37 2009 00101537 Cu Oe CTL - Roa 302 - 04 28 17 - 1510702824754

5.
-Superior Court of California

County of San Diego
Civil
Unique ID-C2759-38
CASE 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL
VOLUME 12
TOTAL 12
VOLUME
C205_C2759/38 Reg_Date: 04/21/2017

-
CIV-120
FOR COURT USE ONLY
ATTORNEY OR PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY (Name and Address): - TELEPHONE NO.
1- H. Paul Konddck, Esq. (Bar # 88566) (619) 291-2400; riltb

H. Paul Kondrick, A Professional Corporation FAX'NO :1'vEL BUSINESS OFFICE 17
3130 Fourth Avenue . (619) 291-7123 CENTRAL DIVISION
San Diego, CA 92103-5803
ATTORNEY{FOR (Name,· Courtney S. Etnyre. Plaintiff 11 JUL 26 PM 2: 32
Insert name of court and name of judicial district and branch court, if any:
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO CLERK-SDI-ERKR COURT

Central Division Branch SAN DIEGO COUNTY. CA
PLAIN,TIFF/PETITIONER COUrtney S. Etnyre
DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT: Sandip ("Mickey") Minhas, et al. - JU[*26'11 ptl 1:51
CASE NUMBER:
NOTICE OF ENTRY OF DISMISSAL AND PROOF OF SERVICE
El Personal Injury, Property Damage, or Wrongful Death
[I] Motor Vehicle 17 Other
Family Law 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL
[Il Eminent Domain
OD Other (speci40. Complaint for Discrimination, Retaliation and Harassmeni
TO ATTORNEYS AND PARTIES WITHOUT ATTORNEYS: A dismissal was entered in this action by the clerk as shown on the
Request for Dismissal. (Attach a copy comp/eted by the c/erk)
Date: July 26, 2011 , H. Paul Kondrick, Esq.

(TYPE OR PRINT NAME OF |Yl ATTORNEY --1 PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY)
i 111-lf
GNATURE)
PROOF OF SERVICE
1. I am over the age of 1'8 and not a party to this cause. I am a residerit of or'employed in the county where the mailing occurred.
My residence or business address is: 3130 Fourth Avenue
_ San Diego, CA 92103
2. rfl I served acopy of the Noticeof Entry of'Dismissal and Request for'Dismissal, by mailing them, in a sealed envelope with
postage fully prepaid, as follows:
a. 13C1 l deposited the envelope with the United States Postal Service.
b. 1 I placed the envelope for collection and,processing for mailing following this business's ordinary practice with
whicb I am readily familiar. On, the same day correspondence is placed,for collection and mailing, it is deposited
in the ordinary course of business with the United States Postal Service.
c. Date of deposit: July 26, 2011
d. Place of deposit (city and state): San Diego, CA 92103
e. Addressed as follows (name and address):
Michael C. Sullivan, Esq.
Paul, Plevin, Sullivan & Connaughton, LLP Claudette Wilson, Esq., c/o Wilson Turner Kosmo, LLP
401 F Street, Tenth Floor 550 West "C" Street Suite 1050
San Diego, CA 92101 San Diego, CA 92101

3. F--1 1 served a copy of the Notice of Entry of Dismissal and Request for Dismi5sal by personally delivering copies to the
person served as shown below:
Name: Date: Time: Address:
4. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.
Date: July 26, 2011 -- Candice E. Caufield K - -

(TYPE OR,PRINT NAME) (SIGNATURE OF DECLARANT)
Page l,of 1
Code of Civil Procedure, § 581 et seq.;

Form Adopted for Mandatory Use NOTICE OF ENTRY OF DISMISSAL Cal. Rules of Court,:mle.3.1390
Judicial Council of California
CIV-120 [Rev. January 1, 20071 AND PROOF OF SERVICE www coun#nfo.ca.gov

LexisNexis® Automated California Judicial Council Forms
Clv-110
ATTORNEY OR PAkTY VMTHOUTATTORNEY (Name. Staun!4, and address)
H. Paul Kondrick, Esq. (Bar # 88566) FOR COURT USE ONLY
H. Paul Kondrick, A Professional Corporation

3130 Fourth Avenue >ESS --FEATE 7 -7
1/
t..- & i :.J: L' : 4

· San Diego, CA 92103-5803
TELEPHONE N0 (6,19) 291-2400 FAX NO. (OptionaO (619) 291-7123 f j :1 It
E-MAIL ADDRESS (Optional:
i : JUL -8 PM 2: 46
ArroRNEY FOR nvame,· Courtney S. Ettlyre, Plaintiff
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO GLERA-6,4,viOR COLRT
STREET ADDRESS 330 West Broadway SAN DIEGO COUNTY, [ A
Aur n.
<j 2,:,4],rll P# 2'0,7
MAILING ADDRESS:
c,TYANpzip CoDe San Diego 92101

BRANCH NAME. Central Division
PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER: Courtney S. Etnyre
DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT: Sandip ("Mickey") Minhas, et al.
REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL
CASE NUMBER:
[--1 personal injury, property Damage, or Wrongful Death

0 Motor Vehicle F7 Other
Fll Family Law 1-1 Eminent Domain 37-2009-00201537-CU-OE-CTL
1 Other (specify): Complaint for Money Damages: Discrimination, Retaliation and Harassment
- A conformed copy will not be returned by the clerk unless a method of return is provided with the document -
1. TO THE CLERK: Please dismiss this action as follows:
a. (1) 1-fl With prejudice (2) F-7 Without prejudice
b. (1) El Complaint (2) 0 Petition

(3) Fl Cross-complaint filed by (name): on (date):
(4) F-1 Cross-complaint filed by (name): on Mate):
(5) Entire action of all parties and all causes of action

(6) E-7 Other (speci60:*
2. (Complete in all cases except family law cases.)
Court fees and costs were waived for a party in this case. (This information may be obtained horn the clem. if this box is
checked, the declaration on the back of this form must be completed).
Date: July 6, 2011
··...H·PauKqndrisk, Esq.
(TYPE OR PRINT NAME OF | ATTORNEY F-1, PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY) (SIGNATURE)
*If. dismissal requested is of specified, parties only of specified causes of action Attorney or party without attorney for:
only, or of speded cross-complaints only so state and identify the parties,
causes of action, or cross-complaints to be dismissed. 1 X I PlaintifUPetitioner r-3 Defendant/Respondent
£ Cross-Complainant
3. TO THE CLERK: Consent to the above dismissal is hereby given.**
Date:
(TYPE OR PRINT NAME OF || ATTORNEY Fl PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY) (SIGNATURE)
** If a cross-complaint - or Response (Family Law) seeking affirmative Attorney or party witbout attorney for:
relief - is on file, theattomey for cross-complainant (respondent) must
F7 Plaintiff/Petitioner F--1 DefendanURespondent
sign this consentif required by Code of Civil Procedure section 581 (i)
or 0).
Fl Cross-Complainant
(To be cnpleted by clerk)
4 11 Dismissal, entered as requested on' Mate): JUL 0 8 2011
5 F7 Dismissalientered on Mate): ,as to only (name):
6. Fl Dismissal not entered as requested for the following reasons (spec/*):
7. a. 17 Attorney or party without attorney notified on Mate): JUL 1 2 2011

b. Fl Attorney or party without attorney not notified. Filing party failed to provide
1711 a copy to be conformed |1 means to return conformed copy
Date:
JUL 1 2 2011
'Clerk,.by r .n; uu*,N,TA 11 , Deputy
J. Virissimo Page 1 of 2
Form Adopted for Mandatory Use
Judicial:Council of California
REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL V Code of Clvil[Proced,ire, §'581'et seq.
Gov.,Code, § 68637(c), Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1396
CIV-110 [Rev. July 1, 2009] www.coudint).ca.gov
T .v..AT,™4US) A.,ir-ninA 0.144.-4. T..,44..nl r•w.-r.41 57-,•,4"•
clv-110
_ PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER: Courtney S. Etnyre CASE NUMBER:
2, DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT: Sandip ("Mickey") Minhas, et at. 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL
Declaration Concerning Waived Court IFees
The court has a statutory lien for waived fees and costs on any recovery of $10,000 or morein value by
settlement, compromise, arbitration award, mediation settlement, or other recovery. The court's lien must
be paid before the court will dismiss the case.
1. The court waived fees and costs in this action for (name):
2. The person in item 1 (check one):

a. r-1 is not recovering anything of value by this action.
b. Fl is recovering less than $10,000 in valueby this acti6n.
c. Fl is recovering $10,000 ormore in value by this action. (/f#em 2c is checked #em 3 must be comp/eted)
3. F71 All court fees and costs that were waived in this action have been paid to the court (check one): Fl Yes Fl No
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the information above is true and correct.
Date:
(TYPE OR PRINT,NAME Opr-1 ATTORNEY |-3 PARTY MAKING DECLARATION) (SIGNATURE)
CIV-110 [Rev. July 1, 2009] Page 2 of 2

LexisNexts® Automated.California Judicial Council Forms
Clv-110
ATIORNEY ORPARTYWITHOUTATTORNEY Name Statel andaddress):
- H. Paul Kondrick, Esq. (6ar * 88566) FOR COURT USE ONLY

3130 Fourth Avenue i /

TELEPHONE'NO. (619) 291-2400 FAX NO. (Oplona/): (619) 291-7123 -
E-MAIL ADDRESS (Optiona/) f : JUL -8 PA 2: 4 0

ATrORNEY FORt(NameJ· Courtney S. Etnvre, Plaintiff
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO L Lti:i\-- -'. :- - '.. 2 .< r OLAT
STREET ADDRESS: 330 West Broadway SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CA
MAIEING ADDRESS:
CITY. AND ZIP CODE: San Diego 92101

BRANCH NAME: Central Division
-*2:64pt' 2,03
PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER: Courtney S. Etnyre
REQUEST FOR'DISMISSAL CASE:NUMBER:
F-1 Personal Injury, Property Damage, or Wrongful Death

0 Motor Vehicle 'El Other
1--1 Family Law 11 Eminent Domain 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL
fil Other (speci4): Complaint for Money Damages: Discrimination, Retaliation and Harassmen
- A conformed copy will not be returned by the clerk unless a method of return is provided with the document -
1. TO THE CLERK: Please,dismiss this action as follows:
a. (1) ril With prejudice (2) Fl Without prejudice
b. (1) F7 Complaint (2) Fil Petition

(3) F7 Cross-complaint filed by (name): on (date):
(4) Fl Cross-complaint filed by (name): on (date):
(5) [ Entire action of all parties and all causes of action

(6) Fl Other (speci60:*
2. (Complete in all cases except family law cases.)
/1 Court fees and costs'were waived for a party in thiscase. (This infonnation may be obtained from the clet*. if this box is
checked, the declaration on the back of this form must be completed).
Date: July 6, 2011
H. Paul Kendrick, Esq. ./ d.?bitic
(TYPE:OR PRINT NAME OF | ATTORNEY -- PARTY WITHOUTATTORNEY) (SIGNATURE)
*If dismissal requested is of specified parties only of specified causes of action Attorney or party without attorney for:
only, or of speafed cross-complaints only so state and Identify the parties,
causes of action, or cross-complaints to be dismissed. [X]Plaintiff/Petitioner DefendanURespondent
1 Cross-Complainant
3. TO THE CLERK: Consent to the above dismissal is hereby given.**
Date:
(TYPE OR PRINT NAME OF -| ATTORNEY -| PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY)

(SIGNATURE)
- If a cross-complaint - or Response (Family Law) seeking affirmative Attorney or party without attorney for:
relief - is on file, the attorney for cross-complainant (respondent) must Fli Plaintiff/Petitioner
sign this consentif required by Code of,Civil!Procedure section 581 (i)
11 Defendant/Respondent
or 0).
1-7 Cross-Complainant
(To be cpmpleted by clerk)
4.1-*| Dismissal entered as requested on (date): JUL 0 8 2011
5 Fl Dismissal entered on (date): as to only (name):
6.1--7 Dismissal not entered as requested for the following reasons (specify)*
7. a. 1[2 Attorney or party without attorney notified{ on (date): JUL 1 2 2011

b..17 Attorney or party without attorney not notified. Filing party failed to provide
171 a copy to be conformed f-1 means to return conformed copy - . .
Date:
JUL 1 2 2011
Clerk, by
/) In/ Uu/y*FU-7
J. Virisgimu , Deputy
Panel of 2
Judicial Council of California
REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL V Code of Civil Procedure, § 581 et seq.;
Gov. Code, § 68637(c), Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1390
CIV-110 [Rev. Julyl, 20091 www. courtinjo. ca.gov
,
Clv-110
PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER: Courtney S. Etnyre CASE NUMBER:
DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT: Sandip ("Mickey") Minhas, et al. 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL
Declaration Concerning Waived Court Fees
The court has a statutory lien for waived fees and costs on·any recovery of $10,000 or more in value by
settlement, compromise, arbitration award, mediation settlement, or other recovery. The court's lien must
be paid 'before the court will dismiss the case.
1. Thecourt waivedi fees and costs in this action for (name):
2. The person in item 1 (check one):

a. Fl is not recovering anything of value by this action.
b. Fl is recovering less than $10i000 in value by this action.
c. E-1 is recovering $10,000 ormore invalue bythisaction. (Ifitem 2c is checked, item 3 must be completed.)
3. Fl All court fees and costs that'were waived in this action have been paid to the court (check one): |1 Yes E-11 No
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the information above is true and correct.
Date:
(SIGNATURE)
(TYPE OR'PRINT NAME OF|- ATTORNEY - PARlY MAKING DECLARATION)
CIV-110 [Rev. July 1,2009] Page 2 of 2

LexisNexis® Automated California Judicial Council Forms
li.5 f '::33 OFF; f.n 1 7
d. 1
1 { , il f.. L E) i '.'' i o ;2 1
H. Paul Kendrick, Esq., State Bar No. 88566
H. Paul Kendrick, A.P.C.
2
3130 Fourth Avenue 11 JUL -8 PM 2: 4 E
3 San Diego, California 92103-5803
LLCAR-ou:-2-;:Kir. 006/4
Telephone: (619) 291-2400 SAN DiEGO COUNTY. CA
4
Facsimile: (619) 291-7123
5
Attorney for Plaintiff, COURTNEY S. ETNYRE
6
8
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
9
FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
10
COURTNEY S. ETNYRE, individually, ) Case No. 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL

11
)
12 Plaintiff, ) PROOF OF SERVICE
)
13
V. )
14
SANDIP C'MICKEY") MINHAS, individually,)
15 QUALCOMM Incorporated, a Delaware )
corporation, and DOES 1 through 40, inclusive,)
16
)
Defendants. )
17
)
18
I, Candice E. Caufield, declare that:

19
20
I am, and was, at the times of the service hereinafter mentioned, over the age of 18
21 and not a party to the within action; I am employed in the County of San Diego, California
22
where the service occurs; and my business address is 3130 Fourth Avenue, San Diego,
23
1 California.
24
On July 7, 2011, I served the foregoing document(s) described as:

25
26
1. REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL, WITH PREJUDICE [Form CIV-110]
27 on all interested parties to this action by placing true copies thereof enclosed in sealed
28
envelopes addressed as follows:
-1- ProofofService
1
Leonid M. Zilberman, Esq.
Wilson, Cosmo & Turner LLP
2
550 West "C" Street, Suite 1050
3 San Diego, CA 92101
Telephone: (619) 236-9600
4
Facsimile: (619) 236-9669
5
Attorneys for Defendant Sandip ("Mickey") Minhas
6
7
8
Melissa L. Klick, Esq.
Paul, Plevin, Sullivan & Connaughton, LLP
9 401 "B" Street Tenth Floor
San Diego, CA 92101

10
Telephone: (619) 237-5200
11
Facsimile: (619) 615-0700
12 Attorneys for Defendant QUALCOMM Incorporated
13
X BY U.S. MAN. (AS INDICATED ABOVE): I placed the originals or copies of
14
the described docnments, as appropriate, in a sealed envelope addressed to the parties as
15
indicated above on July 7, 2011. I am miliar with the firm's practice of collection and
16
17 processing correspondence for mailing. I personally deposited the claim in the United States
18 post office or in a mailbox, substation, mail chute, or other like facility regularly maintained
19
by the government ofthe United States, in a sealed envelope, properly addressed with postage
20
paid.
21
BY PERSONAL SERVICE: I personally gathered a true copy ofthe above

22
23 documents, and gave same to our messenger service for personal delivery/service before
24 5:00 pm. on July 7, 2011 will file the original proof ofpersonal service with the Court upon
25
request.
26
BY FEDERAL EXPRESS/OVERNIGHT MAIL (as indicated above): I placed a
27
true copy in a sealed envelope addressed to the parties as indicated above, on July 7,2011. I
28
-2- Proof of Service

1
personally caused it to be deposited with Federal Express on the same day in the ordinary
2
course ofbusiness for delivery the next business day.
3
BY FACSIMII.E (as indicated above): By use offacsimile machine number, (619)

4
5
291-7123, I faxed a true copy(ies) of the document(s) listed above to the parties, on July 7,
6 2011, at their fax numbers listed above as indicated by their names. The document(s)
7
were/was transmitted by facsimile transmission and the transmission was reported as
8
complete and without error. The transmission report was properly issued by the transmitting
9
facsimile machine. A copy ofthe transmission report will be attached to the proofof service
10
11
indicating that the documents were transmitted properly, as necessary, in the future.
12 I declare under penalty ofperjury under the laws ofthe State of California that the
13
foregoing is true and correct. Executed this 7'h day ofJuly, 2011.
14
15 ce . eld
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

PERIOR COURT OF CALIFORN
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
CENTRAL
MINUTE ORDER
DATE: 06/28/201'1 TIME: 09:30:00 AM DEPT: C-73
JUDICIAL OFFICER PRESIDING: Steven R, Denton

CLERK: Yvette Terronez
REPORTER/ERM: Paula Rahn CSR# 11510
BAILIFF/COURT ATTENDANT: M. Micone
CASE NO: 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL CASE INIT.DATE: 11/02/2009

CASE TITLE: Etnyre vs. Minhas
CASE CATEGORY: Civil - Unlimited' CASE TYPE: Other employment
EVENT TYPE: Settlement Conference (Civil)
APPEARANCES
H Paul Kondrick, counsel, present for Plaintiff(s).
Claudette Wilson, specially appearing for counsel LEONID ZILBERMAN, present for Defendant(s).
Melissa Listug Klick, counsel, present for Defendant(s).
Mike Sullivan is present om behalf of Qualcomm
Settlement conference held. Court directs counsel to continue to meet and confer with their clients re
propsed offer. Counsel is to notify the Court by 6/29/11 if parties have considered the offer and reached
a settlement.
d/6-2 4:4
Judge Steven R. Denton
DATE: 06/28/2011 MINUTE ORDER Page 1

DEPT: C-73 Calendar No. 3
6
Calendar No.; 3
Court Use Only
Superior Court of California

County of San Diego
SIGN-IN SHEET
CASE: 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL - Courtney S Etnyre vs. Sandip Minhas
EVENT TYPE: Settlement Conference (Civil) EVENT DATE/TIME: 06/28/2011 9:30 am
JUDGE: Steven R. Denton

