Page 1 No. AIN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION ONE
RANDEEP HOTHI,
Plaintiff-Respondent,
v.
ELON MUSK
On Appeal from the Superior Court for the County of Alameda
Hon. Julia Spain, Judge,
Case No. RGAPPELLANT’S APPENDIX
VOLUME IV OF VIII, PAGES AA326 TO AA
ALEX SPIRO
(pro hac vice admission
pending)
QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART
& SULLIVAN, LLP
51 Madison Avenue, 22nd Floor
New York, NY Telephone: (212) 849-Facsimile: (212) 849-alexspiro@quinnemanuel.com
MICHAEL T. LIFRAK
(S.B. No. 210846)
JEANINE ZALDUENDO
(S.B. No. 243374)
QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART
& SULLIVAN, LLP
865 S. Figueroa Street, 10th Fl.
Los Angeles, CA Telephone: (213) 443-Facsimile: (212) 443-michaellifrak@quinnemanuel.com
Counsel for Defendant-Appellant Elon Musk
AA
Document received by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
Defendant-Appellant.Page 2 Randeep Hothi v. Elon Musk
First Appellate District Court of Appeal, Case No. A(Alameda County Superior Court Case No. RG20069852)
APPELLANT’S APPENDIX
CHRONOLOGICAL INDEX
Description
Date
Verified Complaint for Damages
and Demand for Jury Trial Filed
by Randeep Hothi
Defendant Elon Musk’s Answer
and Affirmative Defenses to the
Verified Complaint of Plaintiff
Randeep Hothi
Defendant Elon Musk’s Motion
to Strike the Complaint Pursuant
to Cal. Code. Civ. Proc. Section
425.16; Memorandum of Points
and Authorities in Support
Thereof
Declaration of Christine Leslie in
Support of Defendant Elon
Musk’s Motion to Strike the
Complaint Pursuant to Cal. Code.
Civ. Proc. Section 425.Declaration of Elon Musk in
Support of Defendant Elon
Musk’s Motion to Strike the
Complaint Pursuant to Cal. Code.
Civ. Proc. Section 425.Declaration of Tyler James in
Support of Defendant Elon
Musk’s Motion to Strike the
AA
Page No.
08/04/
Vol.
No.
I
09/28/
I
AA
10/30/
I
AA
10/30/
I
AA
10/30/
I
AA
10/30/
I
AA
AA
Document received by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
Ex. No.Page 3
AA
10/30/
I
AA
10/30/
II
AA
10/30/
III
AA
10/30/
IV
AA
10/30/
V
AA
10/30/
VI
AA
Document received by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
Complaint Pursuant to Cal. Code.
Civ. Proc. Section 425.Declaration of Jeanine Zalduendo
in Support of Defendant Elon
Musk’s Motion to Strike the
Complaint Pursuant to Cal. Code.
Civ. Proc. Section 425.Defendant Elon Musk’s Request
for Judicial Notice in Support of
His Motion to Strike the
Complaint Pursuant to Cal. Code.
Civ. Proc. Section 425.16, and
Exhibits A-F thereto
Exhibit G (part 1) to Defendant
Elon Musk’s Request for Judicial
Notice in Support of His Motion
to Strike the Complaint Pursuant
to Cal. Code. Civ. Proc. Section
425.Exhibit G (part 2) to Defendant
Elon Musk’s Request for Judicial
Notice in Support of His Motion
to Strike the Complaint Pursuant
to Cal. Code. Civ. Proc. Section
425.Exhibits H-I to Defendant Elon
Musk’s Request for Judicial
Notice in Support of His Motion
to Strike the Complaint Pursuant
to Cal. Code. Civ. Proc. Section
425.Exhibits J-L to Defendant Elon
Musk’s Request for Judicial
Notice in Support of His Motion
to Strike the Complaint PursuantPage 4
AA
10/30/
VII
AA
11/03/
VII
AA
01/12/
VII
AA
01/12/
VII
AA
01/12/
VIII
AA
01/20/
VIII
AA
01/20/
VIII
AA
01/20/
VIII
AA
Document received by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
to Cal. Code. Civ. Proc. Section
425.[Proposed] Order Granting
Defendant Elon Musk’s Motion
to Strike the Complaint Pursuant
to Cal. Code Civ. Proc. Section
425.Notice of Errata Regarding the
Signature Page to the Declaration
of Elon Musk’s Motion to Strike
the Complaint Pursuant to Cal.
Code Civ. Proc. Section 425.Plaintiff Randeep Hothi’s
Memorandum in Opposition to
Plaintiff Elon Musk’s Special
Motion to Strike
Declaration of Randeep Hothi in
Support of His Opposition to
Defendant’s Special Motion to
Strike
Plaintiff Randeep Hothi’s
Objections to Defendant’s
Evidence Submitted in Support of
Defendant’s Special Motion to
Strike
Reply in Support of Defendant
Elon Musk’s Motion to Strike the
Complaint Pursuant to Cal. Code
Civ. Proc. Section 425.Elon Musk’s Evidentiary
Objections to the Declaration of
Randeep Hothi
Defendant Elon Musk’s
Responses to Plaintiff Randeep
Hothi’s Evidentiary ObjectionsPage 5
Plaintiff Randeep Hothi’s
Response to Elon Musk’s
Evidentiary Objections to the
Declaration of Randeep Hothi
Order - Motion to Strike
Complaint Denied
Notice of Appeal
Appellant’s Notice Designating
Record on Appeal
Register of Actions and
Certificate
01/22/
VIII
AA
01/27/
VIII
AA
03/24/04/01/
VIII
VIII
AAAA
05/11/
VIII
AA
Document received by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
AA330Page 6 Randeep Hothi v. Elon Musk
First Appellate District Court of Appeal, Case No. A(Alameda County Superior Court Case No. RG20069852)
APPELLANT’S APPENDIX
ALPHABETICAL INDEX
Description
Date
Appellant’s Notice Designating
Record on Appeal
Declaration of Christine Leslie in
Support of Defendant Elon
Musk’s Motion to Strike the
Complaint Pursuant to Cal. Code.
Civ. Proc. Section 425.Declaration of Elon Musk in
Support of Defendant Elon
Musk’s Motion to Strike the
Complaint Pursuant to Cal. Code.
Civ. Proc. Section 425.Declaration of Jeanine Zalduendo
in Support of Defendant Elon
Musk’s Motion to Strike the
Complaint Pursuant to Cal. Code.
Civ. Proc. Section 425.Declaration of Randeep Hothi in
Support of His Opposition to
Defendant’s Special Motion to
Strike
Declaration of Tyler James in
Support of Defendant Elon
Musk’s Motion to Strike the
Complaint Pursuant to Cal. Code.
Civ. Proc. Section 425.
AA
Page No.
04/01/
Vol.
No.
VIII
10/30/
I
AA
10/30/
I
AA
10/30/
I
AA
01/12/
VII
AA
10/30/
I
AA
AA
Document received by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
Ex. No.Page 7
Defendant Elon Musk’s Answer
and Affirmative Defenses to the
Verified Complaint of Plaintiff
Randeep Hothi
Defendant Elon Musk’s Motion
to Strike the Complaint Pursuant
to Cal. Code. Civ. Proc. Section
425.16; Memorandum of Points
and Authorities in Support
Thereof
Defendant Elon Musk’s Request
for Judicial Notice in Support of
His Motion to Strike the
Complaint Pursuant to Cal. Code.
Civ. Proc. Section 425.16, and
Exhibits A-F thereto
Defendant Elon Musk’s
Responses to Plaintiff Randeep
Hothi’s Evidentiary Objections
Elon Musk’s Evidentiary
Objections to the Declaration of
Randeep Hothi
Exhibit G (part 1) to Defendant
Elon Musk’s Request for Judicial
Notice in Support of His Motion
to Strike the Complaint Pursuant
to Cal. Code. Civ. Proc. Section
425.Exhibit G (part 2) to Defendant
Elon Musk’s Request for Judicial
Notice in Support of His Motion
to Strike the Complaint Pursuant
to Cal. Code. Civ. Proc. Section
425.Exhibits H-I to Defendant Elon
Musk’s Request for Judicial
AA
09/28/
I
AA
10/30/
I
AA
10/30/
II
AA
01/20/
VIII
AA
01/20/
VIII
AA
10/30/
III
AA
10/30/
IV
AA
10/30/
V
AA
Document received by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
02Page 8
AA
10/30/
VI
AA
03/24/11/03/
VIII
VII
AAAA
01/27/
VIII
AA
01/12/
VII
AA
01/12/
VIII
AA
01/22/
VIII
AA
10/30/
VII
AA
Document received by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
Notice in Support of His Motion
to Strike the Complaint Pursuant
to Cal. Code. Civ. Proc. Section
425.Exhibits J-L to Defendant Elon
Musk’s Request for Judicial
Notice in Support of His Motion
to Strike the Complaint Pursuant
to Cal. Code. Civ. Proc. Section
425.Notice of Appeal
Notice of Errata Regarding the
Signature Page to the Declaration
of Elon Musk’s Motion to Strike
the Complaint Pursuant to Cal.
Code Civ. Proc. Section 425.Order - Motion to Strike
Complaint Denied
Plaintiff Randeep Hothi’s
Memorandum in Opposition to
Plaintiff Elon Musk’s Special
Motion to Strike
Plaintiff Randeep Hothi’s
Objections to Defendant’s
Evidence Submitted in Support of
Defendant’s Special Motion to
Strike
Plaintiff Randeep Hothi’s
Response to Elon Musk’s
Evidentiary Objections to the
Declaration of Randeep Hothi
[Proposed] Order Granting
Defendant Elon Musk’s Motion
to Strike the Complaint Pursuant
to Cal. Code Civ. Proc. Section
425.16Page 9
Register of Actions and
Certificate
Reply in Support of Defendant
Elon Musk’s Motion to Strike the
Complaint Pursuant to Cal. Code
Civ. Proc. Section 425.Verified Complaint for Damages
and Demand for Jury Trial Filed
by Randeep Hothi
05/11/
VIII
AA
01/20/
VIII
AA
08/04/
I
AA
Document received by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
No. A162400
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION ONE
RANDEEP HOTHI,
Plaintiff-Respondent,
v.
ELON MUSK
On Appeal from the Superior Court for the County of Alameda
Hon. Julia Spain, Judge,
Case No. RG20069852
APPELLANT’S APPENDIX
VOLUME IV OF VIII, PAGES AA326 TO AA390
ALEX SPIRO
(pro hac vice admission
pending)
QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART
& SULLIVAN, LLP
51 Madison Avenue, 22nd Floor
New York, NY 10010
Telephone: (212) 849-7000
Facsimile: (212) 849-7100
alexspiro@quinnemanuel.com
MICHAEL T. LIFRAK
(S.B. No. 210846)
JEANINE ZALDUENDO
(S.B. No. 243374)
QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART
& SULLIVAN, LLP
865 S. Figueroa Street, 10th Fl.
Los Angeles, CA 90017
Telephone: (213) 443-3000
Facsimile: (212) 443-3100
michaellifrak@quinnemanuel.com
Counsel for Defendant-Appellant Elon Musk
AA326
Document received by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
Defendant-Appellant.
