurchase that were denied. 13 d. The number of cash settlements (not a repurchase) offered in response to a personal 14 request for a repurchase. 15 27. The specific design or manufacturing issues that FCA or its suppliers have 16 identified, with respect to FCA’s defective electrical architectures, that can cause or has caused 17 any vehicle systems to fail, including the results of any tests conducted by FCA or its suppliers to 18 identify problems with FCA’s PowerNet. 19 28. Average repair rates and costs at 18 months in service for FCA vehicles equipped 20 with FCA’s defective electrical architectures, and conditions per thousand (C/1000) from 2010 to 21 the present date related to stalling, hesitation, loss of power and no start conditions. 22 29. FCA’s analyses of the root cause(s) of vehicle stalling, hesitation, loss of power, 23 and no crank/no start symptoms in FCA vehicles equipped with FCA’s defective electrical 24 architectures &, including summaries and reports. 25 30. The rate and frequency of warranty repairs to correct symptoms of vehicle stalling, 26 hesitation, loss of power, or no crank/no start symptoms in FCA vehicles equipped with FCA’s 27 defective electrical architectures, including summaries and reports. 28 31. All documents reflecting the failure rates for FCA’s defective electrical 6 NOTICE OF DEPOSITION OF DEFENDANT’S PERSON(S) MOST KNOWLEDGEABLE AND CUSTODIAN(S) OF RECORDS architectures used in FCA vehicles equipped with a PowerNet-related system, including summaries and reports. 32. FCA’s policies and procedures, that were in effect from 2009 to present, related to tracking similar customer complaints for the same year, make, and model vehicles with FCA’s defective electrical architectures. 33. FCA’s policies and procedures, that were in effect from 2009 to present, related to tracking similar warranty repairs for the same year, make, and model vehicles with FCA’s defective electrical architectures. 34. The specific design or manufacturing issues that FCA or its suppliers have 10 identified, with respect to FCA’s defective electrical architectures, that can cause or has caused 11 any vehicle systems to fail, including the results of any tests conducted by FCA or its suppliers to 12 identify problems with the EGR COOLER. 13 35. Average repair rates and costs at 18 months in service for FCA vehicles equipped 14 with FCA’s defective EGR COOLER, and conditions per thousand (C/1000) from 2014 to the 15 present date related to vehicle fires, stalling, hesitation, loss of power and no start conditions. 16 36. FCA’s analyses of the root cause(s) of vehicle fires, vehicle stalling, hesitation, loss 17 of power, and no crank/no start symptoms in FCA vehicles equipped with FCA’s defective EGR 18 COOLER, including summaries and reports. 19 37. The rate and frequency of warranty repairs to correct symptoms of vehicle fires, 20 vehicle stalling, hesitation, loss of power, or no crank/no start symptoms in FCA vehicles 21 equipped with FCA’s defective EGR COOLER, including summaries and reports. 22 38. All documents reflecting the failure rates for FCA’s defective EGR COOLER used 23 in FCA vehicles equipped with the ENGINE, including summaries and reports. 24 39. FCA’s policies and procedures, that were in effect from 2014 to present, related to 25 tracking similar customer complaints for the same year, make, and model vehicles with FCA’s 26 defective electrical architectures. 27 40. FCA’s policies and procedures, that were in effect from 2014 to present, related to 28 tracking similar warranty repairs for the same year, make, and model vehicles with FCA’s 7 NOTICE OF DEPOSITION OF DEFENDANT’S PERSON(S) MOST KNOWLEDGEABLE AND CUSTODIAN(S) OF RECORDS defective EGR COOLER. 41. Any factors that contributed to FCA’s decision to issue the RECALL. 42. Any investigation conducted by FCA into vehicle fires in vehicles with a defective EGR COOLER from 2014 to present. 43. The specific design or manufacturing issues that FCA or its suppliers have identified, with respect to FCA’s defective EGR COOLER, that can cause or has caused any vehicle systems to fail, including the results of any tests conducted by FCA or its suppliers to identify problems with FCA’s EGR COOLER. 44. The specific design or manufacturing issues that FCA or its suppliers have identified, 10 with respect to FCA’s defective ENGINE, that can cause or has caused any vehicle systems to fail, 11 including the results of any tests conducted by FCA or its suppliers to identify problems with 12 FCA’s ENGINE. 