DEPARTIVIENT: C-73
ATTORNEY/PARTICIPANT NAME CLIENT NAME SIGNATURE
Klick, Melissa,Listug
hUils . a q K¥U- ¥SjO. c«SC
Qualcomm Incorporated et. al. [DFN] 9111Ili U-
0
Korlariak, H Paul Etnyre, Courtney S et. al. [PLN]
I 1\ A.LxAL#i- Le As *-£4
ZIEBERMAN,4EQNIE; Minhas, Sandip et. al. [DFN]
14:Ke_ Sul\:u#Vi Clv #co M n
MOCS#:3
.
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
STREET ADDRESS: 330 West Broadway
MAILING ADDRESS; 330 West Broadway
CITY AND ZIP'CODE: San Diego, CA 92101
BRANCH NAME: Central
TELEPHONE NUMBER: (619) 450-7070
PLAINTIFF: Courtney S Etnyre
DEFENDANT: Sandip Minhas et.al
Short Title: Etnyre vs. Minhas
CASE NUMBER:
NOTICE OF DISMISSAL IBY COWRT
37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CIL
UNLESS ONEOF THE FOLLOWING OCCURS, THE COURT WILL DISMISS THE ABOVE-ENTITLED CASE WITHOUT
PREJUDICE ON 08/15/2011
1) File a judgment or dismissal (see Superior Court Rules, Division ll, Rule 2.2.4, if applicable).
2) Appear ex tparte in the department listed below and show good cause why the case should not be dismissed.
Contact C-70
Only one continuance will be granted.
All inquiries regarding this notice should be referred to the department Ilisted above.
SOSC CIV-708 (Rev. 1006) Page: 1

NFD-NOTICE OF DISMISSALIBY COURT
Central
330 West Broadwav
San Diego, CA 92101
SHORT TITLE: Etnyre vs. Minhas
CASE NUMBER:
CLERK'S CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE BY MAIL
37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL
I certify that I am not a party to this cause. I certify that a true copy of NOTICE OF DISMISSAL BY COURT was
mailed following standard court practices in a sealed envelope with postage fully prepaid, addressed as indicated
below. The certification occurred at San Diego, California on 07/01/2011. The mailing occurred at Sacramento
on 07/05/2011.
F · 04,-84---44
Clerk of the Court, by: K. Breckenrldge
, Deputy
MELISSA L KLICK LEONID ZILBERMAN

401 B STREET TENTH FLOOR 550 WEST 'C' ST, STE 1050
SAN DIEGO, CA 92101-4232 SAN DIEGO, CA 92101
H P KONDRICK
3130 FOURTH AVE
SAN DIEGO, CA 92103-5803
CLERK'S CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE BY MAIL
Page: 2
.
fli
/1 /
PERIOR COURT OF CALIFOR
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
CENTRAL
MINUTE ORDER
DATE: 07/01/2011 TIME: 08:45:00 AM DEPT: C-70
JUDICIAL OFFICER PRESIDING: Randa Trapp

CLERK: Kelly Breckenridge, Anthony Shirley
REPORTER/ERM: Not Reported
BAILIFF/COURT ATTENDANT: Scot Parriott

CASE CATEGORY: Civil - Unlimited CASE TYPE: Other employment
EVENT TYPE: Civil Jury Trial
APPEARANCES
H Paul Kondrick, counsel, present for Plaintiff(s).
Claudette Wilson, specially appearing for counsel LEONID ZILBERMAN, present for Defendant(s).
Melissa Listug Klick, counsel, present for Defendant(s).
Mike Sullivan, counsel, present for defendant Qualcomm
Upon the Court's inquiry, counsel inform the Court that this matter is settled.
Dismissal to be filed within 45 days.

Calendar No.: 4
Court Use Only
Superior Court of California

County of San Diego
SIGN-IN SHEET
CASE: 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL- Courtney S Etnyre vs. Sandip Minhas
EVENT TYPE: Civil Jury Trial EVENT DATEmME: 07/01/2011 8:45 am
JUDGE: Randa Trapp

DEPARTMENT: C-70
ATTORNEY/PARTICIPANT NAME CLIENT NAME

--1 SIGNATURE
Klick, Melissa Listug

kto \»*4 /44 cp<'
Qualcomm Incorporated et. al. [DFN]
<4>Ok-
yonki642*al / ' Etnyre, Courtney S et al. tPLN]
<IZAe:.AeAt- 6,7 ,\s *-3

·ZilBERIVIAN-tEONIEY Minhas, Sandip et. al. [DFN]
. C 0,bc'j00Rf-
Mi Ke_ Sul li U·Cir\ Couqb c o u 41_
MOCS#:5
1
.
1 MICHAEL C. SULLIVAN (SBN 131817)

MELISSA LISTUG KLICK (SBN 228470)
2 EMILY J. FOX (SBN 262106) P--.0 LE /'
PAUL, PLEVIN, SULLIVAN & CONNAUGHTON LLP 9,01( of the Superlorcouit"'
3 401 B Street, Tenth Floor JUN 30 2011
4 Telephone: 619-237-5200 8* Anuiony Shirle,% DepuliF
i Facsimile{ 619-615-0700 J {N RS, 2 1 :w -,pizr
5
Attorneys for Defendant
6 Qualcomm Incorporated
8
9
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
10
COURTNEY S. ETNYRE, individually, CASE NO. 37-2009-001*1537-CU-OE-CTL
11
Plaintiff, ! DEFENDANT QUALCOMM
12 INCORPORATED'S OPPOSITION TO
v. PLAINTIFF'S MOTION PURSUANT TO
13 EVIDENCE CODE §402, HEARING
SANDIP ("MICKEY") MINHAS, RELATIVE TO THE SCOPE OF
14 individually, QUALCOMM Incorporated, a TESTIMONY BY DEFENDANTS' EXPERT,
Delaware corporation and DOES 1 through MARK KALISH, M.D.
15 40, inclusive,
16 Defendants.
Dept: 70
17 Judge: Honorable Randa Trapp

Complaint Filed: November 2,2009
18 Trial Date: July 1,2011
19
20
21
22
23
- 24
25
26
27
28
PAUL, PLEVIN,
SULLIVAN & Qualcomm's Opposition to Eyidence Code § 402
CONNAUGHTON LLP Motion re Mark Kalish, M.D,
4
1 I.
2 INTRODUCTION
3 Defendant Qualcomm is uncertain what relief PlaintiffCourtney Etnyre requests in her
4 motion for an Evidence Code 402 hearing to determine the scope of Dr. Kalish's testimony
5 regarding the IME 0f Plaintiff Etnyre. Etnyre's motion should be denied forseveral reasons.
6 Most notably, the court cannot actually grant Etnyre's unconventional motion, as Etnyre fails to
7 move the court to take any speciic action. At most, Etnyre has only possibly requested the court
8 exclude an unspecified_portion of testimony for an unspecified purpose. Additionally, the motion
9 should be denied because: (1) Etnyre has failed to identify the fact which is to be "predetermined"
10 by the requested 402 hearing; (2) Etnyre has failed to provide any legal basis to exclude the IME
11 or any reason that it is improper; and (3) the IME is undisputedly relevant and admissible.
12 *I.
13 BACKGROUND AND ARGUMENT
14 Qualcomm first informed Etnyre that it would be designating Dr. Kalish on October 7,
15 2010. (Decl. Klick 112; Exh. A.) Because Etnyre refused to submit to an Independent Mental
16 Examination, after extensive meet and confer, Qualcomm was forced to bring a motion to compel,
17 which was originally filed on December 6, 2010. (Decl. Klick 11 2.) Unfortunately, the Court was
18 not able to hear that,motion until April 1, 2011. At that time, the motion was granted and the
19 IME went forward on April 20, 2011. (Decl. Klick 11 2; Exh. B.) Etnyre did not contact
20 Qualcomm to try to coordinate Dr. Kalish's deposition. (Decl. Klick 11 3.) Instead, Etnyre simply
21 noticed Dr. Kalish's deposition on top of the earlier noticed deposition of Johanna Hunsaker,
22 Ph.d. (Decl. Klick 113; Exh. C.)1' From that time forward, Qualcomm has offered Dr. Kalishon
23
24
' Notably, Dr. Hunsaker did not appear either and Etnyre chose to depose William Sailer for a second date
25
on that date instead. Qualcomm was Willing to reschedule Dr. Kalish at that time, and did provide various
alternative dates within and outside the discovery period. (Decl. Klick 11 3; Exh. D.) Etnyre made no such
26
similar attempts as to Dr. Hunsaker. Therefore, Qualcomm has moved to exclude Dr. Hunsaker's
unknown opinions.
27
28
PAUL, PILEVIN, 1
SULLIVAN & Qualcomm's Opposition to Evidence Code § 402
CONNAUGHTON LLP Motion re Mark Kalish, M.D,
.
1 several dates and Etnyre has either ignored the dates or cancelled. (Decl. Klick 11 3; Exh. D.)2
2 A. Etnyre's Motion is Not Sufficiently Specific.
3 Etnyre fails to move the court to take any specific action. Etnyre instead "moves the Court
4 to determine the scope oftrial testimony of dbfendant's expert as to the scope of testimony he
5 may offer at trial relative to statements made by plaintiff Etnyre, to him during a purported
6 defensemental examination." (Moving papers, p. 1.) The Court is not required to entertain an
7 open ended hearing to determine the scope of a witness' possible testimony, Where Entyre has not
8 deposed thewitness in question,:and has made no specific or legal objection to the witness'
9 testimony.
10 Evidence Code section 402 provides for the "procedure for determining foundation and
11 other preliminary facts." (Evid. Code 11 402.) Subsequently, Evidence Code sections 403,404,
12 and 405 provide the specific procedures to determine such preliminary facts. Section 403 deals
13 with "determinations of foundational or other preliminary facts where relevancy, personal
14 knowledge, or authenticity is disputed." Section 404 deals with "whether proffered evidence is
15 incriminatory." Finally, Section 405 deals with"determination of foundation and other
1,6 preliminary facts in other cases."
17 Here, it is unclear which section Etnyre is attempting to apply. Qualcomm is aware of no
18 ,question of the authenticity of Dr. Kalish's examination, and is unaware of Etnyre taking the
19 position that anything she said during the examination was potentially incriminating. Section 405
20 also seems inapplicable because the question presented by Etnyre is purely legal and does not
21 seem to seek the determination of any fact. (An example of a proper question of preliminary fact
22 would be whether one offered as an expert is qualified to speak as such. Fairbank v. Hughson
23 (1881) 58 Cal. 314.) 'Since it is unclear here what finding of fact the judge would berequired to
24 make, an Evidence Code section 402 hearingis inappropriate.
25
26
12 At present, Dr. Kalish's deposition is not scheduled and Etnyre has provided no requested or proposed
times for the same. (Decl. Klick 11 3.)
27
28
PAUL, PLEVIN,
SULLIVAN &
Qualcomm's Opposition to Evidence Code § 402 2
CONNAUGHTON'LLP Motion re.Mark Kalish: M.D.
. .
1 B. Etnyre Has Provided No Basis if a Fact Was Determined How that Would Impact
2 Trial.
3 The request for a "Evidence Code 402 hearing" appears to instead be an unconventional
4 motion in limine to exclude reference to the IME of Ms. Etnyre. However, Etnyre fails to provide
5 any legal basis to do so. The only Evidence Code sections cited by Etnyre are Section 402 and
6 Section 1220 - which actually provides for the admissibility of statements by a party-declarant.
7 She simply provides no legal basis to exclude Dr. Kalish's examination.
8 C. Etnyre's IME is Admissible.
9 Etnyre's motion fails, even ifthe motion were to be viewed as an unconventional motion
10 in limine, to exclude Entyre's IME. Etnyre, admits statements in her IME would be admissible as
11 admissions of a party opponent pursuant to Evidence Code Section 1,220. Etnyre does not dispute
12 that the statements in her IME would be relevant and probative to this case. In fact, Etnyre
13 provides no legal grounds under which her IME statements would be inadmissible. Etnyre refers
14 vaguely to CACI 218 in her moving papers, however the directions for use make clear that CACI
15 218 is not applicable to admissions of a party opponent, the admissibilityof which are controlled
16 by Evidence Code Section 1220.
17 Entyre's complaints with the IME are not that it is inadmissible, but that it was somehow
18 unfair. Essentially, Etnyre seems to be re-arguing that the exam should not have been allowed.
19 Entyre is attempting to limit the scope of the IME, without legal justification to do so, because
20 Etnyre fears the IME is not favorable to her.
21 Etnyre wants to handcuff, limit, and exclude Qualcomm's expert when Etnyre has five of
22 her own treating experts available to testify at trial. Etnyre is going to place her treaters on the
23 stand to discuss her emotional state who have admitted that they are not 0bjective and are ·
24 advocates for their client. (See, e.g., Exh. E i[Wong 59:17-60:1, 109:19-2511.) Etnyre chose not to
25 designate an independent psychiatric expert. However, that should not prevent Qualcomm from
26 not only designating such an expert, but utilizing their examination and opinions at trial - just as
27 Etnyre will! with her various providers. Moreover, the fact that her treaters were given
28 inconsistent stories, did not ask detailed questions, and did not know pertinent facts goes to the
PAUL, PLEVIN,
SULLIVAN & Qualcomm's Opposition to Evidence Code § 402 3
CONNAUGHTON LLP , Motion re Mark Kalish, M.D.
1 ; weight of their testimony - and does not detract from the admissibility of Dr. Kalish's testimony.
2 The detailed questioning by Dr./Kalish is not only proper for a forensic examination, but
3 had Dr. Kalish failed to obtain such a detailed familial, personal, and event-specific history, Dr.
4 Kalish would have failed to do his job. Etnyre's treating doctoiis also state that in first meeting
5 with Etnyre or other new patients that they are thoreugh in getting a full detailed history, (Exh. F,
6 23:9-24:1,31:12-3217; Exh.,6,18:9-119), Etnyre's providers also stated that it is important to
7 lascertain inconsistencies in a patient's story. (Exh. E, 20:9-25, 21:17-20; Exh. F, 24:12- 25:1,
8 67:10-23; 109:8-20). For Dr. Kalish's opinion to be relevant andl admissible it must be "based on
9 matter... that is of a type that reasonably may be relied upon by an expert in forming an opinion
10 upon the subject to which his testimony relates." (Evidence Code § 81.0). Dr. Kalish's opinions
11 derived from the IME are only reliable if Dr. Kalish was thorough in conducting the IME. Dr.
12 Kalish was allowedbut a few hours in which to examine Etnyre, where as Entyre's mental health
13 providers have spent countless hours over several years with Entyre. Etnyre's suggestion that the
14 IME was too grueling or over-inclusive is specious.
15 HL
16 CONCLUSION
17 Accordingly, Etnyre's motion for an Evidence Code section 402 hearing on Dr. Kalish's
18 examination should be denied.
19
Dated: June 30, 2011 PAUL, PLEVIN, SULLIVAN &

20 CONN HTON LLP
21
22
By
23 I H.EL .SULLIVAN
M I LISTUG KLICK
24 LY J. FOX

25. Qualcomm Incorporated
26
27
28
PAUL, PLEVIN, 4
SULLIVAN.& Qualcomm's,Opposition to Evidence Code § 402
CONNAUGHTON LLP ' Motion,re Mark Kalish, M.D.
1

, 2 EMILY J. FOX (SBN 2621'06)
PAUL, PLEVIN, SULLIVAN & CONNAUGHTON LLP FILED
3 '401 B Street, Tenth Floor Clerk of the Superior Court
San Diego, California 92101-4232
4 Telephpne: 619-237-5200
.j:lIN.30-20-11=E
Facsimile: 619-615-0700
By: Anthony Shirley, Depulv
5
8
9
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO,
10
COURTNEY S. ETNYRE, ' CASE NO. 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL
11
Plaintiff, DECLARATION OF MELISSA LISTUG
12 KLICK IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT
V. QUALCOMM INCORPORATED'S
13 OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION
SANDIP ("MICKEY") MINIIAS, PURSUANT TO EVIDENCE CODE §402,
14 individually, QUALCOMM Incorporated, a HEARING RELATIVE TO THE SCOPE OF
Delaware corporation and DOES 1 through TESTIMONY BY DEFENDANTS' EXPERT,

15 40, inclusive, MARK KALISH, M.D.
16 Defendants.
Date: July 1, 2011
Time: 8:45 a.m.
17
Dept: 70

19 Trial Date: July 1, 2011 11
20
21 I, Melissa J. Listug Klick, declare:
22 1. I am an associate inthe law firni ofPaul, Plevin, Sullivan & Connaughton LLP,
23 attorneys of record for Defendant Qualcomm Incorporated in the above-entitled matter, and am
24 licensed to practice before this Court. I have personal knowledge of the following facts and, if
25 called as a witness, could and would testify competently thereto.
26 2. I first informed Ms. Etnyre's attorney, Paul Kondrick, that Qualcomm would be
27 designating Dr. Kalish on October 7,2010. Attached as Exhibit A hereto is a true and correct
28 copy of my October 7, 2010 letter to Mr. Kondrick regarding the same. Because Ms. Etnyre
PAUL, PLEVIN, 1
SULLIVAN & Decl. ofMelissa Listug Klick ISO of Oppo to
CONNAUGHTON LLP Evidence Code § 402 Motion re Kalish
,
.
1 refused to submit to an Independent Mental Examination ("IME"), after extensive meet and
2 confer, Qualcomm was forced to bring a motion to compel, which was originally filed via ex parte
3 on December 6, 2010. Unfortunately, the Court was not able to hear that motion until April 1,
4 2011. At that time, the motion was granted and the iME went forward on April 20,2011:.
5 Attached as Exhibit B hereto is a true and correct copy of the Court's April 1, 2011 Order
6 compelling the IME.
7 3. Mr. Kondrick did not contact my office to try to coordinate Dr. Kalish's
8 deposition. Instead, Mr. Kondrick noticed Dr. Kalish's deposition on top of the earlier noticed
9 deposition of:Johanna.Hunsaker, Ph.D. Attached as Exhibit C hereto is a true and correct copy of
10 Qualcomm's deposition notice for Johanna Hunsaker and Ms. Etnyre's deposition notice for Dr.
11 Kalish. From that time forward, my office has offered Dr. Kalish on several dates and Ms.
12 Etnyre's counsel has either ignored the dates or cancelled last-minute. Attached hereto as Exhibit
13 D is correspondence regarding scheduling Dr. Kalish' s deposition. At present, Dr. Kalish's
14 deposition is not scheduled and Mr. Kondrick has provided no requested or proposed times.
15 4. Attached hereto as Exhibit E are true and correct copies of relevant portions of
16 the deposition testimony of Dr. DeeAnn Wong taken on May 4, 2011 by my office.
17 5. Attached hereto as Exhibit F are true and correct copies of relevant portions of
18 the deposition testimony ofArlene E. Pollard, LCSW taken on May 6, 2011 by my office.
19 6. Attached hereto as Exhibit G are true and correct copies of relevant portions of P
20 ' the deposition testimony of Raymond A. Fidaleo taken on May 24,2011 by my office.
21 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws ofthe State of California thatthe
22 foregoing is true and correct.
Executed on June 30,2011, at San Diego, Ceaiiumier\ /

23
\Xii/
3 N\// -<
25 .,Mlissa*SSig Klick
26
27
28
PAUL, PLEVIN, 2
SULLIVAN & Decl. of MelissaListug Klick ISO of Oppo to
CONNAUGHTON LLP Evidence Code § 402 Motion re Kalish
EXHIBIT A
PP
401 B STREET. 7'ENTH R.CK)R. SAN DIEGO, CA 93 101
PAUL, PLEVTN, PHONE 619-237·5200 | FAX 619·615·0700 | WWWPAULPLEVIN.COM
St
SULLIVAN &
MELISSA UBTUG'KLICK
(619) 2434561 mklick®paulrlevin.com
CONNAUGHTON up
October 7,2010
Paul Kondrick
3130 Fourth Avenue
San Di6go, California 92103
Re". Etnyre v. Qualcomm Incorporated
Dear Mr. Kondrick:
Defendants will designate Dr. Mark Kalish, a licensed psychiatrist, in this matter to
testify regarding plaintiff Courtney'Etnyre's alleged emotional distress damages.
Pursuamt to Code of Civil' Procedure section 2032.020(c) and 2016.040, Defendants
request that Ms. Etnyre submit to an Independent Mental Examination by Dr. Kalish on
November 9, 10, 11, 15, 16, 17, or 18, 2010 at 9:00 a.m.
Please confirm, in writing, by October 22, 2010, whether you will produce Ms. Etnyre
for an examination or if Defendants will be forced to file a motion to compel the
examination. As previewed at the case management conference, because Ms. Etnyre
has placed her emotional state at issue in this case, we hope that we are able to
stipulate to the examination without court intervention.
Please contact me if you have any questions. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Paul, Plevin, Sullivan