PDF Page 3
Randeep Hothi v. Elon Musk
First Appellate District Court of Appeal, Case No. A162400
(Alameda County Superior Court Case No. RG20069852)
APPELLANT’S APPENDIX
CHRONOLOGICAL INDEX
Description
Date
01
Verified Complaint for Damages
and Demand for Jury Trial Filed
by Randeep Hothi
Defendant Elon Musk’s Answer
and Affirmative Defenses to the
Verified Complaint of Plaintiff
Randeep Hothi
Defendant Elon Musk’s Motion
to Strike the Complaint Pursuant
to Cal. Code. Civ. Proc. Section
425.16; Memorandum of Points
and Authorities in Support
Thereof
Declaration of Christine Leslie in
Support of Defendant Elon
Musk’s Motion to Strike the
Complaint Pursuant to Cal. Code.
Civ. Proc. Section 425.16
Declaration of Elon Musk in
Support of Defendant Elon
Musk’s Motion to Strike the
Complaint Pursuant to Cal. Code.
Civ. Proc. Section 425.16
Declaration of Tyler James in
Support of Defendant Elon
Musk’s Motion to Strike the
02
03
04
05
06
AA327
Page No.
08/04/2020
Vol.
No.
I
09/28/2020
I
AA023
10/30/2020
I
AA034
10/30/2020
I
AA057
10/30/2020
I
AA068
10/30/2020
I
AA084
AA010
Document received by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
Ex. No.
PDF Page 4
08
09
10
11
12
AA328
10/30/2020
I
AA087
10/30/2020
II
AA160
10/30/2020
III
AA268
10/30/2020
IV
AA335
10/30/2020
V
AA400
10/30/2020
VI
AA547
Document received by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
07
Complaint Pursuant to Cal. Code.
Civ. Proc. Section 425.16
Declaration of Jeanine Zalduendo
in Support of Defendant Elon
Musk’s Motion to Strike the
Complaint Pursuant to Cal. Code.
Civ. Proc. Section 425.16
Defendant Elon Musk’s Request
for Judicial Notice in Support of
His Motion to Strike the
Complaint Pursuant to Cal. Code.
Civ. Proc. Section 425.16, and
Exhibits A-F thereto
Exhibit G (part 1) to Defendant
Elon Musk’s Request for Judicial
Notice in Support of His Motion
to Strike the Complaint Pursuant
to Cal. Code. Civ. Proc. Section
425.16
Exhibit G (part 2) to Defendant
Elon Musk’s Request for Judicial
Notice in Support of His Motion
to Strike the Complaint Pursuant
to Cal. Code. Civ. Proc. Section
425.16
Exhibits H-I to Defendant Elon
Musk’s Request for Judicial
Notice in Support of His Motion
to Strike the Complaint Pursuant
to Cal. Code. Civ. Proc. Section
425.16
Exhibits J-L to Defendant Elon
Musk’s Request for Judicial
Notice in Support of His Motion
to Strike the Complaint Pursuant
PDF Page 5
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
AA329
10/30/2020
VII
AA609
11/03/2020
VII
AA612
01/12/2021
VII
AA616
01/12/2021
VII
AA636
01/12/2021
VIII
AA773
01/20/2021
VIII
AA781
01/20/2021
VIII
AA797
01/20/2021
VIII
AA802
Document received by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
13
to Cal. Code. Civ. Proc. Section
425.16
[Proposed] Order Granting
Defendant Elon Musk’s Motion
to Strike the Complaint Pursuant
to Cal. Code Civ. Proc. Section
425.16
Notice of Errata Regarding the
Signature Page to the Declaration
of Elon Musk’s Motion to Strike
the Complaint Pursuant to Cal.
Code Civ. Proc. Section 425.16
Plaintiff Randeep Hothi’s
Memorandum in Opposition to
Plaintiff Elon Musk’s Special
Motion to Strike
Declaration of Randeep Hothi in
Support of His Opposition to
Defendant’s Special Motion to
Strike
Plaintiff Randeep Hothi’s
Objections to Defendant’s
Evidence Submitted in Support of
Defendant’s Special Motion to
Strike
Reply in Support of Defendant
Elon Musk’s Motion to Strike the
Complaint Pursuant to Cal. Code
Civ. Proc. Section 425.16
Elon Musk’s Evidentiary
Objections to the Declaration of
Randeep Hothi
Defendant Elon Musk’s
Responses to Plaintiff Randeep
Hothi’s Evidentiary Objections
PDF Page 6
22
23
24
25
Plaintiff Randeep Hothi’s
Response to Elon Musk’s
Evidentiary Objections to the
Declaration of Randeep Hothi
Order - Motion to Strike
Complaint Denied
Notice of Appeal
Appellant’s Notice Designating
Record on Appeal
Register of Actions and
Certificate
01/22/2021
VIII
AA822
01/27/2021
VIII
AA829
03/24/2021
04/01/2021
VIII
VIII
AA835
AA837
05/11/2021
VIII
AA842
Document received by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
21
AA330
PDF Page 7
Randeep Hothi v. Elon Musk
First Appellate District Court of Appeal, Case No. A162400
(Alameda County Superior Court Case No. RG20069852)
APPELLANT’S APPENDIX
ALPHABETICAL INDEX
Description
Date
24
Appellant’s Notice Designating
Record on Appeal
Declaration of Christine Leslie in
Support of Defendant Elon
Musk’s Motion to Strike the
Complaint Pursuant to Cal. Code.
Civ. Proc. Section 425.16
Declaration of Elon Musk in
Support of Defendant Elon
Musk’s Motion to Strike the
Complaint Pursuant to Cal. Code.
Civ. Proc. Section 425.16
Declaration of Jeanine Zalduendo
in Support of Defendant Elon
Musk’s Motion to Strike the
Complaint Pursuant to Cal. Code.
Civ. Proc. Section 425.16
Declaration of Randeep Hothi in
Support of His Opposition to
Defendant’s Special Motion to
Strike
Declaration of Tyler James in
Support of Defendant Elon
Musk’s Motion to Strike the
Complaint Pursuant to Cal. Code.
Civ. Proc. Section 425.16
04
05
07
16
06
AA331
Page No.
04/01/2021
Vol.
No.
VIII
10/30/2020
I
AA057
10/30/2020
I
AA068
10/30/2020
I
AA087
01/12/2021
VII
AA636
10/30/2020
I
AA084
AA837
Document received by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
Ex. No.
PDF Page 8
03
08
20
19
09
10
11
Defendant Elon Musk’s Answer
and Affirmative Defenses to the
Verified Complaint of Plaintiff
Randeep Hothi
Defendant Elon Musk’s Motion
to Strike the Complaint Pursuant
to Cal. Code. Civ. Proc. Section
425.16; Memorandum of Points
and Authorities in Support
Thereof
Defendant Elon Musk’s Request
for Judicial Notice in Support of
His Motion to Strike the
Complaint Pursuant to Cal. Code.
Civ. Proc. Section 425.16, and
Exhibits A-F thereto
Defendant Elon Musk’s
Responses to Plaintiff Randeep
Hothi’s Evidentiary Objections
Elon Musk’s Evidentiary
Objections to the Declaration of
Randeep Hothi
Exhibit G (part 1) to Defendant
Elon Musk’s Request for Judicial
Notice in Support of His Motion
to Strike the Complaint Pursuant
to Cal. Code. Civ. Proc. Section
425.16
Exhibit G (part 2) to Defendant
Elon Musk’s Request for Judicial
Notice in Support of His Motion
to Strike the Complaint Pursuant
to Cal. Code. Civ. Proc. Section
425.16
Exhibits H-I to Defendant Elon
Musk’s Request for Judicial
AA332
09/28/2020
I
AA023
10/30/2020
I
AA034
10/30/2020
II
AA160
01/20/2021
VIII
AA802
01/20/2021
VIII
AA797
10/30/2020
III
AA268
10/30/2020
IV
AA335
10/30/2020
V
AA400
Document received by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
02
PDF Page 9
23
14
22
15
17
21
13
AA333
10/30/2020
VI
AA547
03/24/2021
11/03/2020
VIII
VII
AA835
AA612
01/27/2021
VIII
AA829
01/12/2021
VII
AA616
01/12/2021
VIII
AA773
01/22/2021
VIII
AA822
10/30/2020
VII
AA609
Document received by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
12
Notice in Support of His Motion
to Strike the Complaint Pursuant
to Cal. Code. Civ. Proc. Section
425.16
Exhibits J-L to Defendant Elon
Musk’s Request for Judicial
Notice in Support of His Motion
to Strike the Complaint Pursuant
to Cal. Code. Civ. Proc. Section
425.16
Notice of Appeal
Notice of Errata Regarding the
Signature Page to the Declaration
of Elon Musk’s Motion to Strike
the Complaint Pursuant to Cal.
Code Civ. Proc. Section 425.16
Order - Motion to Strike
Complaint Denied
Plaintiff Randeep Hothi’s
Memorandum in Opposition to
Plaintiff Elon Musk’s Special
Motion to Strike
Plaintiff Randeep Hothi’s
Objections to Defendant’s
Evidence Submitted in Support of
Defendant’s Special Motion to
Strike
Plaintiff Randeep Hothi’s
Response to Elon Musk’s
Evidentiary Objections to the
Declaration of Randeep Hothi
[Proposed] Order Granting
Defendant Elon Musk’s Motion
to Strike the Complaint Pursuant
to Cal. Code Civ. Proc. Section
425.16
PDF Page 10
18
01
Register of Actions and
Certificate
Reply in Support of Defendant
Elon Musk’s Motion to Strike the
Complaint Pursuant to Cal. Code
Civ. Proc. Section 425.16
Verified Complaint for Damages
and Demand for Jury Trial Filed
by Randeep Hothi
05/11/2021
VIII
AA842
01/20/2021
VIII
AA781
08/04/2020
I
AA010
Document received by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
25
AA334
PDF Page 11
Exhibit Number 10
RESPONDENTRANOEEPHOTHI 'S MOTION fORFEES
AA335
Document received by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
Exhibit H
II
1:•r~n,, .. ... ..,Oil" 1,-.
Rl!~JOodt.·ot h:1~ o hisrcryof !tt!JfJ"U,it':a ar 1C"sla·'!i foeiiirjr.s. ~riJ:,w(ulfy t11Jcin,y ph'1to:ttt:(J.11 sa,,d vidr.o M
JkJ.it on l1iJ
rw;1,,r orc~!1t4M cf~tr rr.i~cond~cl ,s· &\fi[wfocd ,r, lht l f!,if;e ~cl!lmtf 1:tn1, l!J,f"!• l•~~j
bz~il':.!CIJI
~nfro,1la:lens ir\1'1ih Ted1.1 rmp!o)"f:es
loan jncident in re~ua,y 2019 Respc,c,denr hi t T~kJ 's securi,v tmpfo~t TyfN James wirh his car tJS M,.
Janw:'ii appmar.hW Rtsocnth:ne roo1k him 10 ~uvt:, TI~.sk(s privutc 1>m1~rry. Mr. Tyl,;t STJ({t.ff!d 1r. lmu
lnjc.,ries. The Rz;;pondti,cd:rf r'lllf stnp.Jnd llcd r~ JCet.e. Th" Frerr.orit PQJlt:e Otpattmcnr wtrt i:olJtd and
-......, r,:"oi~.,~···• ............,,
,~...!~ ,<;11,on .,..,:_11J..•~ it
t•
·1;·., ,~,~ 1:1i,,1i· :_;
~• 1'0• r ;\!',~t)
an ivL'tl vii the Kt.Tie. Tiw. Dr.;,,anm,!fli lute, oHcmp?c."i la i'!i'-tie il1:Sr.ond1."nt a warn ir-.'.l 1101i<1J ~t rrt..•1pasi.
but was im~uc,;r;S)ftJI beai~.'iil!: Rec:1)01Jdtnt has rJ'Vl)irle-d t1nd been U'1Coop,tro:iveinmeetins with F~mont
·;p.1,::":- " ''.4;t>id-l. F- ct iCC!l1 ~n,
;..'iP.i.! <'.""':~~:c -:h,::-1:,, ..:~ ri ~ ....
pr1lir:.: cl(ace:rs.