13 DATED: August 14, 2020 BOUCHER LLP 14 15 By: ve. 16 RAYMOND P. BOUCHER MARIA L, WEITZ 17 NEAL BUTALA Attomeys for Plaintiff, Jerry Michael 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 8 NOTICE OF DEPOSITION OF DEFENDANT’S PERSON(S) MOST KNOWLEDGEABLE AND CUSTODIAN(S) OF RECORDS EXHIBITA Definitions 1 The term “DOCUMENTS” shall mean “writing” as defined in Evidence Code § 250, which reads in its entirety: “‘Writing’ means handwriting, typewriting, printing, photostating, photographing, photocopying, transmitting by electronic mail or facsimile, and every other means of recording upon any tangible thing, any form of communication or representation, including letters, words, pictures, sounds, or symbols, or combinations thereof, and any record thereby created, regardless of the manner in which the record has been stored.” The term “DOCUMENTS” also includes each copy of a document which is not identical in all respects with or which contains any 10 notations or marks not appearing on said DOCUMENTS. 11 2 The term “CORRESPONDENCE” shall mean any correspondence in any manner, 12 whether by memorandum, letter, memorializations and/or transcriptions of conversations, 13 handwritten note, typewritten note, mail, fax, personal delivery, messenger, e-mail, electronic 14 document of any type or sort, instant message, text message, modem or other electronic, mechanical 15 or manual means. 16 Request for Production 17 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 1: 18 All DOCUMENTS which evidence or discuss Y OUR decision to issue recall 19V-757. 19 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 2: 20 All surveys, reports, summaries, and other DOCUMENTS in which owners of 2014 - 2019 21 Dodge Ram 1500 vehicles have reported to Y OU concerns with vehicle fires. 22 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 3: 23 All DOCUMENTS evidencing, describing, or tracking complaints by owners of 2014 - 24 2019 Dodge Ram 1500 vehicles regarding concems with the EGR COOLER. 25 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 4: 26 All DOCUMENTS evidencing, describing, or tracking vehicle repurchases made by YOU 27 of 2015 Dodge Ram 1500 vehicles and allegedly containing conditions, defects, or 28 9 NOTICE OF DEPOSITION OF DEFENDANT’S PERSON(S) MOST KNOWLEDGEABLE AND CUSTODIAN(S) OF RECORDS nonconformities regarding concerms with the EGR COOLER. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 5: All surveys, reports, summaries, and other DOCUMENTS provided by YOU to NHTSA in which owners of 2014 - 2019 Dodge Ram 1500 vehicles have reported to Y OU vehicle fires. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 6 All DOCUMENTS evidencing and/or describing Y OUR offers to consumers of vehicle payments for vehicles manufactured by Y OU with a defective EGR COOLER. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 7: All DOCUMENTS which evidence any predictive model used to determine if a vehicle 10 equipped with the Eco Diesel 3.0L engine will be repurchased. 11 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 8: 12 All DOCUMENTS which evidence or discuss vehicle fire concems in 2014 — 2019 Dodge 13 Ram 1500 vehicles due to the EGR COOLER. 14 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 9: 15 All of YOUR memorandum regarding failure rates of the EGR COOLER in the Eco Diesel 16 3.0L engine. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 10: 17 All DOCUMENTS evidencing, describing, analyzing, or tracking repair presentations by 18 owners of 2014 - 2019 Dodge Ram 1500 vehicles in which the dealer found thermal fatigue of the 19 EGR COOLER. 20 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 11: 21 All DOCUMENTS which evidence or discuss vehicle fire concems in 2014 — 2019 Dodge 22 Ram 1500 vehicles due to the EGR COOLER. 23 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 12: 24 All of YOUR memorandum regarding thermal fatigue with the EGR COOLER. 25 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 13: 26 All DOCUMENTS evidencing, describing, analyzing, or tracking repair presentations by 27 owners of 2014 — 2019 Dodge Ram 1500 vehicles in which the dealer repaired or replaced the 28 10 NOTICE OF DEPOSITION OF DEFENDANT’S PERSON(S) MOST KNOWLEDGEABLE AND CUSTODIAN(S) OF RECORDS EGR COOLER. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 14: All DOCUMENTS evidencing quality problems identified by YOU in the EGR COOLER used in the 3.0L Eco Diesel Engine from 2014 to present. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 15: All DOCUMENTS evidencing any Failure Mode and Effects Analyses (“FMEA”) generated by Y OU or provided to YOU concerning the 3.0L Eco Diesel engine or any of its parts, components, sub-components, systems, assemblies, or sub-assemblies. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 16: 10 All DOCUMENTS from 2014 to the present date that reflect the relative frequency of 11 engine repairs (R/1000) for Dodge 1500 vehicles equipped with the 3.0L Eco Diesel engine 12 including, but not limited to, all such DOCUMENTS that reflect any comparison of other R/1000 13 rates with the frequency of 3.0L Eco Diesel engine repairs (R/1000). 