& Connaughton up
BY:
Me - -istug Klick
EXHIBIT B
.
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA,

COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
CENTRAL
MINUTE ORDER
DATE: 04/01/2011 TIME: 11:00:00 AM DEPT: C-70

JUDICIAL OFFICER PRESIDING: Randa Trapp
CLERK: Anthony Shirley, Tina Curry
REPORTER/ERM: Norma Jean Flores CSR# 7413
BAILIFF/COURT ATTENDANT: S. Parriott

CASE CATEGORY: Civil - Unlimited CASE TYPE: Other employment
EVENT TYPE: Discovery Hearing

MOVING PARTY: Qualcomm Incorporated
CAUSAL DOCUMENT/DATE FILED: Motion to Compel Discovery to Compel Independent Mental
Examination and for Sanctions, 03/07/2011
APPEARANCES
H Kondrick, counsel present for Plaintiff(s).
Melissa Klick, counsel, present for Defendant(s).
Mike Sullivan, counsel, present for defendant(s)
The Court hears oral argument and MODIFIES AND CONFIRMS the tentative ruling as follows·
The motion of Defendant Qualcomm Incorporated to compel independent mental examination ("IMF) of
Plaintiff Courtney Etnyre is GRANTED.
Code of Civil Procedure section 2032.020(a) provides that "[alny party may obtain discovery ... by
means of a physical or mental examination of (1) a party to the action ... in any action in which the
mental or physical condition ...of that party ... is in controversy in the action." A court may order an IME
upon a showing of good cause. (CCP § 202.320(a).) "Good cause" is shown when the moving party
produces specific facts justifying discovery and the inquiry is relevant to the subject matter of the action
or reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. (Vinson v. Superior Court
(1987) 43 Cal.3d 833, ;840.)
In this action, Plaintiff clairns she has been severely and permanent/y emotionally damaged by
Qualcomm and the Incidents giving rise to this action caused mental disability. (See Listug Klick Decl.,
1[112-4.).She daims a'/plethora of issues stemming from' the incident and her employment. for example,
she claims Defendants' Conduct caused her to suffer anxiety, short term memory loss, major depression
and posttraumatic stress disorder, as well as physical injury such as musde tension, pounding heart
palpitations, chest discomfort, and stomach problems. Based on Plaintiffs allegations as well as her
responses to discovery and deposition testimony, it Is clear that Plaintiffs mental and emotional
condition are directly at issue in this action. Accordingly, the Court orders an IME.
DATE: 04/01/2011
MINUTE ORDER Page 1
DEPT: C-70
Calendar No. 49
EXHIBIT C
. .
,

2 EMILY J. FOX (SBN 262106)
PAUL, PLEVIN, SULLIVAN & CONNAUGHTON up
3 401 B Street, Tenth Floor
San Diego, Califoinia 92101-4232
Telephone: 619-237-5200
Facs,mile: 619-615-0700
5
6 Qualcomm Incolporated
1 7
8
9
!I
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
1COURTNEY S. ElINYRE, CASE NO. 37-2009-001:01537-CU-OE-CTL

11
Plaintiff,
AMENDED NOTICE OF TAKING
V.
VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF JOHANNA
HUNSAKERPH.D. AND REQUEST FOR
S ANDIP
PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS (VfA
("MICKEY") MiNHAS, SUBPOENA)
14 I in dividually,
QUALCOMM Incorporated, a
'Delaware corporation and DOES 1 through
15 4 0, inclusive Complaint Filed: November 2,2009
Trial Date: None Set
16 Defendants.
17
18
i9 TO COURTNEY EINYRE AND HER ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:

20
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that, pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section
21 2025.010 et seq., defendant Qualcomm Incorporated will take the deposition ofplaintiffs expert
22 Johanna Hunsaker Ph.D. on May 25, 2011 at 9:00 a.m. atthe law offices of Paul, Plevin, It
23 Sullivan & Connaughton LLP, 401 B Street. Tenth Floor, San Diego, California.
24
The deposition will be taken before a certified shorthand reporter who is authorized to
25 administer an oath AND WILL BE VIDEOTAPED. If, for some reason, the deposition is not
26
completed on the above dates, it will be continued on mutually agreeable dates, excluding
27 Sundays and holidays, until completed.
28 Notice is further given that this office has requested a realtime-ready court reporter. If any
PAUL PLEVIN
SULLIVAN & NOTICE OF TAKING VIDEOTAPED 1
CONNAUGHTON UP DEPOSITION OF GENE R. KONRAD
1 - attorney who is present wishes to be connected to the court reporter's system, it is your obligation
2 to contact Hutchings Court Reporters, LLC at 800-697-3210 to make arrangements fortheir
3 technical support personnel to contact you regarding your software needs and to ensure that the
4 1 court reporter brings adequate cabling and supplies.
5 Dr. Hunsaker is requested to produce the following original documents at his deposition:
1. All documents sent by plaintiff or her attorneys to Dr. Hunsaker in connection with
-0 7 his retention in this matter.
2. All documents reviewed by Dr. Hunsaker in connection with her retention in this
9 1 matter.
10 3. All documents created by Dr. Hunsaker in connection with.her retention in this

11 matter.
12
4, All documents relied upon by Dr. Hunsaker to formulate the opinions sheihtends
13 ' to offer in this matter.
14 5. All documents evidencing payments plaintiff or her attorneys made to Dr.

15 Hunsaker for her services in this matter.
16
6. All documents evidencing communications between Dr. Hunsaker and plaintiff.
17
7. All documents evidencing communications between Dr. Hunsaker and any
18 member of H. Paul Kendrick, A Professional Corporation.
19 8. An updated copy of Dr. Hunsaker's curriculum vitae.
20 9. All documents evidencing Dr. Hunqaker's qimlifications to serve in an expert
21 capacity in this matter.
22 10. All documents listing the matters in which Dr. Hunsaker has testified as an expert
23 I at trial or by deposition within the preceding four years.
24 11. All documents reflecting any expert testimony, either at deposition or trial. which
25 5 Dr. Hunsaker has offered in other matters.
26
12. All documents listing al! publications authored by Dr. Hunsaker within the last ten
27 years.
2%f W
PAUL PLEVIN
CONNAUGHTON up DEPOSrnON OF GENE R. KONRAD
.
1
13. A copy of all publications authored by Dr. Hunsaker that relate to the opinions she
2 intends to offer in this matter.
3 Dated: April 28, 2011

PAUL, PLEVIN, SULLIVAN &
4 C9NNAUGHTON UP
5
6 VCRAEL C. SULLIN AN
MITLISSA LISTUG KUCK
EMrY J. FOX
7
8
Qualcomm Incorporated
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
2l
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PAUL PLEVIN
SULLIVAN & | NOTICE OF TAKING VIDEOTAPED 3

DEPOSITION OF GENE R KONRAD
CONNAUGHTON LLP 1
SUBP-020
-
ATTORNEYC.
_Michael ORSullivan
PARTY WITHOUTATTORNEY
(SBN 131817) (A=e, Sta#0 Baroumber. endaMBM FORCOURTUSEONLY
Melissa Listug nick (SEN 228470)
paul, Plevin, Sullivan & Connaughton LLP
401 B Street, loth Floor
San Diego, CA 92101
TELEPHONE NO.: 619-237-5200
FAX NO. A#0,4. 619-615-0700
E-MfIL ADDRESS (40*4
ATTORNEY FOR #Ven,4. Defendant Qualcomm Incorporated

SUPERIOR CdiURTOF CAUFORNIA, COUNTY OF San Diego
STREETADDRESS. 330 West Broadway
MAUNBADDRESS:
CrrrANDZ,PCODE: Sail Diego, CA 92101

BRN,cH,aME: Central
PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER:Courtney Etnyre
DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT:Sandip C "Mickey") Minham

DEPOSITION SUBPOENA CASE NUMBER:
FORPERSONALAPPEARANCEANDPRODUCTIONOFDOCUMENTSANDTHINGS 37-2009-00101537
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CAUFORNIA, TO (name. adchss. and telephone number of deponent , knom*
Johanna Hunsaker; University of San
Hall, 313; San Diego, CA; Phone:
Diego-- School of Business Administration; olin
(619) 260-4858
1. YOU ARE ORDERED TO APPEAR IN PERSON TO TESTIFY AS A WITNESS in this action al the following date, time, and place:
-
Date: May 25, 2011 Time:9:00 a. m. Address: Paul, Plevin, Sullivan & ConnAughton, LLP
_421-L_LS*reet #1000. San Die-0 CA 92101
. F7 As a todeponent who is not a natural,person. you are ordered to designate one or more persons to testify on your behalf as
the matters described in Item 4. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2025.230.)
b, E-1 You are ordered to produce the documents and things describedlin item 3.
c, 171 This deposmon will be recorded stenographically fTI through the instant visual display of testimony
and by EI] audiotape videotape,
d, F-7 This videotape deposition is intended for possible use at trial under Code of Civil Procedure section 2025.620(d),
2, The personal attendance of the custodian or other qualified witness and the production of the original records are required bythls
subpoena. The procedure authorized by Evidence Code sections 1560(b). 1561, and 1562 will not be deemed sumdent compliance
with this subpoena.
3. The documents and things to be Produced andfany testing or sampling being sought'are described as follows:
1-71 Continued on Attachment 3.
4. If the witness is a representative of a business orotherentity, the mattersupon which the witness isto be examined are described
as follows:
Continued on Attachment 4.
5. IF yOU HAVE BEEN SERVED WITH THIS SUBPOENA AS A CUSTODIAN OP CONSUMER OR EMPLOYEE RECORDS UNDER
CODE OF CML PROCEDURE SECTION 1985.3 OR 1986.6 AND A MOTION TO QUASH OR AN OBJECNON HAS BEEN
SERVED ON YOU, A COURT ORDER OR AGREEMENT OF THE PARTIES, WITNESSES. AND CONSUMER OR EMPLOYEE
AFFECTED MUST BE OBTAINED BEFORE YOU ARE REQUIRED TO PRODUCE CONSUMER OR EMPLOYEE RECORDS,
6, Atthedeposition. you wilibeaskedquestions underoath. Questions and'ensweraarerecorded stenographisally althe deposRIon; leterthey are
uansonbed forpossible use attliaL You may read the wimen record and change any inoorrect enswers before you aign the deposition. You am entitled
torecelve witness fees andmileageactually traveled.both ways. Themoney must bepaid, attheoption of the partygiving notice ofthe deposition,
either w}th se,vice of thissubpoenaoratthetimeof the deposition. Unless the courtorderaoryou agreeothemise, ilyouare being deposed asen
individual, thedeposition must take plaoe within 75 miles pf yourmaidence or within 150 miles of,ourresklence lithe deposition will be takenwithln the
county of the coun where the ection is pending. The location of the deposmon for all deponents Is governed by Code of CM Procedure section
2025.250.
-6iSOBEDIENCE OFFORTHITHE
S SUBPOENA MAYAND
SUM OF $500 BE PUNI
ALLSDAMAGES
HED AS CONTEMPT BY THIYOURAILJNE
RESULNAOM S COURT. YOUTOWIOBEY.
LL ALSO BE UABLE
Dateissued:April 28, 2011 , T><1 # 9'z/
MUR*Ate¥ PEBSOMatuanWaposwN
MAliRna Liatua Klick (SBN 228470)
frYPE OR PRINT NAME,
Anoev.*fualcomm. Intoroorated
Fmn Adopted for Mandatofy Use
(P,Dolof service on,ovemel irmt Page 1 of 2
Ju*lai Council of CaNiomia DEPOS,TION SUBPOENA FORPERSONAL APPEARANCE. . Code of Cl¥ 11 Procedure §§ 2020.510,
alap·020 IRev. January 1. 20091 AND PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS AND THINGS <. ABI 2026.220,2025.230.2006 250,20265204
2>Cmlorns Govemm,Mt(od.§08097.1
.
PErmONER/PLAINTIFF: Courtney Etnyre CASE NUMBER
RESPONDENFPEFENDANT: Sandip ("Mickey") Minhas 37-2009-00101537
Attachment 3
1. All documents sent by plaintiff or her attorneys to Dr. Hunsaker in connection

with his retention in this matter.
2. 711 documents reviewed by Dr. Hunsaker in connection with her retention in this
matter.
3. All documents created by Dr. Hunsaker in connection with her retention in this
matter.
4. All documents relied upon by Dr. Hunsaker to formulate the opinions she intends to
offer in this matter.
5. All documents evidencing payments plaintiff or her attorneys made to Dr. Hunsaker
for her services in this matter.
6. All documents evidencing communications between Dr. Huneaker and plaintiff .

7. All documents evidencing communications between Dr. Hunsaker and any member of H.
paul Kondrick, A Professional Corporation-
e. An updated copy of Dr. Hunsaker' s curriculum vitae.
9. All documents evidencing Dr. Hunsaker"s qualifications to serve in an expert
capacity in this matter.
10. All documents listing the matters in which Dri Hunsaker has testified as an expert
at trial or by deposition within the preceding four years.
11. All documents reflectihg any expert testimony. either at deposition or trial,
which Dr. Hunsaker has offered in other matters.
12. All documents listing all publications authored by Dr. Hunsaker within the last
ten years.
13. A copy of all publications authored by Dr. Hunsaker that relate to the opinions
she intends to offer in this matter.
So*
.
1 , Eogre v. Minhas et at.

San Diego Superior Court ,Case No. 37-2009-00101537
2
PROOF OF SERVICE
3I
I, the undersigned, hereby declare that 1 am over the age of eighteen years and; not'a party
4 to this action. I am employed, or am a resident of, the County of San Diego, California, and my
[ business address is: Paul, Plevin, Sullivan & Connaughton LLP, 401 8 Street Tenth Floor, San
5 Diego, California 92101.
6 On April 28,2011, I caused to be served the following document(s):

• AMENDED NOTICE OF TAKING VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF JOHANNA
HUNSAKER PH.D. AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS (VIA
8 SUBPOENA)
·9 I on the interested party (ies) in this action by placing a true copy thereof and addressed as follows:
10 ' R Paul Kondrick Leonid M. Zilberman
H. Paul Kondrick, a Professional Corporatioh Wilson Turner Kos,no LLP
11 3130 Fourth Avenue 550 West C Street, Suite 1050
San Diego, CA 92103 San Diego, CA 92101-3532
12 Telephone: (619) 291-2400 Telephone: (619) 236-9600
Facsimile: (619) 291-7123 Facsimile: (619) 236-9669
13 : E-Mail: kendrick@msn.com E-Mail: izilbermanawnkt. com
Attorney for Plaintiff
Attorneys for Defendant Sandip Minhas
14
0 (By MAIL SERVICE) I then sealed each envelope and, with postage thereon fully
prepaid postage, I placed each for deposit with United States Postal Service, this same day,
at my business address shown above, following ordinary business practices.
16 0 (State)foregoing
I declareisunder penalty ofperjury underthe laws ofthc State of California thalthe
true and correct.
17
18 0 (Federal) I declare
whose thattheI service
direction am employed bythe office ofa member of the bar ofthis court at
was made.
19 Executed April 28, 2011, at San Diego, California.

20
21 - AV, .
I*J+V811wf bL 'fe•©€
Ueborah Blirandwski
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PAUL PLEVEN
SULLIVAN &
PROOF OF SERVICE 1
CONNAUGHTON'LD
1
H. Paul Kendrick, Esq., State Bar No. 88566
H. Paul Kondrick, A.P.C.
2
3130 Fourth Avenue
Telephone: (619) 291-2400
4
Facsimile: (619) 291-7123
5
6
8
9
FOR THE: COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

10
11 COURTNEY S. ETNYRE, individually, ) Case No. 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-OIL
12 Plaintiff ) PLAINTIFF, COURTNEY S.

13
) ETNYRE'S NOTICE OF TAKING
V. ) DEPOSITION OF DEFENDANT,
14 ) QUALCOMM INCORPORATED'S
SANDIP ("MICKEY") MINHAS, individually,) DESIGNATED EXPERT WITNESSES
15 QUALCOMM Incorporated, a Delaware ) PURSUANT TO SUBPOENA
16
17 Defendants. )
)
18
19
TO: All'Parties by and through their attorneys ofrecord:
20
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that plaintiff, COURTNEY S. ETNYRE ('TINYRE"), will

21
22 take the depositions of defendant QUALCOMM INCORPORATED's CQUALCOMM"),

23 designated expert witnesses, pursuant to subpoenas, attached hereto as Exhibits HA" and "B",
24
respectively, on the following dates and at the following approximate times:
25
Exhibit "A": Mark A. Kalish, M.D. on May 25,20111 at 9:00 a.m.; and
26
Exhibit '13": Laura Fuchn Dolan on May 26,2011 l at 9:00 a.m.

27
28 The depositions will be before a certified shorthand reporter at the law offices of
-1- Notice of Expert Witness Depositions

.
h
1 H, Paul Kondrick, A Professional Corporation, located at 31'30 Fourth Avenue, San Diego,
2 CA 92103. [(619) 291-2400]. The depositions will be continued from day-to·<lay, excluding
3
4
weekends and holidays, until completed. In the event that the depositions are not completed on
5 the aforementioned dates, the depositions will continue from day-to-day thereafter at the same
6 time and place, Sundays and holidays excepted until completed, and in the event of any
7 scheduling conflict of the witnesses, parties or counsel, thenat a mutually agreed upon date,
8 time and location.
9
10
PLRASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE that applicant intends, and reserves the right, to
11 record the above-referenced deposition bymeans of videotape in addition to stenographic
12
means, and that she reserves the right to use said videotaped depositions at trial in this matter.
13
H. Paul Kondrick,
14 A Professional Corporation:
71 >1 JL
15
Dated: May 3,2011 8

126
H. Paul Kendrick, Esq
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2.
Notice of Taldng Depositions
EXHIBIT A -719
.
!
SUBP-016
ATTONINEY OR PAR,YNTHOUTATTORNEY /M,m SM,a.Barniambm, endedBast
-H.:Paul Kondrick, Esq. (State Bar # 88566) FORCOURYUSEONLY

3130 Fourth Avenue

TELEPHONE NO. (619) 291-2400 FAX NO.
*son* (619) 291-7123
E-MAU- ADDRESS (0*6011*
ATTORNS, FOR,Nom,J: Courtney S. Etnyre, Plaintiff

SUPERIOR COURT OF CAUFORNIA, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
STREErADDRESS: 330 West Broadway
MAILING ADDRESS:
CITYAND#PCODE: San Diego 92101

BRANCH N#NE. Central Di¥ision
PLAINTIFF/ PETTTIONER: Courtney S. Etrlyre
DEFENDANT/ RESPONDENT: Sandip eMickey") Minhas, et al
CASE NUMBER
DEPOSmON SUBPOENA
FOR PERSONAL APPEARANCE
37-2009-00101,537-CU-OE-CTL
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNK TO (name, address, and felephone number of deponent /f known)
Mark A. Kalish, MD. Telephone: (619) 282-7172
3131 Camino del Rio North, San Diego, California 92108
1. YOU ARE ORDERED TO APPEAR IN PERSON TO TESTIFYAS A WITNESS in this action atthe following date, time, and place:
Date: Time:
Address: Law Offices of H, Paul Kondrick, A.P.C.
May 25, 2011 9:00 a.m. 3130 Fourth Avenue
RAn nifyn, r.A (Dlfn
a. rn As a deponent who Is not ainatural person, you are orderedto designate one or more persons to testify on your behalfas
to the matters described in item 2. (Code Clv. Proc., § 2025.230.)
b.,fT| Thisand
deposition will be recorded stenographically [T through the instant visual display of testimony
by |1 audiotape [Tl videotape.
c. ITI Thls videotape del*sition is intended for possible use at trial under Code of Clvil Procedure sectjon 2025.620(d).
2. If the witness is a representative:of a business or other entity, the matters upon which the witness is to be examined are as
follows:
3. At the deposibn, you w/// be asked questions underoath. Questions andanswmnammided stenographical, atme deposmon;
later they am transcribed for possible use at trial. You may read the written record and change any incorrect answers before you
sign the deposmon. You am entitled to receive witness fees and mileage actually traveled both ways. The money must be paid, at
the opAon ofthe party giving notice ofthe deposmon, either with service of thls subpoena or at the time ofthe deposition, Unless the
couttorders oryou agree othelwlse, H you are being deposed as an Individual, the deposition must take place within 76 miles of your
residence or within 150 miles of your residence li the deposition will be taken within the county of the coutt where the action is
pending. The location of the deposition for all deponents 18 governed by Code of Civil Procedure section 2025,250.
DISOBEDIENCE OF THIS SUBPOENA MAY BE PUNISHED AS CONTEMPT BY THIS COURT. YOU WILL ALSO BE UABLE
FOR THE SUM OF $500 AND ALL DAMAGES RESULTING FROM YOUR FAILURE TO OBEY.
Date issued: May 3,2011 il
H. Paul Kondrick, Esq.