Mort rec•mtly. en AJJ(il .t6, 2019, R~p0ndet1l nalked. haros~cd, amll!ndt111llt.1e!1 (Hut, Tej!d emplcyt.:t!J
wh" WErf. .:1.-ivin,'t rm tlle hl,!hwarir1 r.i Teslo mtrsf!m;y mciof:~>t'Tr ! .} U'1>id
fl.""Si '- ~ Mn~ltit ~~ ,~l'i ~ •..o,d,~I
>i at? f!.t,:irly i~ti·)', !t!-• , :ik,.i-t
!,1l.t \l::' i !i~ ,r: :i:i! l.;~.t tXI
t,.,~c-,.
H.i tnftuJll
.I..
..
Free Wi-Fi'
-
Avo1labie at over 64 miliion
hotspots war ld\'llidc.
BOOJ
PDF Page 14
rn,;, Q{(,t;t.-s wt"' i!I fht a,ea. flt::e T6kJ f:'rr.pkl~-rti) uJtimc;t~}ydid not rt-ij11t:st lhot on otf1r:t.r ~stnt M rh,-j f
'ocotiOfl
On April 12, 2019, Tc-slll wilt host lln evenr ot its htadqwrrc,s ~t 3500 Deer C:eck Rcod PaJoArto. durfn3
wh,'ch T-?.SM t.'m~oyee~
wm lK: de:toothttfilfr:~ oH.hidt (unt o Tc.do shc,t-~lit,, r1N1 li••~ts et '1Q5-1ed im;:,ges of the ccmpatry's: Model 3 test Cilron Twitter. Among these suggestions ioduCc
bt.lklng l.n froi,l ,of resli:l's test vehicles, as well .n lr.tcnlionilliy swervln.i into the t:lectric (',:irs· hme
lo ensure thi'lt the company's demonstratfons Me .authentic. Other Tesla bears also jok~d that it
would be ,1Ml.!S(ng if :h~ Mod~I 3 Ct:tsh~d.
Due to his actions. the noted Tc5JJ bc.1rw II now be required to St.ly Pt lc~:ist \OOyard~ t>'Ninin.g orditr. He is al,o requi,ed to stav
Y'J'Yard~ May trom <>nY resl.'.l v~~i~le YJ"lth manutuC.turer pl31les within hvc miles of the tauory. The.
t~str3,nffil;o,der ,s effect Ne unU\ M;w 7 when a he.1nng is set
Free Wi-Fi'
1
the Tiest,1,rihi: \ n~ddc'5s ~,dion'5 st,cmed tu l..wr. ~ternm~d from a par-tkul,1r fou.1..\ en Tl"\ll~
uotoming A~tonomv lnve-.tor O.l'I on April 22. wt'lert thf eletdit1.irt J n ~rr;:nJkr
leit rides on-..,ehides equipped with ur,re.l~Jsed fe,uur6 of Autopilot and the Full St-lt•Ori..-ing
suite Jre al!o ~,cpKled' to oe held inthe~nt
Neither Tesl1 nat f-l0Lhi have· t@ipond~1d hi rP.qUe~h far c,,rnrntnt to medi~ pulllic,it1cm: ~ut. •1will r.or
re,t T~i'i is my promi~fl' Tl'.!'!'iln
,;1
tero. ie,r.lonrnusk willxoto pr;son.' El<.m Musk, /or hi\ p~rt noted
oo fwilter lhaf Lhe ..\ctlons of the not~ Tc~li! be.Jr was o;omethlng that he h\lS never seen before
Avoilablc at over 64 million
hotspots worldwide.
BOOK NOW
Hertz
. . _ ___
t:n..-:1
A
'llv (;oi,;!.~..,,
.s;,~· ~:o ~:•>':;
l~.;.>t.:-i'i:r, 1';1 '.6$ 'l.;::r.i:1,t\\o ~!!,) ,1 .,:~•~(;111
Jt,!;t $,U',11 0\0 ,0~1,U!inGi (.ll(SO( li\.lt 'W:iU l!f.t<.I aga1ris! n:rn be(.'~US,(t htt hil
a fesiI the ~ l =n~al'JU m,t1g11 it
PDF Page 15
RESPONDENT RANDEEP HOTHT'S MOTION FOR FEES
AA339
Document received by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
Exhibit I
PDF Page 16
EXAMPLES FROM TWITTER
Clarence W orley
- .:'~::••,:~'-:': ·. -;_-Q;;r,.:r: l"J,'·r9,: :-=~=,.~ ·t•1:;•·: 1:d.:lp.,:·1::::·
_ ,~,.1~-".;::::._ n~~· .=•:;c1·:h:-r ·:e :L ....
= li:.abeth Soechting -'} ' 1,iG'i-:=:f-':eal t.3 • /•.r,:r
20
v
t hope the case @skabooshka shows joumos ,.-,hat kind of people hey have bei=:n
rt?lying e n, ~tslaq a1tracts crir:1 :nal mindse s a c people ful l of ha:red. ~ o~ vali d
o r reliable sources
011
_:;n
i1
;:;o tant top ic Ii e ft EVRevolution, #Tes la.
-#Teslalmpact.
Pas:.ionPlanet '..!-'P.:issionP:an<2i 1 · Apr 20
V
You're a fraud :and you 're a v12ry 5ick person, Wl> ile I und er~tand you five with your
fa ther and don·t understan d the rea l economics of what t his is doi119 to try to hurt
emp!cyees is <1 whOle nother t ~·ng I r,ope you get wha 's com ing o yot now th at
you 've been doxed. Fraud,
71
)
Kim Paquette 3. k r1pdOt:e::'.lo::: •
~.!,
2·
✓
Arc l'OW S s_;.Q is ercc.1·ag ng others to take wp sabot:agi.,g the event in
Skabooshka 's st~ac. SICK. '(12~1 people
.ue S CK. Le-t Skabooshka be a lesson -
7esla sr t putting u;: w,th this crap. Po ice will be c.; 'ed. STSLA
Daniel : ..... Scott ;;; Cr-:rBby • ' pr ;::o
Repl/11',g to @Matt MillecrCubed @tesla_tr 1th
Amazing how many of these assholes turns out to be working for a, ICE
auto1m ker. Pipperger. skabooshka 's brother, Preaching about 1ntegri •y and
moral character all day. Turns cu they're the rea l frauds, Sad.
5
"j
AA340
Document received by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
E2ply•1 SJ to @skabooshka @elo, musk
PDF Page 17
Starlin k & flocks of Cars :~.ii!•,.•., :· c•:••)eni'.~o;a • ;..;:, .: ,
F ~1~1y:1,] 1.c: @:skabooshka ~.:for.musk and ;J ,)~: 21.:
@SEC_Enrorcemer-t ancl @Fel This is ,•:b3t you "leed to investigate. i;
PDF Page 18
MrManderly '''.1- '.r\i.Hh.ied,: 1 :,,
v
Trying to crash a vehicle with occupants in it Js very definitely atternpiecl -nurder.
!ts especially eg,egious when all youi tv.ritter friend are encouraging you to do it
before hand. tha, makes it premeditated.
01
;..::J
EXAMPLES FROM ELECTREK.CO
l
0.-.11id Gilmore ""' . ,
My comment was rcnmve:CI for nam,ng the terrorist Hwolved. But ,t'n .ill public record Tl·,cre's no ncco to cle:etc
comments that have public inforrnation that was onutted by the article for no reason. The W/ connection is really
ihe crux of this whole story. We have to name names. Tris is REAL news for a change. Not idle clickba,t.
S i1,u1,
- - - Change ..,. ,
~
I ,(
t;
I 11 ,,
I'
1
;
Yes by not naming them peoole are already wrongly thinking these are some poorly educated idiots. Both of
them are in fact highly educated and these are very deliberate and planned attacks on Tesla and Tesla
employees. T>ie truths needs :o be told and these people need to be held accountable for the,r terror. ll VW is
TlmRowledge \ :,• -n1h1i
,· t,)
,.:,:=t:::I
So a grcup cf ~cple commun,cat1ng to plan actions that will plausibly ci1use 1ng car by inlsnt,onally wrecking ,t'I Ai the best !he stc,y:•ne \•,ould be · ,J,01 wrecks imo resla wMa
obvious demo ~quip"'ent 15 set ,ioAJ!.io is l hcrc not ln...•JS ,1qa1nst Sclbot~g1119 a coin~any 1hat you ht-1vo a tmnnc1nl inc.?ntwe to do so·,' su,~lv th..,t iS n J'41I .Jbfo otfense
S I ru
., •
,...._~
deJ,e,knis :~ rn:.i,11h·.~ ,"~I'•
l SLAO seems to becomirg or,creas,ngly radicalized. I hope the FBI is invesligatlng - I could see 011e of 1he mere radical memt:ers
rJ~cKJing that a bomb at Fr~mont would t:" good tor u,e c~use.
AA342
Document received by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
actively involved 111 orchestrating physical attacks on Tesla employP-es and property this 1s a very big story.
PDF Page 19
Brv-1n B3kctr
ti
m.,-1,!th •'.\;!,}
It's tlma for everyone lo cool oft a htlle bit here.· No. ,t G lima tor \11is wack lob to crawl back inlo his hole. and for Teslu to oontir.ua to
mmp up protec11ons aga.nsl him and his ilk. Never give anything lo n buily--all they'll want is a little more.
IH,,...
Sh.-"";
I think the Tasia Secu111y depa1 tmen1 snould keep the FBI lnform&d about these ,wents. I am immediately reminded of Ted Kaczynski
who ended up ln .i Superm(lx Facility. From 1/./ik,pedia ·some neo·Luddites use v~ndalism and or vrotenco to nch,eve social change
and promote their cause • Tho carispi,a~,- angle a!so wmra,ns rurth~r research.
9 , . ._
Shat"',
4r
h4rr4r
-&
;..-
~:JO
v'!i1,,
1
How ,s lhal not crnninal?
Openly discussing attempted murder to make money sho1,ld be charged as such. As well as losing any access 10 sleek markels.
Wah Cheung 3 ;lY.wUB •lHi,
The guy 1nterlered Tes 1a employees M d their demonstration work nearly ca~sing ,m nccidenl 1s 3 dcgeflerated hl1man worm.
2 -~
..,
SNuo
farllcustheelder 4 mo"'hs ct,;n
Someone needs to take his meds. Bizarre to think that a few random acts will have existential import. Not rational,
2
A
Drucifer 4 months ago
Lock Them Up!
2A V
Share
Martin Bartek 4 months ago
l hope those stalkers will go to prison soon .
2 A
Nicholas Pye
~
V
Share>
,.
;noutm, 1~w
Great news. You cannot behave like a psyct>opath and think its ok.
1
A.
Sh.a.re i
B..try AharMml• Fae.I Covtaf•
~ n·~l!'lf!'I,-, :-.go
r,.cJ,11}d
These are extremely disturbed individuals {tacepetmJ
,
~
Shnro
AA343
Document received by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
..,.;::
PDF Page 20
Th q11y ,.n:i1h11,11 11 t 111a!ely cr,0zy. ,~ 11' crazy. q,, lly trnp,~-irncy by the o,I companies. I 91!t th(ll many of you ha1e them , hut seriously thmo jvs1 ,sn I
.,~,dence 10 maki, :lie leap that th""' i» some giant oil company conspiracy Jgai11s1Tesla. If the <>lltl companies ~ated Te<,;la hey would
1ust t>11y up ~II Ihe stock which for lhern would he cheap .