14 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 17: 15 All DOCUMENTS reflecting any written reports, recorded statements, or communications 16 made by any of YOUR employees (other than FCA’s legal counsel), to any other employee (other 17 than FCA’s legal counsel), that refer or relate in any manner to vehicle fire concems associated 18 with vehicles equipped with the 3.0L Eco Diesel engine during any period (whether monthly, 19 quarterly, semi-annually, annually, or cumulatively) from 2014 to the present date. 20 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 18: 21 All DOCUMENTS evidencing the agenda and/or the meeting minutes of each meeting at 22 which one or more quality concerns in the EGR COOLER were addressed or discussed by YOU 23 with any person other than YOUR attomey. 24 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 19: 25 All DOCUMENTS reflecting the agenda and/or meeting minutes of each meeting at which 26 Y OUR warranty spending or reacquired vehicle spending pertaining to vehicles equipped with the 27 EGR COOLER was addressed or discussed by Y OU with any person other than Y OUR attorney. 28 11 NOTICE OF DEPOSITION OF DEFENDANT’S PERSON(S) MOST KNOWLEDGEABLE AND CUSTODIAN(S) OF RECORDS REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 20: All DOCUMENTS pertaining to the design, manufacturing, performance, and modifications of the 3.0L Eco Diesel Engine thatY OU have included in any disclosure, response, summary, or compilation. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 21: All DOCUMENTS pertaining to advertising campaigns for FCA vehicles that contained the 3.0L Eco Diesel engine. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 22: All DOCUMENTS evidencing Y OUR research, testing, or analyses regarding the EGR 10 COOLER. 11 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 23: 12 All DOCUMENTS evidencing Y OUR research, testing, or analyses regarding the 3.0L 13 Eco Diesel engine. 14 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 24: 15 All DOCUMENTS evidencing Y OUR pre-release research, testing, or analyses regarding 16 the EGR COOLER. 17 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 25: 18 All DOCUMENTS evidencing Y OUR pre-release research, testing, or analyses regarding 19 the 3.0L Eco Diesel engine. 20 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 26: 21 All DOCUMENTS evidencing Y OUR post-release research, testing, or analyses regarding 22 the EGR COOLER. 23 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 27: 24 All DOCUMENTS evidencing Y OUR post-release research, testing, or analyses regarding 25 the 3.0L Eco Diesel engine. 26 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 28: 27 All of Y OUR internal correspondence regarding problems or repair strategies for the EGR 28 COOLER. 12 NOTICE OF DEPOSITION OF DEFENDANT’S PERSON(S) MOST KNOWLEDGEABLE AND CUSTODIAN(S) OF RECORDS REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 29: All of Y OUR internal correspondence regarding problems or repair strategies for the 3.0L Eco Diesel engine. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 30: All DOCUMENTS which describe or discuss Y OUR average repair rates to 2014 — 2019 Dodge Ram 1500 vehicles. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 31: All of Y OUR internal correspondence regarding repair rates for the EGR COOLER. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 32: 10 All of Y OUR internal correspondence regarding repair rates for the 3.0L Eco Diesel 11 engine. 12 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 33: 13 All of Y OUR internal correspondence regarding thermal fatigue with the EGR COOLER. 14 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 34: 15 All of YOUR correspondence to component manufacturers regarding problems with the 16 EGR COOLER. 17 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 35: 18 All of YOUR correspondence to component manufacturers regarding problems with the 19 3.0L Eco Diesel engine. 20 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 36: 21 All DOCUMENTS which evidence or describe engine failure in 2014 — 2019 Dodge Ram 22 1500 vehicles equipped with the 3.0L Eco Diesel engine. 23 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 37: 24 All DOCUMENTS produced by Y OU in response to any NHTSA investigation pertaining 25 to the EGR COOLER. 26 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 38: 27 All DOCUMENTS produced by Y OU in response to any regulatory investigation 28 pertaining to the EGR COOLER. 13 NOTICE OF DEPOSITION OF DEFENDANT’S PERSON(S) M