(TYPE OR PRINT NAME)
N 4 MUf
(BIGNATURE OF PERSON ISSUING SUBPOENA)
Attorney for Plaintiff, Courtney S. Etnyre
(Prootol *ankeon -Mae)
Penn Adopted for Mendtory Un Pagelof*
J;*50*at Cour)00 ofC,mornla DEPOSITION SUBPOENA Code of CM: Prooedn §§ 2020.314
SUBP«OiS[Rov. Jmwary 1.2009]
FOR PERSONAL APPEARANCE omms,4 Co, § 68097.1
2026.220,2025.230,202&250,205620
EXHIBIT A .i 8 Lazi,Nua® AMI„ated 00*,ija 3,#da/ Co-#Fmma

i j
SUBP-016
_ PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER: Courtney S, Etnyre ' CASE NUMBER
DEFENDANr/RESPONDENT: Sandfp ("Mickey") Minhas, et at. 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL
PROOF OF SERVICE OF DEPOSITION SUBPOENA FOR PERSONAL APPEARANCE

1. Iaserved thls Depos/#on Subpoena lar fmonal Appeamnoe by personally dellvering a copy to the person served as follows:
Person served (name):
b. Address where served: CA
c. Date of delivery.
d. Time of delivery:
e. Witness fees and mileage both ways (check one):

(1) CJ were paid. Amount: , .......... I.
(2) 0 were not paid.

(3) 0 were tendered to the witness's
public entity employer as
required by Government Code
section 680971 The amount
tendered was (spe*):........$
f. Fee for service:..
2. I received this subpoena for service on (date):
3. Person serving:
a. f-1 Nots registered California process server
b. Ca#fornla sheriff or marshal
c. F7 Registered California process server
d. [3 Employee or independent contractor of a registered California process server
e. E-3 Exempt from registration under Business and Professions Code section 22350(b)
f. £ Registered professional photocopier
g. Exempt from registration under Business and Professions Code section 22451
h. Name, address, telephone number, and, If applicable, county of registration and number:
CA
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of (For California sheriff or marshal use only)
California that the foregoing is trueand correct.
I certily that the foregoing is true and correct.
Date:
Date:
(SIGNATURE)
(SIGTURE)
SUBP·016[Rav. .Insmy 1,20091

PROOF OF SERVICE OF P.a• 2 Or 2
DEPOSITION SUBPOENA FOR PERSONAL APPEARANCE
Int,Ne*11% AdomatedColvornta Judictal Cornell Forms

t
EXHI BIT 8 9
SUBP-015
ATTORNEY OR PARTYNTHOUTATTORNEY 8*3118. **B,rnumbe4 andedchis)
-H. Paull Kondrick, Esq. (State Bar # 88566) FOR COURT USE ONLY

3130 Fourth Avenue

TELEPHONE NOL (619) 291-2400 FAXNO.0060"80' (619) 291-7123
E·MARL ADDRESS (Op#onao:
ATTORNEY FOR #fam*
Courtney S. Efilyre, Plaintiff
STREET ADDRESS: 330 West Broadway
MAILING ADDRESS
CITY AND ZP CODE San Diego 92101

BRANCH NAME Central Division
PLAINTIFF/ PETJTIONER; Courtney S. Elnym
DEFENDANT/ RESPONDENT:
San(lip C'Mickey") Minhas, et al.
DEPOSmON SUBPOENA CASE NUMBER
FOR PERSONAL APPEARANCE 37-2009-00101637-CU-OE-CTL
THE PEOPLE OFTHE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, TO (name, address, and telephone number of deponent N known):
Laura Fuchs Dolan
Telephone: (714) 662-0800
LECG, LLC, 600 Anton Boulevard, Suite 1350, Costa Mesa, California 92626
1, YOU ARE ORDERED TO APPEAR IN PERSON TO TESTIFY AS A WITNESS In this action atthe following date, time, and place:
Date: nme:
Address: Law Offices of H. Paul Kondrick, A P.C,
May 26,2011 9:00 a.m. 3130 Fourth Avenue
Rm, nipgr, rA 071 fl:t
a. Ir-1 Asa deponent who is not a natural person. you are ordered'to designate one or more persons to testify on your behalf as
to the matlers described In item 2. (Code Clv. Proc., § 2026.230.)
b. Fn Thisand
deposition will berecorded stenographically 00 through the instant visual}display of tedmony
by F7 audiotape EFI videotape.
c. rFI This videotape deposition Is Intended for possible use at trial under Code of Civil Procedure section 2025.620(d).
2- Fl Ifthe witness,is a representative efa busine*sor other entity, the matters upon which the witness Is to be examined are as
follows:
3. Atthe deposition, you willbe asked questions under oath. Questions and answers are recorded stenographlcally at the deposition:
laterthey are transcribed forpossible use st triaL You may read the wrmen record and change any incorrectanawers before you
sign the deposttion. Youere entjtled to receive witness fees and mileage actually traveled both'ways. The money must be paid, at
the option ofthe peltyglving notice of the deposmon, elther w#h servlce ofthis subpoena oratthe timeofthedeposltion, Unless the
court orders oryou agree otherwise, if you are being deposed as an individual, the deposition must take place within 75 miles of your
maidence orwithin 150 miles of yourresidence K the deposition win be taken within the counlyofthe court where the action is
pending. The location of the deposition for all deponents la governed by Code of Civil Procedure section 2025.260,
Date issued: May 3, 2011
H. Paul Kondrick, Esq.

(TYPEORPRINT NAME) (SIGNATURE OFPERS(IN
Attorney for Plaintiff. Courtney S. Etnyre
InTU#
(Pmofor seivke on mverie)
Form Adapted fv, Mandatoly Uce Page 1 02
Judicial Col11 of C1&,rda DEPOSITION SUBPOENA Codeolewerooe**8§2=a
SUBP415[Rev. Janualy 1,20091
FOR PERSONAL APPEARANCE Govefr¥nont Code, § 68097 1
2026224 2025.230,2025.250.2025820
EXill·BIT B . '2 Z1**® Aummo,Colio*diclot(01=#F_

SUBP-016
_ PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER: Courtney S. Etnyre CAGE NUMBER:
DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT: Sandip ("Mickey'D Minhas, et al: 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL
1. '1:served thfs Deposmon Subpoena for Pemona/Appeamnce by personally delivering acopy totheperson served as follows:
a. Person seived (name):
c. Date of delivery:
d. Time of delivepy:
e. Miness fees and mileagebothways (checkone):

(1) j: werepaki Amount: ........... $
(2) 0 were,not paid.
(3) 1 were tendered to the witness'e
section 68097.2. The amount
tendered was (Spech* ......,. $
f. Fee for service: $
2. Ireceived this subpoena for service on Mate):
3. Person serving:
a. r--1 Not a registered California process server

b. EZZ| California sheriff or marshal
c. 1-7 Registered California process server
d. £ Employee or Independent contractor of a registered California process server
e. EZZ| Exempt from registration under Business and Professions Code section 22350(b)
f. r-7 Registered professional photocopler
g. 0 Exempt from registration under Business and Professions Code section 22451
h. Name, address, telephone number, and, If applicable, county of registration and number
CA
l declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of

(For California sheriff or marshal use only)
California that the foregoing is true and correct.
..
I certify that the foregoing is true and correct.
Date: Date:
(SIGNATURE)
*GNATURE)
SUBP•016 [Rev. Januaryl, 20091

PROOF OF SERVICE OF P,O,2012
DEF'OSITION SUBPOENA,FOR PERSONAL APPEARANCE
1£391:Ne:** AMoineedCaltfornio JudicialCounctl,Forms

.
1 H. Paul Kondrick, Esq., State Bar No. 88566

2 H. Paul Kondrick, A.P,C.
3130 Fourth Avenue
Telephone: (619) 291-2400
4 Facaimile: (619) 291-7123
5 Attorney for Plaintiff COURTNEY S. ETNYRE

6
8
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CAT.TFORNIA
9

I0
11 COURTNEY S. EINYRE, individually, ) Case

)
No. 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL
13 v.
)
14 )
SANDF ("MICKEY") MINHAS, individually,)
16 )
17 Defendants. )
)
18

20
21
I Bin: and was at the times ofthe service herejnafter mentioned, over the age of 18 md
22 not a party to the within action; I am employed in the County of San Diego, California where
23 the service occurs; and my business address is 3130 Fourth Avenue, San Diego, California.
24 On May 3,2011, I served the foregoing document(s) described as:
25 1. PLAINTIFF, COURTNEY S. ETNYRE'S NOTICEOF TAKING
26 DEPOSmON OF DEFENDANT QUALCOMM INCORPORATED'S
DESIGNATED EXPERT WITNESSES PURSUANT TO SUBPOENA
27
'll
28
-1-
ProofofService
1 1 on all interested parties to this action by placing true copies thereof enclosed in sealed
2
3

4 Melissa L. Klick, Esq.
5 Paul, Plevin, Sullivan & Connaughton, LLP
401 "B" Street, Tenth Floor
Tel: 619-237-5200
7 Fax: 619-615-0700
8
Attorneys for Defendant, QUALCOMM Incorporated
9
I,eonid M. Zilberman, Esq.

10
Wilson Turner Kosmo LLP
11
550 West "C" Street Suite 1050
San Diego, CA 92101
12 Tel: 619-236-9600
Fax: 619-236-9669
13
14 Attorneys for Defendant, SANDIP ("MICKEY") MINI{[AS

15 X BY US. MAIL: Iplaced a true copy in a seatedenvelope addressed to the parties as
16 indicated above on May 3,2011. I am familiar with the firm's practice of collection and
17
18
processing correspondence for mailing. I personally deposited the claim in the United States
119 post office or in a mailbox, substation, mail chute, or other like facility regularly maintained
20 by the government ofthe United States, in a sealed envelope, properly addressed with postage
21 paid.
22 BY PERSONAL SERVICE: I personally gathered a true copy of the above

23
24
documents, and gave same to our messenger service for personal delivery/service before
25 5:00 p.m. on May 3, 2011 will file the original proof ofpersonal service withthe Court upon
26 request
27
BY FEDERAL EXPRESS/OVERNIGHT MAIL: I placed a true copy in a sealed
28 envelope addressed to the parties as indicated' above, on May 3,2011. I personally caused it
Proof of Service
1
to be deposited with Federal Express on the same day in the ordinary course of business for
2
delivery thenext business day.
3
4
BY FACSIMILE: Byuseof facsimile machine number, (619) 291-7123, I faxed atrue
5 copy(ies) ofthe document(s) listed above totheparties, onMay 3,2011, attheir fax numbers
6
listed above as indicated by their names. The document(s) were/was transmitted by facsimile
7
transmission and the transmission was reported as complete and without error. The
8
transmission report was properly issued by'the transmitting facsimile machine. A copy of the
9
10
transmission report will be attached to the proof of service indicating that the documents were
11 Ansmitted properly, as necessary, in the future.
12
I declare under penalty ofpedury under the laws of the State of California that the
13
foregoing istrue and correct, Executed this 3rd day ofMay, 2011.
14
15 Candice E. Caufield
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
26
27
28
-3-
Proof of Service
EXHIIBIT E
.
1 CERTIFIED COPY
2 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
3 IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
5 COURTNEY S. ETNYRE, individually. ) Case No.:
) 37-2009-0010153'7-
6 Plaintiff, ) CU-OE-CTL
)
7 VS. )
)
8 SANDIP ("MICKEY") MINHAS, )
individually, QUALCOMM )
9 INCORPORATED, a Delaware )
corporation. and DOES 1 through )
10 40, inclusive, )
)
11 Defendants. )
)
12
13
14 DEPOSITION OF DEEANN WONG, M.D.
15 VOLUME I, PAGES 1 THROUGH 74
16 San Diego. California
17 May 4, 2011
18
19
20
21 REPORTED BY HEIDI J. JOHNSON. RPR, CSR NO. 12525
22
23 Hutchings Number: 318125
24
25
HUTCHINGS
COURT REPORTERS
800-697-3210 www.hutchings.com
Forbestresults, we recommend Adobe AcrobatorAdobe Reader(free.at http://get.adobe.corn/reader/).
COURTNEY S. ETNYRE vs. SANDIP ("MICKEY") MINHAS
Wong, M.D., Deeann on 05/04/2011
1 Q Would you say that most of the time where you
2 have concluded that an individual was trying to lie or
3 malinger has been in a jail, a prison context?
4 A That's probably the highest rate of
5 malingering, particularly because of the type of
6 patient population that you work with. However, there
7 is malingering that happens outside the jail and prison
8 setting.
9 0 What are the specific facts that vou try to
10 consider and assess in determinina whether or not
11 somebody is lvina or malingering? What are the factors
12 you look for7
13 A The things that I look for is the words that
14 they use to describe their experience. Are they usinq
15 words and terminology and phrases that are consistent
16 with who thev are as a Derson. or are thev reportina
17 somethina out of the DSM-IV? Do they parrot back
18 questions -- I mean. Darrot back answers in a way that
19 it's clear that they have not experienced what I'm
20 asking them?
21 I also look for consistencv within the storv.
22 I also look for the nonverbal cues as they're telling
23 their storv. Are the nonverbal cues. facial
24 expressions. behaviors consistent with what thev're
25 reDortina?
Hutchings Court Reporters - Global Legal Services Page 20

800-697-3210
..
COURTNEY S.'ETN¥RE vs. SANDIP ("MICKEY") MINHAS

1 Q Anything else7
2 A As they're giving the story, are they
3 reporting in a way that is consistent with other
4 patients who have -- who are clearly not reporting what
5 they're reporting for secondary gain?
6 Q Anything else?
7 A How does the patient react when or if I do
8 not give them what they are expecting or wanting?
9 Q Anything else?
10 A Not that I can think of at this time.
11 Q Just to get clarification on a couple of
12 those issues, if somebody seems to be parroting back
13 your words when you are asking them questions, that
14 would be an indication to you that they -- a factor
15 that might indicate that they were not being truthful?
16 A Correct.
17 0 If an individual is being inconsistent in
18 what thev say. that would be a factor that would
19 indicate to vou that they might be untruthful?
20 A Possibly.
21 Q I assume that the nonverbal cues are sort of
22 a subj ective assessment that you' re doing as opposed to
23 looking for certain objective nonverbal cues; is that
24 right7
25 A I'm looking for objective nonverbal cues.

800-697-3210
0 0
1 STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
: S S.
2 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO )
*4}-
I, HEIDI J. JOHNSON, a Certified Shorthand Reporter
;
mr;
./
4
5 for the State of California, CSR No. 12525, Registered
t#.' . 6 Professional Reporter, do hereby certify: ,That the

7 witness in the, .foregoing dep:osition was first duly sworn
8 by me to testify to tell the truth, the whole truth, and
3%
9 nothing but the truth in the foregoing cause; that the
/k
i 10 . depositi.on was taken before me at the time and p'lace

.11 herein named; that the said deposition was reported by me
12 in shorthand and transcribed through computer-aided
13 transcription, under my direction; and that the foregoing
i.
f
14 is a true record of the testimony elicited at proceedings
.
15 had at said deposition.
16 I do further certify that I am a
17 disint.erested person and am in no way interested in the

18 outcome of this action or connected with or related to
19 any of the parties in this action or to their

2·0 respective counsel.
21 In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my

day of May , 2011 .
22 hand *AEW"re,t>A
/COWN'..541,
2,3 y* *"" "'.:4,<:: lA
3 5: 4-
O W-1 Vtc
24
E u: CERTIFICATION 1 E »tey'
= T : TRANSCRIPT : & E
·re
.r.-
25
3 + :.
I ./ .....
./ O S
0
HEIDI J. JOHNSON, RPR, CSR NO. 12525
,
I.../..
*O
7,4 SEAL 00 74
4,1,1,1 'i,1,%"
Exhilbit F
6
1 CERTIFIED COPY
3 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
5 COURTNEY S. ETNYRE, )
)
6 Plaintiff, )
)
7 VS. ) No. 37-2009-0010
) 1537-CU-OE-CTL

individually, QUALCOMM Incorporated.
9 a Delaware corporation and DOES )
1 through 40, inclusive, )
10 )
Defendants. )
11 )
12
13
14 DEPOSITION OF ARLENE E. POLLARD, LCSW, a witness
15 herein, noticed by Paul. Plevin. Sullivan &
16 Connaughton, LLP, at 401 B Street, Tenth Floor,
17 San Diego, California, at 10:06 a.m., on Friday,
18 May 6, 2011, before Jeannette M. Kinikin,
19 CSR 11272.
20
21 Hutchings Number 310934
22
23
24
25
HUTCHINGS
COURT'REPORTERS
Forbestresults, we recommend Adobe AcrobatorAdobe Reader(free at: http:#get.adobe.com/reader/).
. .
COURTNEY S. ETNYRE vs. SANDIP ("MICKEY') MINHAS

,Pollard, LCSW, Arlene on 05/06/2011
1 if there are any important things that are shifting or 10:30
2 changing that I think they need to be aware of to adjust
3 medication, I provide that information. And I very
4 routinely get calls back from the psychiatrists that I
5 work with letting me know if they've made any changes 10:30
6 and what that was reflective of.
7 Q. Okay.
8 A. So there's continuity of care.
9 0. Okay. And. Generally. what is the process you
10 ao through when vou have a patient comes in and they 10;30
11 have some Dsycholoaical issue that they're dealing with?
12 What's the process vou ao through7 Do you in terms
13 of talkina throuah the issues or. I mean. what's --
14 what's the system you use to try to address their
15 problems? 10:31
16 A. Do you mean in the initial consultation or
17 lonaer term?
18 0. Yes.
19 A. I try to define as clearly as I can what the
20, presentina problem is. what it is that's bringing them 10:31
21 in at that time if it's a time sensitive issue. history
22 of the presenting problem. any pertinent contributing
23 personal history that's significantlv related to that,
24 and what their current needs and expectations are to
25 determine if I'm the most aporopriate place for them to 10:31,
Hutchings Court Reporters - Global Legal, Services Page 23

800-697-3210
.