«•~t,.
~i.l lll '\1!-
A crazy r,erson usually
spouts nonsen5e. rh15 guy is ma!icious , if you ,;,.itch his tweets you WJil ooser;e c.:ilculated
mIs1ntcrma1Ion, not cont~slon.
Randeep H01ru
soundt like il Pok1 n~me
sel'l(I lhe Tesla hating loi,er back 11nMe LOL
;.
,
quallturv
Q • •28 ~orms
, ·
•·
r ,
Original filing at https://www.plainsite.org/clockets/3xt7clv6u8/superior-court·of· california-county-ohilameda/tesla inc v-hothi/
If that stupid fuck is on this sub, can we please have him broken both leg,; removed from here?
l ·l /...,,
,_,,
A.nil Tryhtlrdr:;69 O points ~ •,: 11\t--
.. ll"
Absolute piece of fucking SHIT. Sue the tuck out of the sumbitch and prosecute him criminally if circumsta nces allow.
Make an example out of him. Fucking neck beard trash.
Elon
should go after ihis motherfucker with all of his lawyers, bankrupt him and put in Jail.
AA344
Document received by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
EXAMPLES FROM REDDIT.COM
PDF Page 21
s1cgc3:t2 MOCEL ::: Li? A!canlro
,.·
6 J.?<:ints
Looking through some of the Twitter posts, they flat out give 1he locatlon of employees and incite assauit with a
deadly l",eapon. How has Twitter and gofundme not banded them?
Dt.•a1mtll~t12()2:~ .'31 l)(HltS .
V
·: '
!I
I his is dearly racketeering
There is a group, organising and colluding online, that is committing illegal acts fer the purpose of harming or
destroying a rnultibilllon dollar company w,th rnembers of the group linanciaily bene1iting.
This guy posied hrs plans and was encouraged by other members of the group.
The motivation Is not important. The means of communication ''Twitter" ·snot releva11t. Wh,ither the group h2s a
formalised str1Jcture or leader ship does not mailer 1his is a clear mcketeenng case with a billion dolla1 company i'.lt
stake.
SEC has been profouncJ\y silent (not even acknowledging the problem or issuing a public warning)
This was the only f.ictor that created the pressures to consider taking TESLA private. I hope that the agreement the
SEC is currently negotiating specifically acknowledges this point and commits to future eniorcement against all forms
of intentionally misleading milrket moving in for mation .:ind those that fraudulently benefit from it.
I also hope that FBI RICO resources are allocated to investigating anc.l prosecut ing ,hese events
a cunt
w1,y is this guy doing all this to harass these people? Sorry if it's a stupid question, l;m just a random from the front
page lo\. I read th,i first 4ish pages of the document, ancl the stuff this guy has done is really tucked up. I just can·t
seern to see why he would do all of that lo!.
oli'-'ersl 4 points
~
,: )c
~•1
.- • ; '
Have you read the restraining order? He was attacking the Tesla car with his !:ex\!~ Acura TL. PuHing driver life and
propert y in danger.
These people have reached a new level or pathetic. Spreadir,g lies on ttle internet i~ annoying and stupid, but
trespassing, hit and runs, and actively trying to cause car accidents is a whole new level
Wow. fhe sheer amount of crazy that this guy is. He hit someone and he was driving erratically. Lock this lunatic up .
.,,. Batshit crazy. Running over employees just to see what's going on i11side What the actua1fuck.
fI
'\
',
✓
Thani< vou tesla for doxxino @skabooshka. Hooefullv Mr. Randeep can now tuck off
AA345
Document received by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
Wow, what
PDF Page 22
, "\.
momyp(rrt 6 OC•ng '
That guy has serious mental Illness.
~
',~••
ll
,~~
,;,•;
Is this Hie skabooshka scumbag who tails Tesla test cars and that Fred Electrek gloriously used for one of his blog
"articlcs 1' ?
,
OeeSnow97 Trying
w decide ,f ii'$ still woo ti• getting a driv
PDF Page 23
1
·. ,,
! •"
• ,,1
• 1
'eirCCC
JJ ,,
0 :Jr"••t
!
Hot Pink Unicorn 3 points ..
Vehicular Assault is a thing ....
xnaas TM3 LR AWD
,
24 coinls , ·, ·• •·.
I imagine ·attempted vehicular homicide'' would not be out of the question, considering there's clearly
intent.
Edit: manslaughter -> homicide
A
koosllipuh '/ po,n.ts
'.-
lsn·t vehicular manslaughter tor accidental death, t hough? Tha1 might be why the pen;ilty is light2r
··v,: I'·, ,..: ,
than you expect.
l"i /'•
"'- ·
xnaas TM3 LR AWO
5 co;rll$ l • ~"''" ·.c~o
Sorry, thai's right. Fixed to homicide!
Idiots like !his should be dragged behind an alley and be neutered w~h a hammer.
Trying to hit someone w i!h your cor just because you don't like the complll1y??I! WTF i3 wrong wi!h you .
n
Michael Wakin ..+ macrodoodle 3 months ago
I suggest reviewing the posts of that moron. You will see what
everyone here already knows. lshkaidiot is deranged and acting on
that sick impulse.
You may not realize it so I will point it out for you, by defending him
you are seriously lowering any credibility your opinions carry.
2
Share,
A
Jame 3 monlhs ngo
In any group of persons, you will always find 2-3% of reactionary sociopathic
psychopaths
2 .,,
"'
Share•
Wallace_.. J.rn1c 3 mon1t1s ago
Ar,d a few batshit crazy folks as well ....
2 "'
.,.
Sham•
AA347
Document received by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
i
..
Assault with a deadly weapon, maybe attempted murder
PDF Page 24
AA348
Document received by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
DECLARATION OF D. GILL SPERLEIN
PDF Page 25
2
3
4
5
D. GILL SPERLEIN, SBN 172887
THE LAW OFFICE OF D. GILL SPERLEIN
345 Grove Street
San Francisco, CA 94102
Telephone: (415) 404-6615
Facsimile: (415) 404-6616
gill@ sperleinlaw.com
Attorneys for Respondent
6
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF ALAMEDA
7
8
10
Tesla, Inc.,
11
12
13
Petitioner,
V.
Randeep Hothi,
14
Respondent.
15
16
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No. RG19015770
DECLARATION OF D. GILL SPERLEIN
IN SUPPORT OF RESPONDENT
RANDEEP HOTHI'S MOTION FOR
REASONABLE EXPENSES INCLUDING
ATTORNEY'S FEES PURSUANT TO
CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 128.5;
)
)
)
)
)
17
18
19
20
21
I, D. Gill Sperlein, Declare:
1.
I am over eighteen years of age and have personal knowledge of the facts below. I am
a member of the California State Bar and am counsel to Respondent Randeep Hothi. I have personal
knowledge of the following facts.
22
2.
On May 1, 2019, on behalf of Respondent Randeep Hothi, I requested a continuance
23
24
of the temporary injunction hearing. The next day, May 2, on behalf of my client, I served a
25
document request with 11 items. I sought all recordings Tesla had made of both the February 21 and
26
April 16 incidents. I also sought police incident reports, documents showing the alleged injury to the
27
28
- 1DECLARATION OF D. GILL SPERLEIN IN SUPPORT OF RESPONDENT RANDEEP HOTHl'S MOTION FOR FEES
AA349
Document received by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
9
PDF Page 26
l
2
3
4
5
6
Tesla security officer, documents showing the Model 3 occupants were Tesla employees, and
Tesla's file on him .
3.
On May 10, 2019, Tesla finally responded to my discovery requests. Tesla declined to
produce any documents, citing the general rule that in workplace violence injunction cases, with
their abbreviated time schedules, discovery is typically not allowed.
4.
Tesla's lead counsel, relying on his own declaration, claimed Hothi " and his
7
followers" had "engaged in '
PDF Page 27
1
7.
The Court's docket was congested. The Court finally reached this cause at about 4:00
2
p.m. To commence the hearing at that hour, as the Court noted, would have required splitting the
3
testimony across two days. In consultation with counsel, the Court extended the TRO and reset the
4
hearing for July 26, 2019. In the meantime, the Court invited letter briefs from counsel addressing
5
6
our discovery requests. Exbibit J at pp. 5-7.
8.
I submitted a letter brief on May 23, 2019, acknowledging the general rule enunciated
7
in Thomas v. Quintero (2005) 126 Cal. App. 41h 635, 650 fn 11, but noting that Tesla had numerous
8
-Q)
.
(]) .
'--
~~·
- .
10
as to whether the alleged violent conduct occurred, and that Hothi had already suffered great
11
reputational damage. Further, I noted that police incident reports I had obtained appeared to
12
contradict the sworn declarations attached to Tesla's Petition.
13
~•
Tesla responded on June 3, opposing the discovery based on the rule th~t discove.ry is
9.
14
generally not allowed in proceedings under CCP § 527.8. Tesla also objected to the discovery
(/)
ur.:
video recordings of both the February 21 and April 16 incidents, which would likely be dispositive
15
16
17
18
requests, claiming undue burden, privacy, confidential business information, and attorney work
product. Further, Tesla sought to exclude the public and press from the injunction hearing.
10.
Tesla's counsel Zachary Alinder also used his June 3 letter brief to take a gratuitous
19
swipe at me, insinuating that I was trying to run up legal fees (6-3-19 letter brief at p. 1, ~1) and
20
claiming I had failed to offer legal support for the discovery requests. (id. at p. 5, ,r4). Mr. Alinder
21
also introduced into evidence a plainly inadmissible settlement communication. Id. alp. 4, 11; see
22
also Hothi's 6-5-19 letter brief at p. 2, i11 & Ex. A.
23
24
11.
Pursuant to an earlier agreement between the parties, Tesla had until close of business
25
on July 19 to produce its recordings. We already had produced our recordings on July 16, as the
26
Court had ordered. I contacted Tesla's counsel several times during the day to discuss the delivery of
27
documents, since I was out of the country and I was unsure if anyone would be in my office to
-3-
28
DECLARATION OF D. GILL SPERLEIN IN SUPPORT OF RESPONDENT RANDEEP HOTHl'S MOTION FOR FEES
AA351
Document received by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
9
i'
PDF Page 28
1
receive documents if they were produced in paper form. Tesla ' s counsel refused to answer my direct
2
question of whether they would produce. Late in the day on July 19, 2019, Tesla's counsel submitted
3
a letter to the Court indicating it would withdraw its Petition, rather than produce the evidence that
4
would establish the truth.
5
12.
Before submitting its letter to the Comt and furnishing a copy to me, Tesla made
6
certain to put its own spin on the dismissal by leaking information to yet another on-line Tesla
7
9
10
11
12
13
propaganda outlet, Tech Crunch, which published its article before I even received the July 19 letter.
I have attached a true and complete copy of that article as Exhibit K.
13.
In order to defend against Tesla's Petition, Hothi was compelled to engage legal
counsel.
14.
I graduated Summa Cum Laude from American University, Washing College of Law
in 1994 and was admitted to the California Bar on December 8, 1994. I am admitted to practice in
14
Califot11:ia, all of the Federal courts in California, the Fifth, Ninth, Tenth and District of Columbia
15
16
Federal Courts of Appeal, and the United States Supreme Court. I am a member of the executive
17
board of the First Amendment Lawyers Association and focus my practice on First Amendment law.