Pollard, LCSW, Arlene on 05/06/2011
1 be. or if a referral would be more aDDropriate. 10:31
2 Q. Okay. And then, from that point, once you
3 establish that sort of baseline of what the issues are,
4 what do you do -- what is your goal in terms of
5 addressing that? Are you trying to help them actually 10:31
resolve those issues in their life or are you trying to
help them resolve the emotional issues internally, learn
8 coping skills, that kind of thing7
9 A. Almost always the latter because I may not have
10 any influence or control or ability to change the 10:32
11 circumstantial parts of it.
12 0. Right. Right. Okav. And I'm assuming there's
13 not really a fact-finding component to your treatment7
14 I'll ask you that a better way.
15 If someone comes into your office and says, my 10:32
16 husband's abusive to me. you don't try to establish
17 whether the person coming in to you is telling you the
18 truth about that7
19 A. Correct.
20 0. You lust take that information at its face 10:32
21 value and try to help the person deal with it; is that
22 correct7
23 A. I do. But I am always mindful that what I am
24 hearing is that personls perspective. So I'm listening
25 also for inconsistencies that I wou1d want to be aware 1!0:33
HutchIngs Court Reporters - Global Legal Services Page 24

800-697-3210
.
COURTNEY S.,ETNYRE vs. SANDIP ("MICKEY") MINHAS

Pollard, ECSW, Arlene on 05/06/2011
1 -RL 10:33
2 Q. Okay. And if you found inconsistencies, and
3 we'll just take this example of the wife who comes in
4 and says my husband' s abusive, do you probe7 Do you try
5 to find out, well, are you participating in that, are 10:33
6 you -- are you abusive too, or do you just wait to see
7 if inconsistencies show up in the explanations that
8 shels giving you?
19 A. I Would question a client as part of, you know,
10 complete information gathering. I'll leave it there. 10:33
11 Q. If you determine that a client was
12 misrepresenting the facts of their circumstances, would
13 you confront them with that conclusion?
14 A. Yes. Yes, I would.
15 Q. Okay. Would you do any investigation to find 10:34
16 out if they were telling you the truth7
17 A. Not necessarily, no.
18 Q. Okay. When you say, "not necessarily," would
19 there be circumstances where you would -- for example,
20 you have someone who comes in and says, I was -- I was 10::34
21 attacked on the street and the person was arrested and
22 put in jail and, for various reasons, you don't believe
23 they' re telling the truth, would you ever go out and do
24 a fact finding to see if there was a criminal record or
25 anything like that? 110:34

800-697-3210
1 Q. Yes. 10:44
2 A. No, it's not.
3 Q. Okay. And where is that document?
4 A. I don't keep written documentation of that.
5 Q. Oh, you just have an oral conversation; you 10:44
6 keep no notes?
7 A. Correct.
8 Q. Okay. Okay. What do you remember, if
9 anything, of that screening telephone interview with
10 Ms. Etnyre? 10:44
11 A. I don't remember anything specific.
12 0. Okay. Okay. So with regard to vour first
13 meetina with Ms. Etnyre. iust without -- I mean. you can
14 refer to vour notes if vou'd like to, but I iust want to
15 get your overall understanding of what transpired at 10:44
16 that meeting. what she told vou about. what you
17 counseled her7
18 A. We reviewed what the presenting issues were.
19 which were predominantly significant degression and
20 anxiety related to her work situation. She shared 10:45
21 her -- the status of her work with Dr. Wong and what her
22 medication management was at that time. We explored
23 what her dissatisfaction with -- was with Judith Matson.
24 who is the psvchologist that she had seen briefly for
25 therapy, and what it was that she was looking for that 10 i45
Hutchings Court Reporters - Global Legal' Services Page 31

800-697-3210
Pollard, LCSW, Arlene on 05/06/201'1
1 would be different. We reviewed her experience of the 10:45
2 11 sessions she had with Charles Nelson. who was the
3 psvchologist Qualcomm referred her to. We did a review
4 of her aeneral life circumstances. her immediate family.
5 her housina situation. I particularly evaluated any 10:46
6 risk of suicidal ideation given her level of depression.
7 And. at her request. I referred her to a labor attorney.
8 Q. And who did you refer her to?
9 A. I believe it was Paula Rosenstein.
10 Q. Okay. Anything else from that first session7 10:47
11 A. Not that I recall.
12 Q. Okay. Let me go back with you over a couple of
13 things that you identified. Status of work issues that
14 she raised, do you have a recollection of specifically
15 what it was that she raised in connection with her 1*:47
16 status at work?
17 A. Yes. I'm trying to be clear about the dates
18 and the timelines because they're complex. She was
19 specifically concerned about being harassed by
20 Mr. Minhas, and had specific complaints about her 10:48
21 difficulties with him. She recalled that she reported
22 her concerns to the H.R. department and asked for
23 transfers but didn't get a response from anyone for an
24 extended period of time.
25 Q. Anything else? 10:49

800-697-3210
.

1 whether or not that is what's going on in terms of a 12:97
2 reinterpretation of the events if someone's story
3 changes constantly over exactly how those events
4 occurred?
5 A. Could you rephrase that7 1207
6 Q. Yeah. That wasn't a very good one either.
7 If in a circumstance where you have someone who --
8 and we'll just use the example of consensually had sex.
9 A. Yes.
10 0. And. after the fact. for whatever reasons, 12:08
11 really regrets the decision and starts rewriting history
12 in their own mind as to what happened. is it more likely
13 that they're rewritina history if thev're inconsistent
14 in how they describe those events over time. and the
15 events change over time? 12:08
16 A. I would think that would be likely.
17 0. That that would --
18 A. Yes.
19 0. -- indicate thev've rewritten the facts?
20 A. Possibly. 12:08
121 0. Okay.
22 A. I would have more concern about it if the facts
23 changed over time.
24 Q. Okay. And, again, just going back to generally
12:08
25 looking at your notes, here are the issues that I
Hutchings Court Reporters - Global Legal, Services Page 67

800-697-3210
COURTNEY S. EINYRE vs. SANDIP ("MICKEY") MINHAS
1 Q. Have you ever done forensic expert work7 14':27
2 A. No.
3 Q. Sorry. I just wanted to make sure there wasn't
4 going to be some sound that came out of that.
5 So, at this time, you have no expectation or 14:27
6 intention of testifying in this matter?
7 A. No.
8 0. Okay. When you see a patient. do you assess
9 their credibility or voracitv of what they're telling
10 vou to help with your treatment? 14:27
11 A. Yes. Althouah. sometimes that is subiective.
12 0. What are some of the thinas that you do. tools
13 that you use or look for in order to assess credibility
14 of a client7
15 A. Consistency of information. the inconsistency 14:28
16 of information. is the affect consistent with the Verbal
17 presentation or description. any outside information
18 that I may be getting. in this case. from Dr. Wona. from
19 Paul Kondrick that would be contradictory from what I'm
20 hearing from her. 14:28
21 0. And do you recall any instances where something
22 that Ms. Etnyre said or did was contradicted by a
23 discussion that you had with an outside person like
i 24 Dr. Wong or Mr. Kondrick?
25 A. No. 14:29

800-697-3210
1 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) as
3 I, Jeannette Kinikin, CSR 11272, do hereby declares
5 That, prior to being examined, the witness' named in
6 the foregoing deposition was by me duly sworn pursuant
7 to Section 2093(b) and 2094 of the Code of Civil
8 Procedure;
10 That said .deposition ·was taken down by me in
11 shorthand at the time and place therein named and
12 thereafter reduced to text under my direction.
13
14 I further declare that I have no interest in the
1;5 event of the action.
16
17 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws
18 of the State of California that the foregoing is true
19 and correct.
20
20th
WITNESS my hand this day of ...N.W.&,
4%' COURT * 44
21
May 2011
22
loh %
23 E u : TRANSCRIPT : Do :
Et \ CERTIFICATION f P' 5
:t. -'t- 0
24
-A :
Je *nette Kinikin, CSR 11272
2
SEAL 00
4'/'00,0,"§0*'
210
HUTCHINGS COURT REPORTERS, LLC - GLOBAL LEGAL SERVICES

800.697.3220
Exhiibit G
1 CERTIFIED COPY
3 FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
5 COURTNEY S. ETNYRE. )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
17 VS. ) Case No. 37-2009-00101537
) CU-OE-CTL
8 SANDIP ("MICKEY") MINHAS. )

individually. QUALCOMM )
9 Incorporated, a Delaware )
corporation and DOES 1 )

'10 through 40. inclusive, )
)
11 Defendants. )
)
12
13
14
15 DEPOSITION OF RAYMOND A. FIDALEO, M.D.,
16 a witness herein. noticed by Paul. Plevin.
17 Sullivan & Connaughton. LLP, at 401 B Street.
18 Tenth Floor, San Diego. California, at 9:45 a.m.,
19 Tuesday, May 24. 2011. before Marc Volz, CSR 2863.
20 RPR, CRR.
21
23
24
25
HUTCHINGS
COURT REPORTERS
Forbestresults, we recommend Adobe Acrobat orAdobe Reader(free at: http://get.adobe:com/reader/)

Fidaleo, Raymond on 05/24/2011
1 Q. You indicated that your expertise is in
2 cognitive therapy, psychotherapy. Did any of those
3 therapies -- did you use any of those therapies in
4 connection with Miss Etnyre?
5 A. Yes, I did.
6 Q. Both of them?
i 7 A. Both. And pharmacology too. She was treated
8 with medication as well.
9 0. Do you recall when vou first met Courtney
10 Etnyre?
11 A. Not directly. no.
12 0. Is there anything that would refresh your
13 recollection?
14 A. Yeah. I can tell you how I formulated the
15 case. you know? When vou first meet a person you go
16 through a history to understand what is happening with
17 them. vou know. what the problem is thev're presenting
18 with. So yeah. I did that fram my notes. so I can tell
19 you what I saw.
20 Q. Why don' t we stop for a moment from looking at
21 your notes and let me just talk to you and ask you from
22 your memory, and then we'll turn to the documents a
23 little bit later. Do you recall what her presenting
24 problem was?
25 A. Yes. Twofold. She had a maj or depression, she

800.697-3210
***
1

5 and correct.
8 Executed atbn-, V )'10 , California,
9 on RED 4 c l q 9-0 £ 1
10
11
RA)YMb , K. FIS EO, M.D.
12
I.
1 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ss
3 I, Marc Volz, CSR 28,63, do hereby declare:
5 That, prior to being examined, the witness named in
7 to Section 2093 (b) and 2094 of the Code of Civil
8 Procedure;
10 That said deposition was taken down by me in
13
1
1
MICHAEL C. SULLIVAN (SBN 131817)
2 MELISSA LISTUGKLICK (SBN 228470}
EMILY J. FOX (SBN 262106) F I Len
3 PAUL, PLEVIN, SULLIVAN & CONNAUGHTON LLP Clerk of Bhe Supellor COM =
401 B Street, Tenth Floor . 11
JEIN 30 201'1
Telephone: 619-237-5200 By: Anthony Shirley, Der*
5 Facsimile: 6119-615-0700
6 Attorneys for Defendant

JUN 38 rl .' I, 3:07
7
9 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALFORNIA
11 COURTNEY S. ETNYRE, individually, 1' CASE NO. 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL
12 Plaintiff, PROOF OF PERSONAL SERVICE
13 V.
Dept: 70
14 SANDIP ("MICKEY") Mit*IAS, Judget Honorable Randa Trapp
individually, QUALCOMM Incorporated, a Complaint Filed: November 2,2009
15 Delaware corporation and DOES 1 through Trial Date: July 1, 204 1
40, inclusive,
16
Defendants.,
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
26
27
28
PAUL, PLEVIN,
ProofofService
1
SULLIVAN &
)NNAUGHTON LLP
.
1
I, the undersigned, certify and declare that I am a citizen of the United States, over the age
2
of eighteen, employed in the'County of San Diego, State of California, and not a party to the
3
within-entitled action. My business address is P.O. Box 12037, San Diego, California, 92101.
4
On June 30,2011' I served a true copy of the within:
1j
5 .
DEFENDANT QUALCOMM INCORPORATED'S OPPOSITION TO
PLAINTIFF'S MOTION PURSUANT TO EVIDENCE CODE §402,
6
HEARING RELATIVE TO THE SCOPE OF TESTIMONY BY
DEFENDANTS' EXPERT, MARK KALISH, M.D.
7
. DECLARATION OF MELISSA LISTUG KLICK IN SUPPORT OF
8 DEFENDANT QUALCOMM INCORPORATED'S OPPOSITION TO
PLAINTIFF'S MOTION PURSUANT TO EVIDENCE CODE §402,
9 HEARING RELATIVE TO THE SCOPE OF TESTIMONY BY
DEFENDANTS' EXPERT, MARK KALISH, M.D.
10
by delivering for personal service to the following:

11
, H. Paul Kendrick Leonid M. Zilberman

12
H. Paul Kondrick, a Professional Corporation Wilson Turner Kosmo LLP
3130 Fourth Avenue
13
550 West C Street, Suite 1050
Telephone: (619) 291-2400 Telephone: (619) 236-9600
14
E-Mail: kondrick@msn.com E-Mail: 1zilberman@wpkt.com
15
Attorney for Plaintiff Attorneys for Defendant Sandip Minhas
16
Place of delivery is San Diego, California. Executed this 30th day of June 2011, at San
17 Diego, California.
18
I hereby certify that I am employed by Accutech Messenger Service, San Diego,
19
California, at whose direction the personal service was made.
20 ,
21
ACCUU MESS*LGER 0
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PAUL. PLEVIN,
Proof of Service 2
SULLIVAN: &
)NNAUGHION LLP
MELISSA LISTUG KLICK (SBN 228470) FILED
Cleric of She Supmtor Couit
PAUL, PLEVIN, SULLIVAN & CONNAUGHTON LLP
3 401 B Street Tenth Floor
JUN 29 2011 I
San Diego, California 92101-4232 By: Anmony Shirle1% OOPUV
4 Telephone: 629-237-5200
Facsimile: 649-615-0700
5 JUN 29 '11 PI' 334