18
Under my fee agreement with Mr. Hothi, T charged my regular rate of $550 per hour. The Laffey
19
Matrix sets the hourly rate for attorneys with twenty plus years of experience at $899 even without
20
th~ standard upward adjustment of 9% for attorneys in the San Francisco Bay Area.
2J
15.
To date, I have spent 110.6 hours on this matter. Most of that time was billed at my
22
regular rate, but in some instances I charged a lower paralegal rate. I also discounted some travel
23
24
time, unless I was also working on the matter during the travel. Hothi requests $57.680 in legal fees
25
26
27
28
-4DEClARA TION OF D. Gill SPERlEIN IN SUPPORT OF RESPONDENT RANDEEP HOTHI' S MOTION FOR FEES
AA352
Document received by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
8
PDF Page 29
)
(not including any legal fees Hothi will incur if Tesla determines to contest this fee application). I
2
3
have attached a detailed listing of my time as Exhibit P. 1
16.
4
Hothi also incurred $4,049 in costs consisting of the following:
a. $2,535.00 to Tamara Thompson Investigations. Ms. Thompson investigated the Tesla
5
Fremont facility and would have testified that the facility included a showroom and
6
was open to the public.
7
b. $1,514.00 to Specialized Legal Services for delivering various filings to the Court.
8
9
17. Thus, the total amount of expenses requested, including costs and fees , is $61,729.
10
12
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing
is true and correct.
13
14
15
Executed on: August 12, 2019, at San Francisco, CA
16
17
18
19
D. Gill Sperlein
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
1
27
28
This exhibit is lettered out of sequence as it was added after other declarations and exhibits were
finalized.
-5DECLARATION OF O. G ILL SPERLEIN IN SUPPORT OF RESPONDENT RANDEEP HOTHl'S MOTION FOR FEES
AA353
Document received by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
11
PDF Page 30
RESPONDENT RANDEEP HOTH!'S MOTTON FOR FF.F.5
AA354
Document received by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
Exhibit J
PDF Page 31
DEBORAH M. TRUJILLO
Certified Shorthand Reporter #5088
24405 Amador St, Dept. 519
Hayward, CA 94544
510-690-2762
Date:
RE:
D . GILL SPERLE IN
345 Grove St
San Francisco, CA 94114
Tesla v. Hothi
CASE NO:
RG19015770
Reporter's Transcript of Proceedings - 0+1
5/21/19 - Dept. 511
$35.00
TOTAL
AA355
$35.00
Document received by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
"WP :
6/17/19
PDF Page 32
1
2
3
4
5
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
6
IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA
7
BEFORE THE HONORABLE JEFFREYS . BRAND, JUDGE
8
DEPARTMENT NO . 511
9
---o0o---
10
12
13
14
In the Matter of
Petitioner :
TESLA INC .,
NO. RG19015770
and
Respondent : RANDEEP HOTHI.
________________
/
15
16
17
REPORTER ' S TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS
18
May 21 , 2019
19
Hayward Hall of Justice
Hayward, CA
20
21
22
APPEARANCES:
23
FOR THE PETITIONER :
ZACHARY ALINDER, CANDACE JACKMAN,
Attorneys at Law
FOR THE RESPONDENT:
D. GILL SPERLEIN,
Attorney at Law
24
25
26
27
28
DEBORAH M. TRUJILLO, CSR #5088
AA356
Document received by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
11
PDF Page 33
1
1
MAY 21 , 2019
2
P R O C E E D I N G S
THE COURT :
3
record .
5
And welcome .
MR . ALINDER :
Thank you , Your Honor.
Zack Alinder
6
of Sideman and Bancroft on behalf of Tesla Inc.
7
is Candace Jackman , associate general counsel at Tesla .
8
THE COURT :
9
MS . JACKMAN :
Your name again , Counsel?
Candace Jackman .
10
MR. SPERLEIN:
11
THE COURT :
12
THE RESPONDENT :
13
D. Gill Sperlein for Respondent.
Welcome .
Good afternoon , Your Honor .
My name
is Randeep Hothi .
14
15
And wi th me
THE COURT :
Nice to have you here .
Why don ' t you all
sit and relax .
16
THE CLERK :
Would you like the Respondent sworn?
17
THE COURT:
Yes , please .
18
There are other witnesses who might testify?
19
MR . ALINDER:
20
THE COURT :
21
22
23
One .
Ms . Tamison [phonetic ].
Why don ' t you also stand , ma ' am, if you
would .
(The Respondent and Ms . Tamison are duly sworn . }
THE COURT :
Let me just t a l k about timi ng her e .
It
24
turns out I had another matter mid- bre ak, and I ' ve tried to read
25
the reply as best I can .
26
I have read all the moving papers , of course , and the
27
r esponse , but I'm just wondering - - realistically , we are
28
alr eady at 4 : 00 o ' c l ock , basically , and I ' d rather do this in
AA357
Document received by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
4
Please state your appearances for the
PDF Page 34
2
1
one sitting.
2
but I think it doesn ' t
3
test imony .
4
evidence.
5
Because the court can go almost any time, not this week, but
6
thereafter.
serve anybody's purpose to break up the
It just doesn ' t.
It makes it harder to consider the
But I also realize that there are date issues .
Counsel, what dates are realistic?
I think everybody would
8
be better served if it was done at a time when there was nothing
9
else on the calendar; and that can be accomplished on most
10
Friday afternoons .
11
full session.
12
It very well might .
13
MR . SPERLEIN:
Well, I could do Friday the 31st, but
that's the Friday of Memorial Day weekend.
16
17
I 'm not sure this will take two to three hours.
What ' s your time projection, Counsel, either of you?
14
15
We could really start at 1:30 and have a
MS. JACKMAN:
That's the Fr i day following .
(Discussion off the record.)
18
THE COURT:
19
to determine a date.
20
exceptionally long and contested workplace violence and elder
21
abuse calendar, and as a result, despite the patience of counsel
22
and others interested, and also Respondent and others interested
23
in this matter, the Court is not able to hear this matter this
24
afternoon.
25
We're back on the record.
It ' s 4 : 00 o'clock.
We are trying
The Court had an
So we are trying to find a date .
There is a temporary restraining order in place, so putting
26
it out to July is doable.
27
the Petitioner in this matter .
28
of Mr. Hothi to that continuance.
I don't think there's prejudice to
AA358
But it does require the consent
I do think that we're better
Document received by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
7
I realize you ' ve been sitting here all afternoon,
PDF Page 35
3
1
served having two to three hours .
2
significantly less; but, knowing how these thi ngs go.
3
would suggest July 19.
4
Maybe it will be
So~
The record should be clear that all parties have
5
obligations.
The Court would be ready sooner than that.
6
Court is unava ilable for personal reasons July 3 through the
7
12th but is available in June , but I understand Counsel's having
8
set aside time to be on the east coast; Respondent's counsel.
9
So my suggestion is July 19 .
10
MR. ALINDER:
11
MR. SPERLEIN:
The
July 19 is clear for us, Your Honor.
Your Honor , I know you've made great
12
strides to accommodate my calendar.
13
First Amendment Lawyers Association meeting, which is a pretty
14
important
That's the 17th through the 21st.
15
THE COURT:
16
MR. SPERLEIN:
17
THE COURT:
18
Does that work for you, Counsel?
MR. ALINDER:
If you
We're available on that date, Your
Honor.
21
22
The 26th is great.
could just lock in that date for this case only.
19
20
How about the 26th?
THE COURT:
But I do need, Counsel, Mr. Hothi's
agreement to continue the matter until that date.
23
(Discussion between Mr. Sperlein and the Respondent.)
24
MR . SPERLEIN:
I
just want to make one thing clear.
25
We understand that there's been a no-trespass issued, a no-
26
trespass notice issued, and my client fully intends to comply
27
with that.
28
that
So, you're right, he is not prejudiced in the sense
AA359
Document received by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
event to me.
I'm going to be at the
PDF Page 36
4
1
THE COURT:
I was saying Petitioner wasn't.
2
want to speak for your client.
MR. SPERLEIN:
Okay.
I ' m speaking for him.
He
4
wouldn't be prejudiced f rom any order to stay away from the
5
premises, but what he would be prejudiced by is what's implied
6
by finding that he's engaged in any kind of harassment.
7
that's why we are here.
8
over -THE COURT:
9
So
So we have no problem putting it
And I do want to be c l ear that -- and this
10
is for your benefit, Mr. Hothi.
And I'm sure your good counsel
11
has a l ready explained it to you.
12
order is very different from ultimately issuing a more permanent
The burden to get a temporar y
13
· •e
PDF Page 37
5
1
MR . SPERLEIN :
In our first motion for continuance, we
2
had asked for discovery, and Your Honor directed the parties to
3
e i ther work it out between themselves or bring it up at this
4
hearing .
5
My position i s that discovery is available and there ' s
6
nothing that prevents it except for the short time frame in
7
these summary proceedings .
8
some voluntary discovery about -- I th i nk it was May 2nd -- and
9
that was denied .
10
We asked for some involuntary - - or
We ' d like the opportunity to take some limited discovery
11
during the time that we are not here .
12
much .
13
anything they might have that might be rel evant to our c li ent
14
so that we can d e fend the case .
We are not asking for
15
THE COURT :
What I ' d like on that, then , Counsel , is
16
fo r you to file -- it can just be a letter brief if you like
17
indicating precisely what you want and the authority for it .
18
Have you folks -- I gather you ' ve informally conferr ed?
19
MR . ALINDER :
Yes , Your Honor .
Obviously , as Your
20
Honor stated in the order and the continuance , there ' s no right
21
to discovery in a summary proceeding like this, and there are
22
a number of cases that hold that .
23
that are relevant to the issues we see here are not the types
24
of things that Mr . Hothi ' s counsel is asking for .
25
think it ' s relevant to what needs to be determined here and we
26
don ' t think that there ' s legal support
27
28
THE COURT :
So -- and really the things
So we don ' t
for t he request .
What kind of i t ems are you talking about ,
Counsel?
AA361
Document received by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
We ' re just ask i ng for the videos, the photogr aphs,
PDF Page 38
6
1
MR. SPERLEIN:
For example, one, there ' s a video that
2
was reviewed by the police department that came from Tesla
3
relevant to the February 21st incident that was taken by either
4
Mr. James or his partner, or maybe i t
5
it ' s a little bit unclear, but something that documented this
6
interaction with him at the car and whether the car touched him
7
or not.
8
department saw it and declined to prosecute based on it.
9
think that it's exculpatory and we think that we should have
11
They've had the benefit of seeing it .
The police
We
that.
But, in addition, the Tesla car that was on the road that
12
day where they cla i m that my client swerved towards them, we
13
calculated there were 13 cameras in that car that day.
14
eight on one car, there were two mounted to it, and then each of
15
the occupants presumably had a cellphone.
16
There ' s
If any of that - - assuming that they were being harassed,
17
it seems that one of those cameras would have picked that up or
18
been trained on it.
19
that would have been taken by that car that day .
20
21
22
THE COURT :
So we would like any of that video footage
It's that simple :
Just the video
evidence .
MR. SPERLEIN:
Yes, Your Honor.
There are other
23
things that would be relevant, but we understand and we're
24
trying to keep it focused.
25
THE COURT :
And I ' m not limiting you to a request.
26
But I do think if you could submit a short brief and any support
27
that you might find, we already have gone around the block
28
slightly on this, but I'm willing to consider it.
AA362
And it turns
Document received by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
10
was a security camera,
PDF Page 39
7
1
out we have lots of t ime now .
2
hearing , even a hearing by phone if one of you should be gone .
3
Okay?
4
sure that Department 511 gets a courtesy copy .
So if you could submit something .