8
SUPERIORCOURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
9
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
10
COURTNEY S. ETNYRE, individually, CASE NO. 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL
11
Plaintiff, DEFENDANT QUALCOMM
12 INCORPORATED'S OPPOSITION TO
v. PLAINTIFF'S MOTION IN LIMINE TO
13 PRECLUDE DEFENDANTS' EXPERT,
SANDIP ("MICKEY") MINHAS, MARK KALISH, M.D., FROM OPINING AS
14 individually, QUALCOMM Incorporated, a TO PLAINTIFF'S TRUTHFULNESS OR
Delaware corporation and DOES 1 through BELIEVABILITY
15 40, inclusive,
Il of 21
16 Defendants.
17
Date: July 1, 2011
18 Time: 8:45 a.m.
Dept: 70
20 Trial Date: July 1, 2011
21
22
23
24
25
26 i
27
28
PAUL, PLEVIN,
SULLIVAN & Oppo To MIL To Preclude Kalish From,Opining As
CONNAUGHTON up To Plaintiffs Truthfulness Or Believability ORIGINAL
..
1 1
2 INTRODUCTION
3 Plaintiff Courtney Etnyre has brought a motion in limine to exclude Dr. Kalish from
4 offering an opinion about the "truthfulness or believability" of plaintiff Courtney Etnyre. This
5 motion in limine should be denied for three distinct reasons:
6 (1) Etnyre has not deposed Dr. Kalish and so it is unclear exactly what opinion, and in
7 what context, she seeks to exclude evidence;
8 (2) It is inappropriate to prematurely handcuff Dr. Kalish from testifying when Etnyre's
9 treating physicians (who are also designated as experts) have already testified as to her veracity on
10 certain issues and are expected todo so at trial; and
1f (3) Dr. Kalish's opinions regarding Etnyre's perception and version of her story in this
12 case, and in particular, regarding emotional distress related to that story is an appropriate, and
13 important, subject matter for expert testimony. For example, one of the areas that Dr. Kalish
14 assessed was whether Etnyre's account of events is consistent with, or inconsistent with, the
15 documentation in order to evaluate whether her current symptoms are caused by the alleged event
16 or by some other mental machination.
17 Accordingly, Etnyre's motion in limine to exclude Dr. Kalish from opining as to the
18 believability or truthfulness of Etnyre in regard to her story as to the reason thatshe has been
19 caused emotional distress should be denied.
20 II.
21 BACKGROUND AND ARGUMENT
22 Qualcomm first informed Etnyre that it would be designating Dr. Kalish on October 7,
23 ' 2010. (Decl. Klick 112; Exh. A.) Because Etnyre refused to submit to an Independent Mental
24 t Examination ("IME"), after extensive meet and confer, Qualcomm was forced to bring a motion
25 Ito compel, which was originally filed via ex parte on December 6, 20.10. (Decl. Klick 11.2.)
26 Unfortunately, the COUK Was notable to hear that motion until April t, 2011. At thattime, the
27 motion was' granted and the IME went forward on April 20, 2011. (Decl. Klick 112; Exh. B.)
28 After the exam (and before), Etnyre did' not make any attempt to contact Qualcomm to try to
PAUL, PLEVIN,
SULLIVAN & Oppo To MIL To Preclude Kalish From Opining.As 1
CONNAUGHTON,LLP To Plaintiffs Truthfulness Or'Believability
/,
1 coordinate Dr. KalisWs deposition. (Decl. Klick 11 3.) Instead, Etnyre simply noticed Dr, Kalish's
2 deposition on top of the earlier noticed deposition of Johanna Hunsaker, Ph.D. (Decl. Klick 9 3;
3 Exh. C.)1 From that time forward, Qualcomm has offered Dr, Kalish on several dates and Etnyre
4 has either ignored the dates orcancelled last-minute. (Decl. Klick 19 3; Exh. D.)?
5 A. Etnyre's Motion is Not Sufficiently Specific.
6 Etnyre does not provide withspecificity, as required, the evidence (testimeny or exhibits)
7 that she seeks to exclude by way of this motion. (Boeken v. Philip Morris Inc. (2005) 127
8 Cal.App.4th 1640, 1675 ["A motion in limine to exclude evidence is not a sufficient objection
9 unless it was directed to aparticular, identifiabie body of evidence...'1.) Moreover, there is no
10 I suggestion that Dr. Kalish will seek to opine as to the general or non-specific "truthfulness" or
11 "believability" ofEtnyre - rather, it maybe part ofhis testimony regarding the facts of the case.
12 Because Etnyre has not identified the specific testimony she seeks to exclude, and has not
13 obtained this testimony, the motion should be denied.3
14 B. Etnyre's Providers Have Opined as to Her Believability.
15 Etnyre's treaters (two ofwhich are listed in Etnyre's expert designation) are expected to
16 testify as to whether they believed portions of Etnyre's story, found it credible, or found her
17 current symptoms to be caused by events that only she relayed to them. (Decl. Klick 11 5; Exhs. F,
18 G, H.) Dr. Kalish must be allowed to offer similar opinions based on his expertise and
19 examination of this case. (Kennemur v. State OfCalg (1982) 133 Cal.App.3d 907, 922-23 [An
20 expert witness may be impeached by calling an opposing expert to contradict the assumptions
21
22
i Notably, Dr. Hunsaker was not prepared on that date and Etnyre chose to·depose William Sailer for a
second session on that date instead. Qualcomm was willing to reschedule Dr. Kalish at that time, and did
provide various alternative dates within and outside the discovery period. (Decl. Klick 113; Exh. D.)
23
Etnyre made no such similar attempts as to,Dr. Hunsaker indicating rather her unavailability. Therefore,
Qualcomm has moved to exclude Dr. Hunsaker's unknown opinions.
24
2 At,present, Dr. Kalish's deposition is not scheduled and Etnyre has provided no requested or proposed
25
time for the same. (Decl. Klick 11 3.)
26
3 There is also no suggestion that this isthetype ofevidence or question that could' not be objected to at
the time oftrial.
27
28
PAUL, PLEVIN, 2
SULLIVAN & Oppo To MIL To Preclude Kalish From Opining As
CONNAWGHTON LLP To Plaintiffs Truthfulness Or Believability
1 upon which the expert based his or her opinion."]) Indeed, it is axiomatic that an expert witness
2 may be impeached by showing the falsity of any matter upon which the expert based his or her
3 opinion (i.e., foundational facts). Sometimes this isdone on cross-examination but, more
4 frequently, contradiction is shown by calling other expert witnesses to testify to the nonexistence
5 or error in the data upon which the expert relied. (12if.)
6 C. Testimony Related to Psychological Testing Results and the Examination Related to
7 the Current Case is Admissible.
8 Moreover, it is,appropriate for Dr. Kalish to opine regarding his findings that are particular
9 to the facts of this case. (Corn v. State Bar (1968) 68 Cal.2d 461, 466, [an expert opinion is not
10 inadmissible merely because it coincides with an ultimate issue of fact].) If Dr. Kalish opines as
11 to whether or not Etnyre suffers from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder ("PTSD"), he must be
12 allowed to testify as to reasons for his diagnosis. One of the key components, of PTSD, according
13 to the DSM-IV, is whether or not an individual actually suffered a traumatic event or whether
14 there are ether explanations for the current symptoms. (Exh. E.) Indeed, Dr. Kalish's evaluation
15 includes a determination of whether or not Etnyre is an accurate historian as to the alleged events
16 at issue.
17 Etnyre's providers, including Dr. Wong, Arlene Pollard, and Dr. Judith Matson have
18 testified that: (1) in treating a patient, the provider makes a determination of believability so as to
19 understand the sort of treatment that would be appropriate; and (2) that inconsistent versions of a
20 story is a key indicator of whether or not the symptoms were caused by the event described or
21 perhaps the result of another mental machination. (Decl. Klick '115; Exhs. F, G, H.) Therefore,
22 Qualcomm's expert must be allowed to testify as to the reasons and basis for the opinions that he
23 offers. To fail to do so, would mislead and confuse the jury into believing that Dr. Kalish's
24 analysis is. incomplete or flawed. The basis of Dr. Kalish's opinion is a necessary component of
25 his opinion. Indeed, his testimony could be excluded if Dr. Kalish could not explain his opinion.
26 (Evidence Code § 803).
27
28 Ill
PAUL, PLEVIN, 3
SULLIVAN & Oppo To MIL To Preclude Kalish From,Opining As
CONNAUGHTON p 1 To Plaintiffs Truthfulness Or Believability
.
.
1 III.
2 CONCLUSION
3 Accordingly, Etnyre's non-specific motion in limine to exclude reference by Dr. Kalish of
4 Etnyre's truthfulness or believability should be denied. Specifically, Dr. Kalish should not be
5 precluded from, 0pining on ariy topics mentioned or discussed in the treaters' testimony or that go
6 to the opinions that he has formed relative to this case.
7
Dated: June 29,2011 PAUL, PLEVIN, SULLIVAN &
8 CONNAUGHTON LLP
B/LL 3-
9
10
11 C. SULLIVAN
MELISSA LISTUG KLICK
12 EMILY J. FOX
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PAUL, PLEVIN,
SULLIVAN &
Oppo To MIL To Preclude Kalish From Opining As 4
CONNAUGHTON LLP To Plaintiffs Truthfulness,Or Believability
4.
j
1 11
2 EMILY J. FOX (SBN 262106) FILE D
Clerk of lhe Superior Court
3 401 B Street, Tenth Floor JUN 29 2011
4 Telephone: 619-237-5200 By: Anthony Shirley, Depu¥
Facsimile: 619-615-0700
5
JUN 29 '11 PM 305
8
9
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
i0
COURTNEY S. ETNYRE, CASE NO. 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL
11
Plaintiff, DECLARATION OF MELISSA LISTUG
SANDIP ("MICKEY") MINHAS, IN LIMINE TO PRECLUDE DEFENDANTS'
14 individually, QUALCOMM Incorporated, a EXPERT, MARKKALISH, M.D., FROM
Delaware corporation and DOES 1 through OPINING AS TO PLAINTIFF'S
15 40, ihclusive, TRUTHFULNESS OR BELIEVABILITY
16 Defendants.
Il of 21
17
Date: July 1, 2011
18 Time: 8:45 a.m.
Dept: 70
21
23 1. I am an associate in the law firm of Paul, Plevin, Sullivan & Connaughton LLP,
24 ' attorneys of record for Defendant Qualcomm Incorporated in the above-entitled matter, and am
25 licensed to practice before this Court. I have personal knowledge ofthe following facts and, if
26 called as a witness, could and would testifycompetently thereto.
ill
27
28 m
PAUL, PLEVIN,
SULLIVAN &
CONNAUGHTON LLP
Decl. of Melissa Listug Klick ISOofOppo toMIL 1 ORIGINAL
Re: Kalish
.
.
1 2. I first informed Ms. Etnyre's attorney, Paul Kondrick, that it would be designating
2 Dr. Kalish on October 7, 2010. Attached as Exhibit A hereto is a true and correct copy of my
3 October 7, 2010 letter to Mr. Kendrick regarding the same. Because Ms. Etnyre refused to submit
4 to an Independent Mental Examination (*'IME"), after extensive meet and confer, Qualcomm was
5 forced to bring a motion to compel, which was originally filed via ex parte on December 6,20110:
6 Unfortunately, the Court was not able to hear that motion until April 1,2011. Atthattime, the
7 motion was granted and the IME went forward on April 20, 2011. Attached as Exhibit B hereto
8 is a true and correct copy of the Court's April 1, 2011 Order compeHing the IME.
9 3. Mr. Kondrick did not contact my office to try to coordinate Dr. Kalish's
10 : deposition. Instead, Mr. Kondricknoticed Dr. Kalish's deposition on top ofthe earlier noticed
11 i deposition of Johanna Hunsaker, Ph.D. Attached as Exhibit C herete is a true and correct copy of
12 Qualcomm's deposition notice for Johanna Hunsaker and Ms. Etnyre's deposition notice for Dr.
13 Kalish. From that time forward, my office has offered Dr. Kalish on several dates and Ms.
14 Etnyre's counsel has either ignored the dates or cancelled last-minute. Attached hereto as Exhibit
15 D is correspondence regarding scheduling Dr. Kalish's deposition. At present, Dr. Kalish' s
16 deposition is not scheduled and Mr. Kendrick has provided no requested or proposed times.
17 4. Attached hereto as Exhibit E is a true and correct copy ofthe definition of
18 Posttraumatic Stress Disorder from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders,
19 Fourth Edition, American Psychiatric Association. This is a readily used and available
20 publication.
21 5. Attached hereto as Exhibit F are true and correct copies of relevant portions of
22 the deposition testimony of Dr. DeeAnn Wong taken on May 4, 2011 and June 10, 2011 by my
23 office.
1
24 6. Attached hereto as Exhibit G are true and correct copies of relevant portions of
25 the deposition testimony of Arlene Pollard taken on May 6, 2011 by my office.
26 9/1
27 m
28 ///
PAUL, PLEVIN,
Decl. of Melissa Listug Klick ISO of Oppo to MIL
2
SULLIVAN &
CONNAUGHTON LLP Re: Kalish
4
1 7. Attached hereto as Exhibit H are true and correct copies 0f relevant portions of
2 the deposition testimony of Dr. Judith Matson taken on March 25, 2011 by my office.
3I I declare under penalty of pegury under the laws of the State of California that the
5 Executed on June 29, 2011, at San Diego, *iffl /2,

6
7 - lissa¥stug Kliek
8
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
i I
PAUL, PLEVIN,
SULLIVAN &
Decl. ofMelissa Listug Klick ISO ofOppo to MIL 3
C0NNAUGHTON LLP Re: Kalish
EXHIBIT A
..
1' .,
C.t.
401B ST.REET, TENTH FLOOR, SAN DIEGO. (LA 92101
D PAUL, PLEVIN,
PHONE 619·237·5200 | FAX 619·615·0700 | WWW.PAULPLEVIN.COM
St SULLIVAN &
CONNAUGHTON LLP
MELISSA USTUG KUCK (619) 243-1561 mklick@paulplevin.com
October 7, 201:0
Paul Kondrick
3130 Fourth Avenue
San Diego, California 92103
Re: Etnyre v. Qualcomm incorporated
Dear Mr. Kondrick:
Defendants will designate Dr. Mark Kalish, a licensed' psychiatrist, in this matter to
testify regarding plaintiff Courtney Etnyre's alleged emotional distress damages.
Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 2032.020(c) and 2016.040, Defendants
request that Ms. Etnyre submit to an Independent Mental Examination by Dr. Kalish on
November 9, 10, 11, 15, 16, 17, or 18, 2010 at 9:00 a.m.
Please confirm, in writing, by October 22, 2010, whether you will produce Ms. Etnyre
for an examination or if Defendants will be forced to file a motion to compel the
examination. As previewed at the case management conference, because Ms. Etnyre
has placed her emotional state at issue in this case, we hope that we are able to
stipulate to the examination without court intervention.
Please contact me if you have any questions. Thank you.
Sincerely,

& Connaughton up
BY:
Me Istug Klick
EXHIBIT B
..
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA,
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
CENTRAL
.
MINUTE ORDER
DATE: 04/01/2011 TIME: 11:00:00 AM iDEPT: C-70
JU.DICIAL OFFICER PRESIDING: Randa Trapp

CLERK: Anthony Shirley, Tina Curry
REPORTER/ERM: Norma Jean Flores CSR# 7413
BAILIFF/COURT ATTENDANT: S, Paritiott

CASE TITLE: Etnyre vs. iMinhas ...
CASE CATEGORY: Civil - Unlimited CASE TYPE: Other employmit
Sft f ':31 9 2 4,4*is

-=,= I
3«» Sfi' .7"
EVENT TYPE: Discovery Hearing./34.. . -*.. *4 =:t.&2

IMOVING PARTY: Qualcomm Incorporated
CAUSAL DOCUMENT/DATE FILED: Motion to Compel Discovery to-Corhpel»Independent Mental
Examination and for Samctior,5, 03/07/2011 , f, 4* 4% ' »:
L 44/r.
15% 6
M 'Al
APPEARANCES
./ Wi#f« .
H Kondrick, counsel, present for Plaintiff(s). 1» 'ft' ' 9 «F Y#'»I '1 4

.
- F ..4.8
/ - + 1*3,-
IMelissa Klick, counsel, present for Defendant{*k

Mike Sullivan, counsel, present for defendam*)«S
4F.*r
ack .a /22-
The Court hears oral argument and MODIRIES,AND, (3641¢18*15 th,e tintative ruling as follows:
fy * .4*#. 44
The motion of Defendant Qualcommflincporats,16*dpel io«pendent mental examination ("IME") of
Plaintiff Courtney Etnyte is GR»iKEE*- Okh & :2'4=
St .4 . 6.
Code of Civil Procedure s«Etibn«2032.020(af*86*ides Ptl.lat "[alny party may obtain discovery ... by
5 means of a physical or._m@itdl 16xaminatian of (1) a *ty to the action ... in any action in which the
mental or physical con&*Sil*df that patt*..'is in cdntroversy in the action." A court may order an IME
upon a showing of 905!f*0se. (GC@*262.3200py "Good cause" is showm when the moving party
produces specific fatts·,tistiTying di#06*1*' andd!*inquiry is relevant to the subject matter of the action
or reasonably taldwlated@to lead tolhe disco*ery of admissible evidence. (Vinson v. Superior Court
(1987) 43 Cal.3d*833>840.) * . r'i
XY,» 75''t
*.V
In this action, Plaintiff *Sla®sfjshe ha*6een severely and permanently emotionally damaged by
Qualcomm and the Incidemts*Ving rise¥*16 this action caused mental disability. (See Listug Klick Decl.,
lili 2-4.) She daims d*11*pa ofiss@6 stemming from the incident and her employment. For example,
she claims Defendants'*enduct chused her to suffer anxiety, short term memory loss, major depressiom
and posttraumatic stress*disorder, as well as physical injury such as muscle tension, poundingi 'heart
palpitations, chest discomfort„ and stomach iproblems. Based on Plaintiffs allegations as well as her
responses to discovery and deposition testimony, it is clear that Plaintiffs mentali and emotional
condition are directly at issue in this action, Accordingly, the Court orders an IME.

EXH I BIT C
3 401 B Street, Tenth Floor
4 Telephone: 619-237-5200
Facsimile: 619-615-0700
5
8
9
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
10
11
Plaintiff, AMENDED NOTICE OF TAKING
12 VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF JOHANNA
V. HUNSAKER PH.D. AND REOUEST FOR
13 PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS (VIA
SANDIP ("MICKEY") MINHAS, SUBPOENA)
14 individually, QUALCOMMIncorporated, a
Delaware corporation and DOES 1 through
15 40, inclusive, Complaint Filed: November 2,2009
Trial Date: None Set
16 Defendants.
17
18
1'9 TO COURTNEY EINYRE AND HER ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:
20 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that, pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section
21 2025.010 et seq., defendant Qualcomm Incorporated will take the deposition ofplaintiffs expert
22 Johanna Hunsaker Ph.D. on May 25, 2011 at 9:00 a.m. at the law offices of Paul, Plevin,
23 Sullivan & Connaughton LLP, 401 B Street, Tenth Floor, San Diego, California.
24 The deposition will be taken before a certified shorthand reporter who is authorized to
25 administer an oath AND WILL BE VII}EOTAPED. lf, for some reason, the deposition is not
26 completed on the above dates, it will be continued on mutually agreeable dates, excluding
27 , Sundays and holidays, until completed.
28 Notice is further given that this office has requested a realtime-ready court reporter. If any
PAUL PLEVIN
CONNAUGHTON LLP
DEPOSITION'OF GENE R KONRAD
. .
1 attorney who is present wishes to be connected to the court reporter's system, it is your obligation
2 to contact Hutchings Court Reporters, LLC at 800-697-3210 to make arrangements for their
3 technical support personnel to contact you regarding your software needs and to ensure that the
4 court reporterbrings adequate cabling and supplies.
5 Dr. Hunsaker is requested to produce the following original documents at his deposition:
6 1. All documents sent by plaintiff or her attorneys to Dr, Hunsaker in connection with
7 his retention in this matter.
8 2. All documents reviewed by Dr. Hunsaker in connection with her retention in this
9 matter. r-
110 3. All documents created by Dr. Hunsaker in connection with her retention in this
11 matter.
12 4. All documents relied upon by Dr. Hunsaker to formulate the opinions she intends
13 to offer in this matter.
14 5. All documents evidencing payments plaintiff or her attorneys made to Dr.
15 Hunsaker for her services in this matter.
16 6. All documents evidencing communications between Dr. Hunsaker and plaintiff.
17 7. All documents evidencing communications between Dr. Hunsaker and any
18 member of H. Paul Kendrick, A Professional Corporation.
19 8. An updated copy ofDr. Hunsaker's curriculum vitae.
20 9. All documents evidencing Dr. Hunsaker's qualifications to serve in an expert
21 capacity in this matter.
22 10. All documents listing the matters in which Dr. Hunsaker has testified as an expert
23 at trial or by deposition within the preceding four years.
24 11. All documents reflecting any expert testimony, either at deposition or trial, which
25 Dr. Hunsaker has offered in other matters.
26 12.
All documents listing all publications authored by Dr. Hunsaker within the last ten
27 yearl
28 l1l
PAUL PLEVIN
CONNAUGHTON LLP
i DEPOSITION OF GENE R. KONRAD
1 13. A copy of all publications authored by Dr. Hunsaker that relate to the opinions she
2 intends to offer in this matter.
3 Dated: April 28,2011 PAUL, PLEVIN, SULLIVAN &

CO GHTON LLP
4
5 By'
C ' C. SULLIVAN,
6 LI A LISTUG KLICK
E J. FOX
8
10
/1
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PAUL PLE¥IN
CONNAUGHTON LLP
DEPOSITION OF GENE R. KONRAD
.
SUBP-020
ATTORNEY OR PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY 0\lame, State Bar number, endaddess) FOR COURTUSE ONLY
_Michael C. Sullivan (SBN 131817)

Melissa Listug Klick (SBN 228470)
Paul, Plevin, Sullivan & Connaughton LLP
401 B Street, 10th Floor
San Diego, CA 92101
TELEPHONE NO.: 619-237-5200 FAX NO (Opt,onaO· 619-615-0700
E-MAIL ADDRESS (Oplionao.·
ATTORNEY FOR Bvamej: Defendant Qualcomm Incorporated

SUPERIOR COURT OF CAUFORNIA, COUNTY OF San Diego
STREErADDRESS. 330 West Broadway
MAILING ADDRESS;
CiTYANDZIP CODE San Diego, CA 92101

BRANCH NAME: Central
PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER:Courtney Etnyre
DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT: Sandip C "Mickey") Minhas

DEPOSmON SUBPOENA CASE NUMBER:
FOR PERSONAL APPEARANCE AND PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS AND THINGS 37-2:009-00101537
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA TO (name, address, and telephone number of deponent if known):
Johanna Hunsaker; University of San Diego-- School of Business Administration; Olin
Hall, 313; San Diego, CA; Phone: (619), 260-4858
1, YOU ARE ORDERED TO APPEAR IN PERSON TO TESTIFY AS A WITNESS in this action at the following date, time, and place:
Date: May 25„ 2011 1lme: 9:00 a,m.
Address: Paul, Plevin, Sullivan & Connaughton, LLP
401 W. B Street #1000, San Diego, CA 92101
a..Fl As a deponentwho is,not a natural person, you are ordered to designate one or'more persons to testify on your behalf as
to the matters described in item 4. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2025.230,)
b. Fl You are ordered to produce the documents and things described in:item 3.
c. Exl This deposition will be recorded stenographically 1-361 through the instant visual display of testimony
and by El audiotape 171 videotape.
d. 11 This videotape deposition is intendedfor possible use at trial under Code of Civil Procedure section 2025,620(d).
2. The personal attendance of the custodian or other qualified witness and the production of the original records are required by this
subpoena. The procedure authorized by Evidence Code sections 1560(b), 1561, and 1562 will not bedeemed sufficient compliance
with this subpoena.
3. The documents and things to be produced and any testing or sampling being sought are described as follows:
|71 Continued on Attachment 3.

4.
If the witness is a representativeof a business or other entity, the matters upon which the witness is to be examined are descfibed
as follows:
[33 Continued on Attachment 4.

5. IF YOU HAVE BEEN SERVED WITH THIS SUBPOENA AS A CUSTODIAN OF CONSUMER OR EMPLO¥EE RECORDS UNDER
CODE OF CML PROCEDURE SECTION 1985.3 OR'1985.6 AND A MOTION TO QUASH OR AN OBJECTION HAS BEEN
SERVED ON YOU, A COURT ORDER OR AGREEMENT OF THE PARTIES, WITNESSES, AND CONSUMER OR EMPLOYEE
AFFECTED MUST BE OBTAINED BEFORE YOU ARE'REQUIRED TO PRODUCE CONSUMER OR EMPLOYEE RECORDS.
6. At the deposition. you will be askedquestions underoath, Questionsand answers arerecorded stenographically at the deposition; latertheyare
transcribed for possible use at trial. You may mad the written record and change any incorrect answers before you sign the deposition You are entitled
to receive witness fees and mileage actually treveled both ways. The money must be paid, at the option of the party giving notice of the deposition,
either with service ofthis subpoena or at the time of the deposition. Unless the courtorders or you agree otherwise, if you are being deposed as an
individual, the deposition must take place within 75 miles of your residence or within 150 miles of your residence Uthe deposition will be taken within the
county of the court where the action iS pending, The location of the deposition for all deponents S governed by Code of Civil·Procedum section
2026250.
DISOBEDIENCE OF THIS SUBPOENA MAY BE PUNISHED AS CONTEMPT BY THIS COURT. YOU WILL ALSO BE LIABLE
FOR THE SUM OF $500 AND ALL DAMAGES RESU
Nx \ Av A - /
ROM YOUR AILJJNE TO OBEY
IDate issued:April 28, 2011 , 12<4 1 7- -<

rPR'rruRE OF PERSON ISSUING SUBPOENA)
Melissa Listua Klick (SBN 228470) Attoikev.,oualcomm. Incorporated
ITYPE OR PRINT NAMEn (Proof of Service on reverse) rmLE) Pagelof.2
Judicial
DEPOSITION SUBPOENA
Council d
FOR PERSONAL APPEARANCE.
California · ,
Code of Clvil Procedure §§ 2020.510,
n-1 2026.220,2025.230,2025250,2026620,
SUBP·020 IRav. January 1. 20091 AND PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS AND THINGS n *ftifu Government Code, 5 08097.1
. .
PETITIONER/PLAINTIFF: Courtney Etnyre CASE NUMBER
RESPONDENT/DEFENDANT Sandip ("Mickey") Minhas 37-2009-0010153'7
Attachment 3
1. All documents sent by plaintiff or her attorneys to Dr. Hunsaker in connection

with his retention in this matter.
2. All documents reviewed by Dr. Hunsaker in connection with her retention in this
matter.
3. All documents created by Dr. Hunsaker in connection with her retention in this
matter.
4. All documents relied upon by Dr. Hunsaker to formulate the opinions she intends to
offer in this matter.
5. All documents evidencing payments plaintiff or her attorneys made to Dr. Hunsaker
for her services in this matter.
6. All documents evidencing communications between Dr. Hunsaker and plaintiff.

7. All documents evidencing communications between Dr. Hunsaker and any ,member of H.
Paul Kondrick, A Professional Corporation.
8. An updated copy of Dr. Hunsaker' s curriculum vitae.
9. All documents evidencing Dr. Hunsaker 's qualifications to serve in an expert
capacity in this matter.
10. All documents listing the matters in which Dri Hunsaker has testified as an expert
at trial or by deposition within the preceding four years.
11. All documents reflectihg any expert testimony, either at deposition or trial,
which Dr. Hunsaker has offered in other matters.
12. All documents listing all publications authored by Dr. Hunsaker within the last
ten years,
13. A copy of all publications authored by Dr. Hunsaker that relate to the opinions
she intends to offer in this matter.
so86
.
1 Etrwre v. Minhas et al.

San Diego Superior Court Case No. 37-2009-00101537
2
PROOF OF SERVICE
3
I, the undersigned, hereby declare that I am over the age of eighteen years and not a party
4 to thisaction. I am employed, or am a resident of, the County of'San Diego, California, and my
business address is: Paul, Plevin, Sullivan & Connaughton LLP, 401 B Street, Tenth Floor, San
5 Diego, California 92101.
6 On April 28,2011, I caused to be served the following document(s):
7 • AMENDED NOTICE OF TAKING VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF JOHANNA

HUNSAKER PH.D. AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS (VIA
8 SUBPOENA)
9 on the interested party (ies) in this action by placing a true copy thereof and addressed as follows:
10 H. Paul Kondrick Leonid M. Zilberman

H. Paul Kondrick, a Prefessienal Corporation Wilson Turner Kosmo LLP
11 3130 Fourth Avenue 550 West C Street, Suite 1050
12 Telephone: (619) 291-2400 Telephone: (619) 236-9600
13 E-Mail: kondrick@msn.com E-Mail; 1zilberman@wpkt.com
14
0 (By MAIL SERVICE) 1 then sealed each envelope and, with postage thereon fully
15 prepaid postage, I placed each for deposit with United States Postal Service, this same day,
at my business address shown above, following ordinary business practices.
16
0 (State) I declare under penalty ofpedury under the laws ofthe State of California that the
t7 foregoing is true and correct.
0 (Federal) I declare that I am employed by the office of a member of the bar of this court at
18
whose direction the service was made.
19 Executed April 28,2011, at San Diego, California.
20
21
!I
6-waki ,1
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PAUL PLEVIN
SULLIVAN &
PROOF OF SERVICE
CONNAUGHTON UP
.
-1
H. Paul Kondrick, Esq„ State Bar No. 88566
2
3130 Fourth Avenue
3 ISan Diego, California 92103-5803

Telephone: (619) 291-2400
4
Pacsimile: (619) 291-7123
5
6
8
9
10
11
COIJRTNEY S. ETNYRE, individualiy, ) Case No. 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL
)
12 Plaintiff, ) PLAINTIFF, COURTNEY S.
) ETNYRE'S NOTICE OF TAKING
13
) DEPOSITION OF DEFENDANT,
14 ) QUALCOMM INCORPORATED'S
SANDIP ("MICKEY") MINHAS, individually,) DESIGNATED EXPERT WITNESSES
15 QUALCOMM Incorporated, a Delaware ) PURSUANT TO SUBPOENA
corporation, and' DOES 1 through 40, inclusive,)

16
)
17
Defendants. )
)
18
19
TO: All Parties by and through their,attorneys ofrecord:
20
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that plaintiff, COURTNEY S. ETNYRE ("ETNYRE"). will
21
i take the depositions ofdefendant, QUALCOMM INCORPORATED's C'QUALCOMM"),

22
23 designated expert witnesses, pursuant to subpoenas, attached, hereto as Exhibits "A" and "B",
24 respectively, on the following dates and at the following approximate times:

25
Exhibit"A": Mark A. Kalish, M.D. on May 25, 2011 at 9:00 a.m.; and
26
Exhibit"B": Laura Fuchs Dolan on May 26, 2011,at 9:00 a.m.
27
The depositions will be before:acertified shorthand reporter at the law offices of

28
-1-
Notice of.Expert Witness Depositions
.
1 H. Paul Kondrick, AProfessional Corporation located at 3130 F6urth Avenue, San Diego,
2 CA 92103 [(619) 291-24001. The depositions will be continued from day-to-day, excluding
3
weekends and holidays, until completed. In the event that the depositions are not cempleted on
4
5 the aforementioned dates, the depositions will continue from day-to-day thereafter at the same
6 time and place, Sundays and holidays excepted, until completed, and in the event of any
7 scheduling conflict ofthe witnesses, parties or counsel, then at a mutually agreed upon date,
8
time and location.
PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE that applicant intends, and reservesthe right, to
10
11 record the above-referenced deposition by means of videotape in addition to stenographic 11
12 means, and that she reserves the right to use said videotaped depositions at trial' in this matter.
13 H. Paul Kondrick,
14 A Professional Corporation:
Dated: May 3, 2011 By: /f/hIL

15
16 H. Paul Kendrick, Esq

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2-
Notice of Taking Depositions
.
EXH'IBIT A ..
. .
SUBP-015
ATTORNEY OR PARTYWTHOUTATTORNEY #anne, State Barnumber, enda#ess):
FOR COURT USE ONLY
-H. Paul Kondrick, Esq. (State Bar # 88566)
3130 Fourth Avenue

TELEPHONE NO.:
(619) 291-2400 FAX,NO.,fO*naO: (619)291-7123
E-MAIL ADDRESS<Op#onaO:
ATTORNEY FOR (Name): Courtney S. Etnyre, Plaintiff

SUPERIOR COURT OF CAUFORNIA, COUNTYOF SAN DIEGO
STREET ADDRESS:
330 West Broadway
MAILING ADDRESS:
CITYANDZIP CODE: San Diego 92101

BRANCH NAME: Central Division
PLAINTIFF/ PETITIONER: Courtney S. Etnyre

DEFENDANT/ RESPONDENT: Sandip C'Mickey'D Minhas, et al.
CASE;NUMBER:
DEPOSITION SUBPOENA
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. TO (name, address, and le/ephone number of deponent if known):
Mark A. Kalish, M.b. Telephone: (619) 282-7172
3131 Camino del Rio North, San Diego, California 92108
1. YOU ARE ORDERED TO APPEAR IN PERSON TO TESTIFY AS A WITNESS in this action atthe following date, time, and place:
Date: Time:
Address: Law Offices of H. Paul Kondrick, AP.C.
May 25,2011 9:00 am. 3130 Fourth Avenue
RAn ntegn rA 971011
a. 1-| Asa deponent who Is nola natural person, you are ordered to designate one,or more persons to testify on:your behalf as
to the matters described in Item 2. (Code Clv. Proc„ § 2025.230.)
b. 1T| This deposition will be recordedstenographically & through the instant visual display of testimony
and by El audiotape [3[1 videotape.
c. 1T1 This videotape deposition is intended for. possible use at trial under Code of Civil Procedure section 2025.620(d).
2. £ If the witness is a representative of a business or other entity, the matters upon which the witness is to be examined are as
follows:
3. At the deposition, you will be asked questions under oath. Questions and answers are recorded stenographically at the deposition;
laterthey are transcribed forpossible use attlial. You may read the written record and change any incorrect answers before you
sign the deposmon. You are entitled to receive witnessfees and mileage actually traveled both ways, The money must be paid, at
the option of the party giving notice of the deposition, either with service of this subpoena or at the time of the deposition. Unless the
court orders or you agree otherwise, if you am being deposed as an individual, the deposmon must take place within 75 miles of your
residence orwithin 150 miles of your residence K the deposition will be taken within the county of the court where the action is
pending. The location of the deposition for all deponents is governed by Code of Civil Procedure section 2025.250.
FOR THE SUM OF $500 AND ALL DAMAGES RESULTING FROM YOUR FAILURE TO OBEY,
4 Mil-Jf
Date issued: May 3,2011
H. Paul Kondrick, Esq. I

(SIGNATUREAOF PERSON ISSUING SUBPOENA)

(Tme)
(Proof of service on.mverse)

Pagelof 2
Form Adopted for Mandatoly Use
Judicial Council of California DEPOSITION SUBPOENA Codeof Clvil Procedure §§ 2020.310,
2026.220,2026.230,2026250,2025.620
SUBP-016 IRev. January 1, 2009] FOR PERSONAL APPEARANCE Govemmend Code,:§ 68097.1
www.cou,f/,Hb.ca.gov
EXH I B IT A bi *: LexisNexia® Aitomated Calgomia,h,dict#/ Cowlcil Fomw

.
SUBP-015
_ PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER: Courtney S. Elnyre CASE NUMBER:
37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL
DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT: Sandip C'Mickey'D Minhas, et al,
PROOF OF SERVICE OF DEPOSITION SUBPOENA FOR PERSONAL APPEARANCE t
1. I served'thls Deposmon Subpoena forPemona/Appeamnce bypersonally dellvering a copy to,the person semed as follows:
a. Person served (name):
c Date of delivery:
e. Witness fees·and mileage both'ways (check one):

(1),|-7 were pald£ Amount: ...-.,.,...$
(2) £ were not paid.
(3) were tendered tothe witness's
requIredby Government Code
section 68097.2, The amount
tendered was (apec#* ........ $
f, Fee forservice:....:.................. $
2. I received this subpoena for service on Mate):
3. Person serving:
a. 1 Not a registered California process server
b. ' California sheriff or marshal
c. r---i Registered Califomiaprocess server
d. Employee or independent contractor of a registered California process server
e. Exempt from registration under Business and Professions Code section,22350(b)
f. F7 Registered professional photocopier
9. Exempt from registration under Business and Professions Code section 22451
h. Name, address, telephone number, and, ifapplicable, county of registration and number:
CA
I declare under penalty of perjury under tbe laws of the State of (For California sheriff or marshal use only),
California that the foregoing is true and correct. I certify that the foregoing is true and correct.
Date: Date:
(BIGNATURE)
(SIGNATURE)
SUBP[ReV. January 1, 20091

PROOFOF SERVICE OF Page 2 of 2
DEPOSITION SUBPOENA FOR PERSONAL APPEARANCE
I,exisNexia® Automated Calgornia Jdicial Council Forms

/
EXHIBIT 8 7'4
.
SUBP-015
ATTORNEY OR PARTY WITHOUTATTORNEY (Name, State Barnumber, andadhss):
FOR COURT USE ON£Y
-H. Paul Kondrick, Esq. (State Bar# 88566)
3130 Fourth Avenue

TELEPHONE NO.:
(619) 291-2400 FAXNO. (Op#ona# (619) 291-7123
E-MAIL At)DRESSj(Op#ona#.·
ATTORNEY; FOR (Name)
Courtney S. Etnyre, Plaintiff
STREETADDRESS: 330 West Broadway
MAIUNG'ADDRESS:
CITY ANDZIP CODE: San Diego 92101

BRANCH NAME Central Division
PLAINTIFF/ PETTTIONER: Courtney S. Etnyre
DEFENDANT/ RESPONDENT: Sandip C'Mickey") Minhas, et al
CASE NUMBER:
11 DEPOSITION SUBPOENA
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, TO (name, address, and telephone numberof deponent if known):
Laura Fuchs Dolan Telephone: (714) 662-0800
LECG, LLC, 600 Anton Boulevard, Suite 1350, Costa Mesa, California 92626
1. YOU ARE ORDERED TO APPEAR IN PERSON TO TESTIFY AS A WITNESS In this action at the following date, time, and place:
Date: Time:
Address: Law Offices of H. Paul Kondrick, A.P.C.
May 26,2011 9:00 a.m. RAn nler. CA 971(11
3130 Fourth Avenue
a. 7 As a.deponent who is not a,natural person, you are ordered to designate one or more persons to'testify on your behalf:as
to the matters described in item 2. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2025.230.)
b, fT| This deposition will be recorded stenographically through the instant visual display of testimony
and by Fl audiotape 1-Fl videotape.
c. [Fl Ihis videotape deposition is intended for possible use at trial under Code of Civil' Procedure section 2025.620(d).
2. F-1 If the witness is,a representative of a business orother entity, the matters upon which the witness is to be examined are as
follows:
3. At the deposiOon, you wilibe asked questions underoath. Questions and answers are recorded stenographically atthedeposition;
later they am transcribed for possible use at trial. You·may read the written record and change any incorrect answers before you
sign the deposition. You are entitled to receive witness,fees and mileage actually traveled both ways. The money must be paid, at
the option of the party giving notice ofthe deposition, elther with service of this subpoena or at the time of the deposition. Unless the
court orders or you agree othenvise, if you are being deposed as an individual, the deposition must take place within 75 miles,of your
residence or within 150 miles of your residence if the deposition will be taken within the county of the court where the action Is
pending, The location of the deposition for all deponents is governed by Code·of Civil Procedure,section 2025.250.
DISOBEDIENCE OF THIS SUBPOENA MAY BE PUNISHED AS CONTEMPT BY THIS COURT. YOU WILL ALSO BE LIABLE
MIL»¢
Date issued: May 3, 2011
H. Paul Kondrick, Esq. , -«

(SIGNATURE OP PERSN 18801*i SUBPOENA)
mILE)
(Proof of service on reverse) Page 101 2

Form Adopted for Mandatoly Use
Judicial Cocnid! of California DEPOSmON SUBPOENA Code of Civil Procedure §§ 2020.310,
2026.220,2025.230,2025.250, 2026.620
SUBP·015[Rev. Jaritaly 1,20091
FOR PERSONAL APPEARANCE Government Code, § 68097 1
www.courtinwa.ca.gov
EXHIBIT B . 2 LexiaNexts® Automated,Cattfornia Judicial Council Forms

.
SUBP-015
PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER: Courtney S. Etnyre CASE NUMBER:
37-2009-00101,537-CU-OE-CTL '
1. I served this Deposition Subpoena for Pemonal Appearance by personally delivering a copy to theiperson served as follows:
a. Person served (name):
c. Date of delivery:
e. Witness fees and mileage both ways (check one):

(1) rn were paid. Amount............ $
(2) were not paid.
(3) 0 were tendered to the witness's
section 68097.2. The amount
$
tendered was (spec/80: ,
f. Fee forservice: .............,.,....., $
2. I received this subpoena for service on Mate):
3. Person serving:
a. £ Not a registered Callfomlacprocess server
b. California sheriff or marshal
c. r--| Registered California process server
d. Employee·or independent contractor of a registered California process server
e. Exempt from registrationunder BUsiness and Professions·Code section 22350(b)
f. Registered professional phot6copier
g. Exempt from registration under Business and Professions Code section 22451
h. Name, address, telephone number, and, if applicable, county of registration and number:
CA
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State,of (For California sheriff ormarshal use only)
California that the foregoing,is true and correct. I certify that the foregoing is true.and correct.
b
Date: Date:
(SIGNATURE) (SIGNATURE)
SUBP-016 [Rev. Januefy 1, 20091

PROOF OF SERVICE OF Page 2 of 2
DEPOSITION SUBPOENAFOR PERSONAL APPEARANCE
Lexi:Nexts® Automated California Judictal Council Forms

A ,
.
1
H. Paul Kondrick, Esq., State Bar No. 88566
2
3130 Fourth Avenue

Telephone:,(619) 291-2400
4
Facsimile: (619) 291-7123
5
Attorney for Plaintiff, COURlNEY S. ETNYRE
6
8
9
FOR THE COUNTY OF SANDIEGO

10
11
COURTNEY S. ETNYRE, individually, ) Case No. 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL
)
)
13
V.
14
SANDIP ("MICKEY") MINHAS, individually,)
16
)
17 Defendants. )
)
18
19
20
I am, and was at the times ofthe service hereinafter mentioned, over the age of 18 and
21
not a party to the within action; I am employed in the Ceunty of San Dieg6, California where
22
23 the service occurs; and my business address is 3130 Fourth Avenue, San Diego, California.
24
On May 3,2011, I served the foregoing document(s) described as:
25
1. PLAINTIFF, COURTNEY S. ETNYRE'S NOTICE OF TAKING
26 DEPOSITION OF DEFENDANT QUALCOMM INCORPORATED'S
DESIGNATED EXPERT' WITNESSES PURSUANT TO SUBPOENA
27
1 1,1
28

,on all Herested parties,te this action by placing true copies thereof enclosed in sealed
2
3
4
Melissa L. Klick, Esq.
Paul, Plevin, Sullivan & Connaughton, LLP
5
401 '*B" Street, Tdnth Floor
Tel: 619-237-5200
7 Fax: 619-615-0700
8
Attorneys for Defendant, QUALCOMM Incorporated
9
Leonid M. Zilberman, Esq.