5
MR . SPERLEIN:
6
THE COURT :
7
MR . ALINDER :
And if you coul d make
Yes , Your Honor.
As could you with your reply brief .
Thank y ou , Your Honor .
to Mr . Sperlein ' s letter brief when he files it .
We will respond
But one of the
10
concerns that has ar i sen in the context of this matter , and
11
Mr . Hothi ra i sed it briefly as well , is the nature of the
12
proceeding is I guess putting a lot of pressure on the victims
13
and there ' s a lot of publicity , particularly from Mr . Hotl1i's
14
supporters , trying to gather information and disseminate that
15
i nformation online .
16
And we are I guess concerned with and would like the
17
Cour t ' s guidance i n that -- we would like to bring in wi tnesses,
18
but frank l y that is really a lot to ask of these people who are
19
in fear and are seeing all this additional context , negative and
20
really disparaging contex t
THE COURT :
21
around them .
Obviously you need the witnesses if they
22
are going to testify.
23
job of protecting parties in the courthouse, and we would do
24
that, but, beyond that , there ' s not much advice that I can give
25
you .
26
helpful .
27
Court can affirmatively do .
28
The Court does and I think it does a good
I urge you , if you have witnesses , the testimony is
But there ' s nothing beyond the courthouse that the
However, the order remains in effect.
AA363
The order , even if
Document received by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
Yes .
One matter we wanted to bring up as well .
8
9
And i f necessary , we could set a
PDF Page 40
8
1
it's a temporary order, if violated, can have consequences.
2
I would just keep those things in mind .
3
obvious .
4
evidence you decide to ultimately put on.
So
I'm really stating the
And we'll continue the matter and you'll see what
5
MR, ALINDER :
6
MR. SPERLEIN:
7
THE COURT :
Thank you, Your Honor .
Thank you, Your Honor.
Thank you very much.
8
9
....~-000---
10
11
12
Document received by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
AA364
PDF Page 41
9
1
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
2
COUNTY OF ALAMEDA
ss.
3
4
5
I, DEBORAH M. TRUJILLO, do hereby certify that I am an
6
Official Court Reporter in the Superior Court of the State of
7
California, in and for the County of Alameda, that as such I
8
reported the within-entitled matter, and that t0e foregoing
9
transcript is a full, true and correct transcription of my
10
shorthand notes so made.
11
12
Dated :
June 17, 2019.
14
DEBORAH M. TRUJILLO
CSR #5088
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
AA365
Document received by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
13
PDF Page 42
RESPONDENT RAND!oEI' HOTlll' S M OTION FOR FEES
AA366
Document received by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
Exhibit K
PDF Page 43
Sperlein Declaration Exhibit K
Earn SSO off a hotel
stay with your rental.
BOOKtlOW
Tesla drops request for
restraining order against
allegedly dangerous short seller
- -•
Ear1yBird
Extended 1 Week
t-+---+---+-i
. ,1,CJu·n:,;I
.
R1nd9,::,p Hothi. t.ocurm11 ,IS !--:utm1ttt•W 1,, th.' court ·:,:h..;•re HH!
CQinp1,1irH W'1!; Med rn·~ •~ah.:d Fr"Jj]y, Ho\~1. un in ~upport his -:;ry.;ol crihcism a.c~crd;ng r., t11*
co:t-=p!t,1!1t 't;ith $tt ppo rfo;g dccunw.rr:ts suppo1t1r.g 1tt o.,:;:;;;e,t·on that
Huti~i h,1'1
il"'!j1,.,1E-t i i".l
r,uosd du1if'l.(J ::i t:il~i\nd• tun 1nt:k:'t1m
Hl
t=-Qb1vt1 r;. ,:me,
that he nea1ly C~iUS.ed an a.ccldeM by dt1\."tng dan-qt:n)l.iil:,' in µ ~1rsuit of
o, res:IC\ ,1ootl 3 unc.h~!hl1'.11.9 o!l fe?l rJnv~r\ 01, J\p,1i ! 6.
Hlln .CAl
s24se
....
Prlnlml ......" 1''011
/\Ue1 gr:in ti,:g th~
~V(~rit ~.
ternpont,··y fnium:lkin tm~:itd cm fo'iiltl~; c1(~scrip110n vf
supp-crtrr. g matt'."1ia!~. :.1I1cJ wrI1tcn urrid.cwits sul:.ur11It,~d by
~mp~,-~ . Wi: cn~;rl ns.ked T~~$ln tQ p roti(.i.t;H ho lil oudio Jnd v1t1 l:r!l
r~or
PDF Page 44
Sperlein Declaration Exhibit K
w1thdraw1n9 1ls ;;:ctPJ>i.::t1nt Fri(Jay. fosl,1 cOlw<,yed tJ1 dor.:u111,~•~ts fried
·n·11h th9 1;ou11 that ll cor~s!<1erea t11is mquimrm>nt l.rr·weessary 1n lighl
ol rnrtte11i11$ already provided, nnd .an undu9 1mposihon on
tr~ privacy
of tfle1r employee-5. s.1oca the ,erord~d com,ersauon-s ,e-gc1rd1ng tna
nc1vent cc;;nt:.u~~d ··11s empioyt>es' pnv~te n.nd c.~r.3onnl ccr.ve!'Satrnrs"
ns v./Cil os mate,·als relat1r:g ro thl:t ~:.s~
res.ta ma:nl...11r,s 1r its letter to tho c;ourt that it still t>o)lwv~c;, "'a r~1r,11ning
ordur ~ga1nst Mr Hoth, is necessarv and apprv!){iare 10 p,crect its
PDF Page 45
*This Exhibit is lettered out of sequence as it was added after the other
declarations and exhibits were finalized
RESPONDENT RAN DEEP HOTl-11 's MOTION rnR FEES
AA369
Document received by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
Exhibit P*
PDF Page 46
Ran deep HOTHI
Activity
Date
Employe
e
Memo/Description
Rates
Duration
Amount
04/08/2019
Sperlein
Call w ith client to discuss mention of his brother in brief and other issues relating to response and hearing.
550.00
0.4
220.00
04/08/2019
Sperlein
Prepare response to Petition.
550.00
4.6
2,530.00
04/22/2019
Sperlein
Review materials from client's counsel re Tesla debate.
550.00
1.1
605.00
04/23/2019
Sperlein
Respond to emails from client.
550.00
0.1
55.00
04/23/2019
Sperlein
Research various articles about Tesla.
550.00
0.5
275.00
04/23/2019
Sperlein
Review all materials in the TRO application.
550.00
0.5
275.00
04/24/2019
Sperlein
Research trespass law and surveillance law.
550.00
0.4
220.00
04/24/2019
Sperlein
Research Tesla bad acts; prepare strategy/ themes; read and respond to emails from client.
550.00
2.7
1,485.00
04/24/2019
Sperlein
Call with L. Fossie re status of GoFundMe and allegations on Twitter about brother.
550.00
0.1
55.00
04124/2019
Sperlein
Prepare strategy memo.
550.00
0.5
275.00
04/24/2019
Sperlein
Respond to email about Twitter posts relating to client's brother.
550.00
0.1
55.00
Sperlein
550.00
2.7
1,485.00
04/25/2019
Sperlein
Meeting with client.
550.00
1.9
1,045.00
04/29/2019
Sperlein
Research the availability of evidentiary hearing and discovery for civil harassment actions.
550.00
0.5
275.00
04/29/2019
Sperlein
Call with client to discuss strategy re filing request for evidentiary hearing.
550.00
0.2
110.00
04/29/2019
Sperlein
Review changes made to outline over the weekend; e-mail client re same.
550.00
0.2
110.00
04/29/2019
Sper1ein
Research procedures for requesting an evidentiary hearing.
550.00
0.5
275.00
04/30/2019
Sperlein
Prepare Request to Continue
550.00
2.6
1,430.00
04/30/2019
Sperlein
Review and incorporate client comments into request to contin1Je; prepare proposed order, proof of service, etc.
550.00
1
550.00
05/01/2019
Sperlein
Prepare request. attachment and exhibits for filing. [Attorney charged at paralegal rate).
175.00
2.5
437.50
05/01/2019
Sperlein
Draft letter to opposing counsel re filing of Request for Continuance.
175.00
0.2
35.00
by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
04/25/2019
Prepare for client meeting; further research on Tesla's history ; research on evidence and procedures for
retraining order proceedings.
05101/2019
Sperlein
Call with client to discuss strategy re filing Motion for Continuance and discovery.
175.00
0.5
87.50
05/01/2019
Sper1ein
Review edits from client and prepare final version of request for continuance.
550.00
0.7
385.00
Sperlein
Prepare discovery requests; draft letter to opposjng counsel enclosing same; call with client to discuss
implications.
550.00
2.4
1,320.00
Sperlein
Review order from the Court; call with client re strategy for disC{)very; review press articles.
550.00
0.8
440.00
05/02/2019
0510212019
AA370
PDF Page 47
05/07/2019
Sperlein
Travel time to Hayward and returning from Freemon! on BART [billed at 50%]
275.00
2
550.00
05/08/201~
Sperlein
Locate case dealing with hearsay in harassment hearings and forward to client and co-counsel; scan forward
Police report to clie.nt and co-courisel.
550.00
0.2
l10.00
05/08/2019
Sperlein
Meet with client; visit court house and observe judge; request information about use of technology during hearing
from court clerk; appear at Police Department to request copy of police report; review report with client.
550.00
4
2,200.00
05/10/2019
Spertein
Call with client to discuss investigator and police reports.
550.00
0.2
110.00
05/10/2019
Sperlein
Call with Private Investigator.
550.00
0.5
275.00
05/11/2019
Sperlein
Review e-mail concerning discovery from o/c; Research the availability of discovery and prepare response; email
client and co-counsel re same.
550.00
2.2
1,210.00
05/13/2019
Sperlein
Call with client to discuss discovery issues and hearing strategy.
550.00
0.3
165.00
Sperlein
Further research on availability of discovery for harassment hearings; draft response to opposing counsel and
circulate
550.00
0.6
330.00
05/13/2019
05/14/2019
Sperlein
Review emails from Client re cameras on Teslas.
550.00
0.2
110.00
05/14/2019
Sperlein
Respond to email form opposing counsel re discovery.
550.00
0.2
110.00
05/15/2019
Sperlein
Continue drafting Response to Petition.
550.00
3.9
2,145.00
05/16/2019
Sperlein
Continue to work with client to revise and edit Response and declaration.
550.00
1.5
825.00
05/16/2019
Sperlein
Continue researching law and drafting response; prepare Hothi declaration.
550.00
3.5
1,925.00
05/16/2019
Sperlein
Review edits to response from client.
550.00
0.8
440.00
525.00
Sperlein
Edit, response and declaration and prepare everything for filing. [attorney work billed at paralegal rate].
175.00
3
Sperlein
Review investigators email.
550.00
0.2
110.00
05/18/2019
Sperlein
Review evidence and prepare declarations.
550.00
2.1
1,155.00
05/19/2019
Sperlein
Prepare for hearing.
550.00
2.1
1,155.00
05/20/2019
Sperlein
Review record, select exhibits, prepare cross examination for Leslie, James, Cross, Temmerman,and Donald;
p repare opening statement.
550.00
10.5
5,775.00
05121/2019
Sperlein
Travel to hearing (prep during travel time).
550.00
0.7
385.00
05/21/2019
Sperlein
Retum travel. [billed at 50%]
275.00
1
275.00
2,035.00
by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
05/17/2019
05/17/2019
05.'21/2019
Sperlein
Attend scheduled hearing (continued at the end of the day).
550.00
3.7
05/21/2019
Spertein
Meet with client to prepare for hearing; review Reply brief.
550.00
2
1,100.00
05/21/2019
Sperlein
Prepare closing statement for hearing.
550.00
2
1,100.00
05/22/2019
Sperlein
Prepare draft letter brief to court re discovery.
550.00
2.5
1,375.00
05/23/2019
Sperlein
Finalize and file Letter brief on discovery.
550.00
1.3
715.00
165.00
06104/2019
Sperlein
Call with client re reply to Petitioner's Opposition to Letter Brief re Discovery.
550.00
0.3
06104/2019
Sperlein
Review Petitioner's Opposition to Letter Brief re Discovery.
550.00
0.6
330.00
06J05/2019
Sperlein
Prepare Reply to Plaintiffs Letter Brief re Discovery and send to client.
550.00
1.2
660.00
06/05/2019
Sperlein
Review client edits and revise Reply to Plaintiffs letter Brief re Discovery; email to aitomey service for filing.
550.00
0.6
330.00
AA371
,,
PDF Page 48
06107/2019
Spertein
Quick review client draft of sanctions motion
550.00
0.5
275..00
06119/2019
Sperlein
Draft letter to Court re discovery
550.00
0.4
220.00
Sperlein
Call with client re strategy to respond to Petitioner's Motion for reconsideration and protective order, draft
opposition; call with opposing counsel to discuss stipulation to stay discovery order; review and revise
stipulation.
550.00
3.7
2,035.00
07123/2019
Sperlein
Review of case law and materials relating to seeking fees under Cal. Civ. Pro. 128.5.
550.00
1.7
935.00
08108/2019
Sperlein
Begin drafting Fee motion.
550.00
4.6
2,530.00
08109/2019
Sperlein
Call with L. Fossi re his declaration.
550.00
0.2
110.00
08109/2019
Sperlein
Work on Fee motion and supporting documents I declarations.
550.00
1.5
825.00
08109/2019
Sperlein
Letters to Alameda County DA and Fremont Police re record request.
550.00
0.8
440.00
08109/2019
Sperlein
Research the availability of discovery for a hearing under CCP 128.5.
550.00
0.9
495.00
08110/2019
Sperlein
Prepare declarations for Fee Motion
550.00
4.1
2,255.00
08111/2019
Sperlein
Continue prepare declarations and fee motion.
550.00
6.2
3,410.00
08111/2019
Sperlein
Finalize declarations and fee motion.
550.00
4.4
2,420.00
110.6
AA372
by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
0711112019
57,680.00
PDF Page 49
AA373
Document received by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
DECLARATION OF LAWRENCE J. FOSSI
PDF Page 50
D. GIU SP[RLEIN. SBN 172887
Tiff LA 'A OFFJCI OF D. GIJ L. SPERL.EIN
''
•
5
345 (irn\(: Stred
San Francisco, ('A 94102
'fokphonc: (415) 404-6615
h1csimik: (415) 404-6616
g11l riJ;sperleinla\\ .com
Atlorneys for Respondent
6
SlJPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF ALAMEDA
7
8
9
) Case No. RG19015770
)
) DECLARATION OF LAWRENCE ,J.
FOSSI IN SUPPORT OF RESPONDENT
Lesia, Inc ..
10
l\:titillner
11
ATTORNIW'S FEES PURSUANT TO
\",
12
13
RA~OEEP HOTIII'S "'10T10N 1-'0R
REASONABLE EXPENSES lNCLlJDING
CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 128.S;
RJndecp Ho1hi.
R~sponcknt.
14
15
t;
16
17
l. Lawrcnc1. J. Fossi. dcclare:
l.
I urn 01;cr eighteen )..:ars of age and ha,c personal knowledge of the (u:ts bclo\\. If
18
ca!kd upon. ( cvutd mid would testitY to the following.
19
20
21
,., ')
23
24
25
2,
l was grnJuJtcd from Yal~ Law School in J983 and am a member of the State 8Jr of
Texas. l practiced iav. for 27 years, with an emphasis oo commercial trial law.
3.
Beginning. in 2011 . l ceased taking new cases, wound down my law practice, amt
began working as the portfolio manager at a family ot1icc in l'.ew York City. Beginning in late 2015.
f began writing under the pseudonym ''Montana Skeptic·' at a financial web site called Seeking
Alpha. The focus of my articles was resla i\1otors, Inc .. now called Tesla. [nc. My articles were
26
27
28
generally critical of l'csla. questioning its safety claims an
PDF Page 51
-
thin!.!S. I ,, roh.: that ·1..1sla ,, ~1~ ":.-trnc111rall\ h;mkru1 1·· - 1h~11 i-. unahk
.
ll, !,!Cncr.11 • a s11s1ainabk
pm lit
2
_,'
4
5
6
4.
r\t . Plllr." point in ·10 I '. I \\;1s ·•JoxxcJ" - my iJ..:ntity wrn, Jiscl \'crcd unJ r..:n:alc
PDF Page 52
RESPONDENT RANDEEP HOTI 11 'S MOTJON FOR FEES
AA376
Document received by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
Exhibit L
PDF Page 53
Fossi Declaration Exhibit L
Stiehing Alpha
1
.1.irKr,,1!,1,., n
-
.
Seekmg Alpha'°'·
Portfolio
Peoplo
.
.
News
Analysis
0
-
Montana Skeptic's Blog
Farewell For Now
Summary
Free
W i-Fi
: ' ' 'n1
1
quu
11"'111\J
• I n which I bid farewell to Tesla analysis at Seeking Alpha .
• And explain why I am departing.
It- :rrcrJol
• A victory for Elon Musk? Perhaps . Of a dubious sort.
Yesterday, July 23 , I decided to cease writing about Tesla (TSLA) here at the
Seeking Alpha web site. l also dedctivatea my Twitter a,count, where l was
@MontanaSkepticl . Here is what prompted those decisions.
Yesterday afternoon, the principa l of the fam ily office In which I am employed
received
a communication from someone purporting to be Elon Musk. Doubtful
that Elon Musi< could actually be attempting to contact tiim , my employer
asked one of my coll eagues to investigate and respond.
My colleague then spoke by phone with Elon Musk (it was indeed him). Mr.
Musk complained to my colleague about my writing at Seeking Alpha and
on
_. TR ADE
Twitter. Mr. Musk said if I continued to write, he would engage couosel and
sue me.
My col]1>ague then spake with me abou the phone call. We both agreed that
Mr. Musk's phone calJ and threatened lawsuit were actions that wou ld tend to
involve our employer in matters in which he has had no part. To avoid such a
consequence, I offered to Immediately cease writing at Seeking Alpha and to
deactivate my Twitter account.
How did Mr. Musk learn my Identity, and that of my employer? It appears to
me his information came thanks to the doxing efforts of some of his lollowers
Sponsarnd Financial C
PDF Page 54
Fossi Declaration Exhibit L
believe he has any valid legal claim, and 1 would have no trepidation in
Al l 11,.,111i.•,Wu C.,111 tu, 0
defending myself vigorously were he to bring any claim. My response to his
threats was simply to protect my cmploy1.?r and pre~erve my employment.
CEC> t.i.t r.:u1tiuclt1 of 1N
And so, you might say, Elon Musk has won this round. He has silenced a critic,
Out he has many, many cntics, and he cannot silence them all, and the truth
tQ Uil l pi,c, 6f '((Ill.•
will out.
I am proud of everything I wrote at Seeking Alpha, and have immensely
appreciated the extraordinary support of so many SA members and
contributors,
lt more than makes up for the endless mendacity and vicious personal attacks
( have endured from many Tesla cultists and from publications such as
Electrek and Teslarati.
All the articles and blog posts I have already published will continue to be
available to Pro subscribers. These four articles, along with the blog posts, will
remain on this side of the firewall:
Just Say 'No' To Tesla's Misleading Margin Mrtric
Ai Tesl.i Breaks Faith With !ts 8elievers, It's nme To Go Short
Even With Mc!Jel 3 Success, Tesla ls Structurally !lsr.krupt
To anyone tempted to short Tesla,
r urge you to again read the cautions in
Part V of the second linked article.
I am hopeful my magnificent collaborator, CoverOrive, who has been loath to
himself become a contributor, will find a new home at Seeking Alpha under the
aegis of another contributor.
With sadness, I say farewell. And, I thank you for the splendid ride.
Disclosure: I am/we are short TSLo\..
Additional disclosure: I am short TSLA via long-dated options
231) L·""•
https://seekingalpha.com/instablog/37229846-montana-skeotic/5190656-farewell-now
AA378
Document received by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
'Tesla Investors SwalJow The B1oe Pill
PDF Page 55
RESl'ONOF.NT RANDEEP HOTHl'S MOTION POR fGES
AA379
Document received by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
Exhibit M
PDF Page 56
Fossi Declaration Exhibit M
Seeking Alpha ·
Portfol,o
P11<1pl9
News
An11lys'-'l
Tesla And Montana Skeptic: Our
Response
. l!:
''I
?
M
MANA•
•
SA Editor George MorliTrly
Summ11rv
• Following a call co his employer by Elon Musk, a s~eking Alph3
contributor has been forced to stop contrlbutmg to our site.
• This underscores how important It is that all voices be given the
opportunity to be heard ,
• Seeking Alpha will continue to give voice to all investors, on all
investments.
• We continue to embrace pseudonymity on our platform, accordmg to our
policies.
Last nig ht, long-time Seeking Alpha contributor Montana Skeptic posted whut
IF you haven' t re<1d it, the crux or the matter is that by leveraging doxxmg
efforts of others, from different sites, Tesla (NASDAQ: TSUI) CEO Elon Musk
S19n ur.-no""'·
E-tTRADE
contilcted the author's employer ilnd threatened to engage counsel ilnd sue
our pseudonymous contributor. l will leave It to others to opine on the
priorities ol th ,s entrepreneur and what lessons investors might take from it
and will focus this brief article on the issues most pressing to Seeking Alpha :
our commitment to providing a platform for vibrant Investment research .ind
discussion, and our respect for the privacy or our contributors and users.
Seeking Alpha Is the pre-eminent platform for crowd -sourced Investment
E.+TRAOE o
Sponsored Finilnc,.ill Col
reseilrch. This isn't hubris, it' s f~ct. Since its launch, Seeking Alpha has
enabled thousands of contributors to share their research with millions of
users, many of whom enrich that discussion in comments on our news and
articles. We believe that the investment landscape is richer for that, but this
tl<1.1J•,,1Wf'I Gui;to: :if;C'.. " .-~ow
Ul!,0,164 T,.,d'1,,n Op1lo,,,
turn of events could make it tempting to rethink our approach.
\l.1n Who
That will not happen.
lffl'l
c.,1t--.1 cow ::O,iiOO l
IU!U~•p
In fact, on behalf of Seekmg Alpha leadership, I want to state clearly that we
https://see kingalpha.com/art icle/4189933-tesla- montana-s ke ptic-response
AA380
Document received by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
appears likely to be his final can rne nt on our site.
PDF Page 57
Fossi Declaration Exhibit M
dre more committed th.an ever to providing the soapbox for bulls and bears on
th is, and @very, stock. We want every writer to share their research ~nil to
analvzc the allocatrons of capIt<1I (Intellectual, financial, and otherwise) by all
corporate leaders so that investors can be better informed and make their own
capital allucation dcus,ons according ly. We rirmly believe in the be11erits of
free speech and open discourse .
O.e,i
.,., rio ;he"-•; ,J,:-.
,,
""
Our strategy enables robust debate on myriad topics and brings new voices to
the fore, just as Mr. Musk himself did on Tesla's most recent ~arn:nr.~
!O
:n1,
.,ll.!
.i;:;1:y :,,os,11:.)
PDF Page 58
RESPONDENT RJ\NDEEP Ronn 's MOTION FOR FEES
AA382
Document received by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
Exhibit N
PDF Page 59
Fossi Declaration Exhibit N
HN1\ NCl:\I, TJ!Vl rs
HOME
~ARll(ETS LIVE
tONf thi11)l; h.•,\d.:r.. nf\,.,•J: nm, cnmp;u111..•j: do •~II trn.· ltrJII•, l't"~la's
1la., i~ .·\rnu1U -ta\•\1 r!'l')Orl1.•rs ,1 :-,l,1lim1Pnl ~-,:11:rh ,,·~1~ ;ri n0-\\;1_,. ,•i1u~id:\'t 1 aml ~1t 1sk,m 11I
tu lnr1\1tr ;11uhw .1 pub'.ir11,- :--hr ;.:111111,,'l.1)1 •
UNVESTdJt.APPEmE
FOR CLEAN FOOD
r ··~·-·,~
\VI\O kllt.'W 1n:.-.·h:1:sms.:. J C'J r 1,;in~ the m:1mJ fartuwr p,~1~i~c;;i,,n to itk!lllf~· the huyn
in 1h pnhhc r1.•l,tti1,11~ l fforb{! \~lll'~S ,..=t shuuJd n:,ut th.· '.'-:nli1H ptit1t.
1
\\'1' ,lln),uly !ooktt! :H Llw i,rnad1.:r t·c1ntt:1~I for :\h1:sk. "A·ho.st• crr,11i-.: ht!h;n=inur i!)
'i.tmtiug to make hi~ p,.. si:Jon r,t lhc c·omp;1m he l"Urf(JUJ!(t.,.:1,k 1rntcn,1Mc.
Li!'I~ ,tw'-·U ln~tc~TWit.' of',, prm.iun , ,tnd th,: t"O:-i[ nf m.Jki11g it
llH~ prolll rn:UJ:,;ir\ is nnl t.hn.·t:i ly i':(>mp.ar:1Dft~ to 1h~Lt 1)! olhcr anlom;1kt•r=-, ht~<·.:Ju.,(•
T._.1-11,~ (i(l~s 11ol s1•1l 1t._ 1~~1'".- :,1 a 1li~••fl1111t 11> .;1 ru~t\\·ork of indt•1u-•mlt.~nt 1le:1h•r,;
..
'1 he gi ,;i,\\ 1.~t ltir.-k T1!Sb mam1;.:.11;~Bh.•nt •'·i('r pcrior:m:d
w;\~ ti, ~11d1ant tl1e firms
an.n1;-"3i3 hHu f•H u~fr1~ on t"w•, rr,c;minZ!k:")s. mclrk~: Odh tdcs :rnd i!,m~s mariln.
nu.: ,1t•l;,•cric•5: rn1i[ r il.! i:i, ·•~t•lt,~;) bt·~tu!-'(• tlw UU)f'\'.' . : :n1- Tt•:i-b dc-li\·l".S. tn fol·[, l:w:~r. 1h1' nmn~ f:\r-.. it d ..~livcrs, the~m<1n• m1)ney :t
l,_: ... {1 (·:·
l
1
':
I· ~-·
https://ftalphavilJe .ft.com/2018/07/27 /15 32692760000/Je-suis-Monta na-Ske ptic/
AA383
Document received by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
[:'i,luHana Sk"·ptil'.'~I f~m1\lti~·cr 1 is :i !vng(i111c 11.•:-::.·:1 '>Upp1u1c c ami ~\·,1~ ()11i..~ of the
fi r•a H, purcl11,1.$t• .l \huh=I ,·. \\ hr-n •~:u!tmh-,\..; Jt !hi:-; placit 1)! -cmp!oynt~•nll
b<'-1·a1 11l? !l;,:nrt~ qf l \ lar.l;1~1:1 S'-•'l>lk's! :u;t1un.:.;, l \111JH~111:1 Sk~plh: I Y!llnntct!i'\."J ftr
~lop ;rnd did.'·
PDF Page 60
Fossi Declarat ion Exhibit N
Vir.cm~l \\'•}ltcr.s rt't:t!nlty ,,rc,t..~ ~l fin,. ;1nai;-si~ :!howiui; th:H the ).l.n.•;1lrs, drivi r of
'fesl:i':, lo.,st:s .trc: ib t:,,,t•: u1ul~r lhl! he:uJiu~ ofSnl('.!-, t,,Jmwr.1[ & Admiui-.;t,-,-tt.i\e
(turnmo11h·, S(I&,\) F;lr ~·ea1-s1 r.._~;;l:t lm1.:.;1t>1.) h:tw• ~--=1>..~t· t<•1I tlw lirm·s Josl-t'> l o
shrinlc :t~ lt.~l dl1 li\'t!ri<'~ incn·.ISl:.. In ..1rl un! facl.1h<~ O!>pt1:i;l1~~ l1us lt.-i.pp!!nt~~l ,111d, ,1s
lhe ~\1(,ih.lr.s detail~, 1huor1po5ih• i:,; !arnly tu co;Himw 1,1 h,lp\mn.
On gros.C:i mctr.L(.ins:. canna'k1..·~ typically discount th,.-i r c.·ars \vl1tm .selling lo pn1ach:
..
l.,l'l's clo th<' m(Hh lm;\gin"i 1:,m1 ,~, Sl~:F) ha-,. :ml onwth<': rt·h•?uw tlt•\ .s t•:lll lr
,\ufolk1·} of S:I billio,1 and C<'sl> of !W<1 cats W th~ (lcalcNhlp n~t¥ic•rk, ,1nd 1~ autl')mhut dc:wn its :-.ates oper.atavn l<1morrow. it still would
n<•c~i to m,1int:i1r1 tht· S111wrth,n-gc·r n1!rW1Jrk for :i•l 11>ni4 il.~ th,1: , " :in~ Tt•!-l.1 r.1r-; nn
the rm1d
\Ve !C:hould m,mtton W(! don't know the;.J, l'XiU1 allo<'ntion ol Sup.:-n:har,;cr costs, nil we
cuuhl find is :1 linc i11 the w16 fin~ncial y,•.,'s m•K:
..
\Ve a.Hot.•atc Surcrdrnrgcr n.:l.ltccl ~~P<'llS1.'~ lo ew-\ of tornl notomotiv~ r<..-vi.:-nue~
an,l .rsellingr gt:ncr.:11. and admi11i.;trati,·t: cxpc::1scs. ~l'hc.'ic c::osl.3 wcrr immoh•:-ial
for ;\ii P<'•iml.~ prc-scmed.
\l<,nt,,na Skcptk lhrn upd,itd those figurt·s in a later post, harn1K bt~•n challenged
m1 !-1.nmc p<)inL\ 11H.·ludlni; th;>y.Sc tbc ,~trn 10'.';. ln opcr:itin~ iL'i tiwn
PDF Page 61
Fossi Declaration Exhibit N
Tesla Gross Marg,n Ql-Q4 l01] and Full Year
so
40
,,
.
u.,
11'1
11.l
I\ I
,. 9
u
10
s.•
JS
0
cu 2017
Q22017
Q3 2017
Q4 2017
Fully~.,
-.,..,
f,,..J•V
' J"'#?11,"°f".w'illrltf"i" ',n•
1
On itross margin in g.t!n~ral. the point is really this is not a ~oi>d metric for a cnntpany
losing mone)' overall un fve,y deh,·ery, each one of which cw.,tc, fr'"1h sen1cing,
warranty and potential uulO\)llot litigation r.Jated liab,lities
Ahead of Tesla's release of th= figures Wt-dncsday (when we'll have a special
Mork.l's Li,·e session running), we11 take a look at the other ~rgumenl.S of Montana
Skeptic in a •cries Strcisoncl Hft-ct pools. Fuel frce to drop us• line lo enlnrgc upon or
chollcnge tho anol}(Sis in them. or do so ln the s'Omments blo.low.
We'll 11J)datc thl~ posl us "'ell wrrsla has comments on Mont,ml Skcp1ic's work
llpciate • ,t.., 'L'C mlckd det11ils of.\fontrmu Sh,ptic's respollse, and the change to
as.umptions on dcalor discounts.
Related links:
Streisand rr ·t - Wild
~hat's rhe r
.~ for S!r~!->}'ll~ F.ff\'<'t? • FTAlpha\'illc
https://ftalphaville .ft.com/2018/07/2 7/1532692 760000/Je-suis-Montana-Skeptic/
AA385
Document received by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
The brl'llkdown of analy4o m, and not d«bt of $8.8bn, an incrco,11 of $0.Shn in
three m,inths.
PDF Page 62
AA386
Document received by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
DECLARATION OF AARON GREENSPAN
PDF Page 63
2
3
4
5
D. GILL SPERLEIN, SBN 172887
THE LAW OFFICE OF D. GILL SPERLEIN
345 Grove Street
San Francisco, CA 94102
Telephone: (415) 404-6615
Facsimile: (415) 404-66 I 6
gill@sperleinlaw.com
Attorneys for Respondent
6
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF ALAMEDA
7
8
IO
Tesla, Inc.,
II
12
13
Petitioner,
V.
Randeep Hothi,
14
Respondent.
15
16
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No. RG19015770
DECLARATION OF AARON
GREENSPAN IN SUPPORT OF
RESPONDENT RANDEEP HOTHl'S
MOTION FOR REASONABLE
EXPENSES INCLUDING ATTORNEY'S
FEES PURSUANT TO CODE OF CIVIL
PROCEDURE 128.5;
Date:
Time:
Courtroom:
Judicial Officer:
17
18
19
20
21
I, Aaron Greenspan, declare:
l.
J am over eighteen years of age and have personal knowledge of the facts below. If
called upon, I could and would testify to the following.
2.
I am an independent journalist and run the website plainsite.org.
3.
Attached is a true and correct copy of a portion of an email exchange I had with Elon
22
23
24
Musk on August 7, 2019. I have redacted the email addresses.
25
26
27
28
- 1DECLARATION OF LAWRENCE FOSSI IN SUPPORT OF RESPONDENT RANDEEP HOTHI 'S MOTION FOR FEES
AA387
Document received by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
9
PDF Page 64
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing
2
is true and correct.
3
4
5
Executed on: August 9. 2019
Date
at San Francisco
CA
State
City
6
7
8
9
10
11
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-20
DECLARATION OF LAWRENCE FOSSI IN SUPPORT OF Ri:SPONDENT RANDEEP HOTHl S MOTION rQR FEES
AA388
Document received by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
12
PDF Page 65
RESPONDENT RANOP.F. P HOTT 11·s MOTION f()[{ Frms
AA389
Document received by the CA 1st District Court of Appeal.
Exhibit 0
PDF Page 66
Greenspan Exhibit 0
I'""'· Elon Musk
',.,:,J•' · Re: Musk Private Foundation
Inquiry
i:;.s--,: AugtIst 7, 2019 at 5:46 PM
1:,
Aaron Greenspan
Tile dnta ,s uncqwvccm that Autopilot Is safm than human dn~1ng by a s19mficanl margin It Is uncth,c.1, and false ol you to cla11n otherwise 111
doing :;o, you are cnctangenng the pubtIc.
As for lhe people you mention below. they have act,vely ha1asse11 :ind on the case or Holh,. almost killed Test~ emplcyees Wh~I was a
sIdesw,po wncn Ho1h1 h1I one o1 our ocopte could eas
Back to 