10 Wilson Turner Kosmo LLP
550 West "C" Street, Suite 1050

11
San Diego, CA 92101
12 Tel: 619-236-9600
Fax: 619-236-9669
13
14
Attorneys for Defendant, SANDIP ("MICKEY")MINHAS
15 X BY US. MAIL: I placed a true copy in a sealed envelope addressed to the parties as
16
indicated above on May 3, 2011. I am familiar with the firm's, practice of collection and
17
processing correspondence for mailing. I personally deposited the claim in the United States
18
post office or in a mailbox, substation, mail chute, or other like facility regularly maintained
19
20 by the government ofthe United States, in a sealed envelope, properly addressed with postage
21 paid.
22
BY PERSONAL SERVICE: I personally gathered a true copy of the above
23
documents, andgave same to our messenger service for personal delivery/service before
24
25
5:00 pm on May 3, 2011 will file the original· proof ofpersonal service with the Court upon
26 request.
27
BY FEDERAL EXPRESS/OVERNIGHT MAIL: I placed a true copy in a sealed
28
envelope addressed to the parties as indicated abeve, on May 3, 2011. I personally caused it

.
1
to be deposited with Federal Express on the same day in the ordinary course of business for
2
delivery the next business day.
3
BY FACSIMILE: By use of facsimile machine number, (619) 291-7123,1 faxed a true
4
5
copy(ies) of the document(s) listed above to the parties, on May 3, 2011, at their fax numbers
6 listed above as indicated by their names, The document(s) were/was transmitted by facsimile
7
transmission and the transmission wasreported as complete and without error. The i
8
transmission report was properly issued by the transmitting facsimile machine. A copy of the,
9
transmission report will be attached to the proof ofservice indicating that the documents were
10
11
transmitted' properly, as necessary, in the future.
12 I declare under penalty of pedury under the laws of the State of California that the
13
foregoing is true and correct Executed this 3rd day ofMay, 2011.
14
15 Candice E. Caufield
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
I!
25
26
27
28

EXHIBIT D
..
101
PP
401 B STREEr, TENTH FLOOR, SAN DIEGO, CA 92101
PHONE 619·237·5200 | FAX 619·615·0700 WWW.PAULPLEVIN.COM

PAUL, PLEVIN,
SULLIVAN & MELISSA LISTUG KLICK (619)243-1561 mklick@paulplevin.com
CONNAUGHTON LLP
May 5, 201:1
Paul:'Kondrick
3130 Fourth Avenue
Re: Etnyre v. Qualcomm Incorporated
As to depositions that you referenced in your May 4, 2011 letter, please send out an
amended notice for Mr. Rouse on May 119th at 1:30 p.m. as you indicated this date
worked for you. Further, we have not received a response from you regarding our
offer to produce Mr.. Sailer on May 11th at 9:30 a.m. for his continued deposition.
Mary Stewart is available foT her continued depositibn on the following dates from 9:00
to 12:30: May 12th,'May 17th, and May 19th. Please confirm the dates that you need Y
for her deposition as soon as possible.
Please let us know when Mr. Konrad's file will be ready for copying so that we can
reschedule his deposition. If he has the file and there was a miscommunication with
the deposition officer, iplease clarify so we can arrange to have the file copied this
week. If not, please let us know when you or he anticipates the file being ready. We
would prefer for you to coordinate this effort, but we have been unable to obtain any
dates from you either for production or deposition.
We are in receipt of your deposition notice for Dr. Kalish and Ms. Fuchs Dolan. We
would be happy to coordinate dates with them, but since you did not contact us, we
will contact Dr. Kalish and Ms. Fuchs Dolan to check to see if they happen to be
available as noticed.
Sincerely,

& Connaughton up
M ssa'istug KlicK--
Page 1 of 1
.
Melissa Listug Klick
From: Wilson Claudette G. [CWilson@wilsontumerkosmo.com]

Sent Tuesday, May 17, 2011 12:00 PM
To: Paul Kondrick; Melissa Listug Klick
CC: Mike Sullivan; Zilberman, Lonny M.; Mary F. Duarte; Deborah Baranowski
Subject RE: iEtnyre v. Minhas et al.
9:30 - 4:00 on May 25 works for us.
Claudette
From: Paul Kondrick Imailto:kondrick@msn.com]

Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2011 11:45 AM
To: Melissa Listug Klick
Cc: Mike Sullivan; Zilberman, Lonny M.; Mary F. Duarte; Deborah Baranowski; Wilson
Claudette G.
Subject: Re: Etnyre v. Minhas et a#.
Ms. Klick,
I'm ok with an am start on that date so long as we can re-schedule Hunsaker &
Katish. Say start with Mr. Sailer around 9:30 am. By copying at! counsel, I
request their inputs as well.
-Paul Kendrick
-- Original,Message ---
From: Melissa Listua Klick
To: Paul Kondrick
Cc: Mike Sullivan ; Lonnv Zilberman ; 'Marv F. Duarte ; Deborah Baranowski

Sent: Monday, May 16, 2011 5:02 PM
Subject: Etnyre v. Minhas et al.
Paul,
Bill Sailer is available on May 25th, but needs to be done by 4:00. He can start early at 8:00 or
8:30, so I presume this will work. Again, please simply confirm by responding to this email or
send a confirming notice as soon as possible. To do this, he has to move some appointments,
so please let us know as soon as possible. Thank you.
Melissa
Melissa Listug Klick \ Direct: 619.243.1561
n C Paul, plevin,
1- -r, . Sullivan &
4 F ' connaughton,LLP
L)/7 % 401 B Street, Tenth Floor
l ' San Diego, CA 92101
__21« T: 619.237.5200> 1 F: 619.615.0700
www.Daulnlevin.com
Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail is confidential and intended only for the recipients listed above. If you
have received this e-mall in error, please delete it immediately and inform the sender of the error or
contact admin®gaulnlevin.com.
6/27/2011
Page 1 of 1
From: Paul Kendrick [kondrick@msn.com]

Sent: Twesday, May 31, 2011 8:22 AM
CC: Mike Sullivan; Lonny Zilberman; Wilson Claudette G.

Subject: Re: 1Etnyre v. Minhas et al. Deposition Stipulation
Let's discuss. I have some scheduling conflicts.
-P. Kondrick
- Oiginal Message ----

T.o: Paul Kendrick
Cc: Mike Sullivan ; Lonnv Zilberman ; Wilson Claudette G.
Sent: Saturday, May 28, 2011 1:08 PM
Subject:'Etnyre v. Minhas et al. Deposition Stipulation
Paul,
I incorporated your changes into the deposition stipulation that is attached. Please sign and
send back to my office for filing next week. As you know, we need to get this filed as soon as
possible. Although you wanted me to change the dates in the stipulation to a "mutually
agreeable" date, below are proposed dates for Ms. Dolan and Dr. Kalish. Please confirm these
dates as soon as possible. If these dates do not work for you, then please provide alternate
dates. Also, I think we need to discuss the Hunsaker stipulation as I did not understand your
note. As to Dr. Hunsaker, could you please provide us with a date when she will be prepared
and available to testify? Thank you.
Melissa
j Laura Fuchs Dolan - June 8, 2011 at 9:30 am

Dr. Kalish - June 8, 15, or 16, 2011 at 1:00 pm
Paul, Plevin,
r Sullivan &
Connaughton LLP
401 B Street, Tenth Floor

San Diego, CA 92101
T: 619.237.5200 1 F: 619.615.0700
www:Daulglevin.com
have received this e-mail in error, please delete it immediately and inform the sender of the error or
contact admin@gaulnlevin.com
6/27/2011
..
401 B STREET, TENTH FLOOR, SAN DIEGO, CA 92101
PHONE:619 ·237·5200 | FAX 619·615·0700 | WWW,PAULPLEVIN.COM

PAUL, PLEVIN,
St
SULLIVAN & MELISSA LISTUO KLICK (619) 243-1561 mklick@paulplevin.corn
CONNAUGHTON LLP
May 31, 2011
Paul Kondrick
3130 Fourth Avenue
Re: Etnyre v.: Qualcomm Incorporated
Dear Paul:
As we have previowsly advised, Dr. Kalish is available for deposition on June 8th, 15th
and 16th in the afternoon for his deposition. You have advised that you are not
available on June 8th for,his deposition. Please advise as soon as possible if you
would like to take his deposition on June 15th or 16th.
Further, Dr. Kalish still has not been contacted by Advanced Attorney Services to have
his file copied. As we stated at the ex parte hearing on May 24th, his file is ready to
be copied.
Sincerely,

& Connaughton up
Msda«Eistug Klick
cc: Leonid M. Zilberman
Page 1 of 2
.
From: Melissa Listug Klick
Sent; Monday, June 06, 2011 11:08 AM

To: 'Paul Kendrick'; Mike Sullivan; Claudette G. Wilson; Lonny Zilberman
Subject: RE: Etnyre v, Minhas & QUALCOMM - Remaining deposition
Paul,
We have spoken to Dr. Kalish's omce regarding scheduling his deposition given
your availability below. He is available on June 20th .in the morning or anytime
on June 21*. Please confirm as soon as possible. Thank you.
Melissa
Melissa Listug Klick \Direct: 619.243.1561
have received this e-mail in error, please delete it immediately and inform the sender of the error or contact
admin@gaulnlevin.com
From: Paul Kondrick Imailto:kondrick@msn.com]

Sent: Monday, June 06, 2011 10:24 AM
To: Mike Sullivan; Melissa Listug Klick; Claudette G. Wilson; Lonny Zilberman
Subject Etnyre v. Minhas & QUALCOMM - Remaining deposition
Counsel,
To follow up from our CMC meet & confer last Friday, in particular on the
issue of remaining deposition discovery, at present, the following deposition
remain to be concluded:
1. Mary Stewart;
2. Tom Rouse;
3. Sandip Minhas;
4. Fuchs-Dolan;
5. Kalish;
6. Wong;
7. Hunsaker;
8. Cambridge PMK & dox production
I rearranged nip schedule to proceed with the Rouse deposition tomorrow, June
7th, @ 9:00 am, ® our law office. -
Dr. Wong's deposition will proceed, to my understanding, on Friday, June 10th

@ 2:00 pm @ Belski & Associates; however, as I recall, her deposition was to
6/27/2011
Page 2 of 2
proceed AFTER her notes/charting comments were transcribed. To date, I have yet to
either be notified that the notes have been transcribed or otherwise available. We
recently discussed the need for those notes in order for the Wong deposition to
effectively efficiently go forward.
I will be engaged in trial during June 13-16. We were assigned out this morning. In
addition, I have oral argument during the afternoon of June 15th. Therefore, it looks
like June 1.7th is the earliest date available to our ojjice to resume depositions.
Dr. Hunsaker is, as mentioned, con¢luding her sabbatical in Europe. She returns
June 13th. In our last communication, she still needed the Mary Stewart deposition &
exhibits. We've tried to expedite providing her with deposition materials.
I understand that there is an ex parte hearing scheduled for tomorrow, June 7, @ 8:30
am, followed by the Rouse deposition. I suggest that we confer, with our calendars, in
hand, sometime tomorrow morningi to coordinate the remaining depositions, resolve
stipulations, extending the discovery cut-off, including addressing Dr. Kalish & Dr.
Hunsaker motion in limine related issues.
I look forward to your comments.
-Paul Kondrick
6/27/2011
Page 1 of 1
.
From: Paul Kondrick [kondrick@msn.com]

To: Mike Sullivan; Claudette G. Wilson; Lonny Zilberrnan; Melissa Listug Klick
Subject: Kalish & Hunsaker depositions
Melissa,
Thanks, again, for your prompt response. I suggest we proceed with Dr.
Kalish's depo on Monday, June 20th @ 10:30 am at our office. Fuchs-Dolan's
deposition would then follow on June 21 @ 10:00 am at our law omce.
Since Dr. Hunsaker will be in town as of that week, e.g., the week of 7/20, is there
a date, Melissa, that you would like us to work around? Just let me know, & we'll
pass the dates along to her for a quick response7 Let us know, ok?
Trust this schedule, at least for Dr. Kalish & Fuchs-Dolan works for ail parties
& counsel If anyone has issues/problems with these dates, then let me know.
-Paul Kondrick
--- Original Message
To: Paul Kondrick; Mike Sullivan ; Claudette G. Wilson ; Lonnv Zilberman

Subject: RE: Etnyre v. Minhas & QUALCOMM - Remaining deposition
Paul,
We have spoken to Dr. Kalish's omce regarding scheduling his deposition given
your availability below. He is available on June 20th in the morning or anytime
on June 21st.
\ Please confirm as soon as possible. Thank you.
Melissa
6/27/2011
Page 1 of 2
.
From: Wilson Claudette G. [CWilson@wilsontumerkosmo.comli

Sent: Monday, June 06, 2011 1:04 PM
To: Melissa Listug Klick; Paul Kondrick; Mike Sullivan; Zilberman, Lonny M.
Subject: RE: Fuchs-Dolan Depo
confirmed on this end as well
From: Melissa Listug Klick Imailto:mklick@paulpievin.com]

To: Paul Kondrick; Mike Sullivan; Wilson Claudette G.; Zilberman, Lonny M.
Subject: RE: Fuchs-Do/an Depo
Confirmed.
have received this e-mail in error, please delete it immediately and inform the sender of the error or contact
admin@oaulolevin.com
From: Paul Kendrick [mailto:kendrick@msn.com]

To: Mike Sullivan; Claudette G. Wilson; Lonny Zilberman; Melissa Listug Klick
Subject: Fuchs-Dolan Depo
Melissa,
Thanks for your prompt response. I suggest we proceed with Fuchs-Dolan's

deposition on June 21 @ 10:00 am at our law ojjice. Dr. Kalish's depo then
would proceed on Monday, June 20th® 10:30 am at our office
-Paul Kondrick
-- Original Message ----

iFrom: Melissa LIstua Klick
To: Paul Kendrick ; Mike Sullivan ; Claudette G. Wilson ;Lonnv Zilberman

Subject: RE: Etnyre v. Minhas & QUALCOMM - Remaining deposition
I Paul,
We have contacted Ms. Fuchs Dolan based on your email below regarding
availability and she is available at 10:00 on either June 20 or 21. Please let us
know which date you would like to depose her as soon as possible.
6/27./201 1
Page 2 of 2
.
.
Thank you.
Melissa
6/27/2011
Page 1 of 4
.
From: Paul Kondrick [kondrick@msn.coml
Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2011 8:32 PM

TO: Melissa Listug Klick
CC: Mike Sullivan; Claudette G. Wilson; Lonny Zilberman
Subject: Re: QC/Etnyre - Follow Up - Kondrick Reply
Melissa,
I'm stiti on for the met & confer on Friday. We have a lot to cover... so
As for Dr. Kalish, Pls let's look at a reschedule date. I think I could, if
necessary, do it the same morning as Fuchs Dolan, if QC still intends to use
her.
Appreciate the need to communicate with upcoming deadlines. Tonite was the
lEt time Vve been in .the o#ice this week, except to pick up files, & head to
court This is niy last email, & I'm now OBice to get some dinner. Thanks tho:
-PK
--- Original Message --

To: Paul Kondrick ; Mike Sullivan ; Wilson Claudette G.
Cc: Zilberman. Lonnv M.
1 Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2011 8:26 PM
Subject: RE: QC/Etnyre - Follow Up - KondrickiReply
Paul,
I have two more questions based on your email
First, does this mean that you wilt be unavaitable to meet on 6/17 in the
afternoon? Let us know if we need to try to reschedule that meeting.
Second, I assume you need us to reschedute Dr. Kalish's deposition based on

your availability. I will contact him to get additional times later in the
week, unless I hear differently from you.
Have a good evening (and please do not feel compelled to respond after-hours to
an email from Mike or I, we're simply trying to get things to you as soon as-
possible as deadlines approach). Thanks.
Melissa
Melissa Listug Klick i Direct: 619.243.1561
6/27/2011
Page 2 of 4
.
Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail is confidential and intended only for the recipients listed above. If you have
received this e-mail in error, please delete it immediately and inform the sender of the error or contact
fadmin@gaulglevin.com
From: Paul Kondrick [mailto:kendrick@msn.com]

To: Melissa Listug Klick; Mike Sullivan; Wilson Claudette G.
Cc: Zilberman, Lonny M.
Subject: Re: QC/Etnyre - Follow Up - Kondrick Reply
Thanks. VIi have Candice, my asst, check to make sure tomorrow.
-Paul
- Original Message --
From: Wilson Claudette G.
To:.kondrickamsn.com ; mklickagaulglevin.com ; msullivan(a*aulglevin,com
Cc: Zilberman. Lonnv M.
1 Sent:'Wednesday, June 15,2011 7:29 PM

1 Subject: Re: QC/Etnyfe - Follow Up - Kondrick Reply
TRC is at 2:00 on Monday on my calendar not 4:00.
From: Paul Kondrick [mailto:kondrick@msn.com]

To: Melissa Ustug Klick <midick@gaulgievin.com>; Mike Sullivan <msullivan@gaulglevin.com>
Cc: Wilson Claudette G.; Zilberman, Lonny M.
Subject: Re: QC/Etnyre - Follow Up - Kendrick Reply
Understand ...that sometimes there is a truly urgent matter, especially with the
continued TRC coming up, etc.. A day off is nice every now & then ... even to watch
a ball game with the kids.
Thanks for your prompt reply ... esp. @ 7:07 pm ... go home.
7PK
-- Original Message --
From: Mike Sullivan,
To: Paul Kendrick ; Melissa, Listua 1Klick
Cc: Wilson Claudette G. ; Zilberman. Lonny M.
Subject: RE: QC/Etnyre - Follow Up - Kondrick Reply
Paul,
1We'll do our best not to bother you, but we can't agree not to communicate on
important items with trial approaching.
6/27/2011
Page 3 of 4
.
Thanks. Mike
Mike Sullivan \ Direct: 619.744.3655
<http://www.pauiplevin.com/images/lopo h.gil> Paul; Pievin,

Sullivan &
Connaughton LLP

San Diego, CA 92101
T: 619.237.5200 \ F: 619.615.0700
www.paulplevin.com <http:/Avww.paulpievin.com/5,
Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail is confidential and intended only for the
recipients listed above. If you have received this e-mail in error, please delete it
immediately and inform the sender Of the error or contact admin(*paulplevin.com
<mailto:admin@Daulpievin.com>
From: Paid Kondrick Imailto:kondrick@msn.coml

Sent: Wed 6/15/2011 6:40 PM
Cc: Mike Sullivan; Wilson Claudette G.; Zilberman, Lonny M.
Subject: Re: QC/Etnyre - Follow Up - Kendrick Reply
Melissa,
I just saw this email I've been in trial since Monday, & as I may have mentioned,
argued a matter to the 4th DCA this afternoon. The trial was to conclude today,
but not later than tomorrow, June 16th; however, the other side is still putting on
its case-in-chief, & they informed the court today, that they will have witnesses
thru Monday, June 20th. That will affect the presently scheduled Kalish
deposition date for starters.
I've just contacted Dr. Hunsaker to firm up her availability since she just returned
to the US. a few days ago. I expect that you would like to see her jile before her
6/27/2011
Page 4 of 4
.
depo, e.g., the dox you may have been seeking via subpoena. My understanding is
that most of her file is electronic so that that should expedite getting your office
what you want produced by her.
As mentioned, I will now be in trial thru at least next Monday. I advised the court
in that matter that I have a 4:00 pm TRC with Judge Trapp scheduled for Monday,
June 20*h.
Separate subject... please don't send me emails on the weekend, ok?!?!?
-P. Kendrick
6/27/2011
Page 1 of l
Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2011 8:11 PM

TO: 'Paul 'Kondrick'
CC: 'Wilson Claudette G.'; Mike Sullivan
Subject: Etnyre v. Minhas et al. - Dr. Kalish

Paul,
1: have contacted Dr. Kalish and he Is available on 6/21 at 10:00 for his deposition. Earlier today, I sent
you a letter indicating that we would not be having Ms. Fuchs Dolan testify at trial given the Court's recent
ruling. Therefore, I think it would work to slot Dr. IKalish into Ms. Fuchs Dolan's former deposition slot.
Please let us know so we can confirm with him. Thank you.
Melissa
Melissa Listug Klick IDirect: 619.243.1561
r 1 Paul, plevin,
- I Sullivan &
rn 1 3 Connaughton LLP
L_)/-k, 401 B Street, Tenth Floor
San Diego, CA 92101
--' T: 619.237.5200 FF: 619.61'5.0700
www.Daulolevin.corn,
Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail is confidential and intended only for the recipients listed above. If you have received
this e-mail in error, please delete it immediately and inform the sender of the error or contact admin@Daulolevin.com
6/27/2011
Page 1 of 1
.

Sent: IMonday, June 20, 2011 9:13 AM,
To: 'Paul Kondrick'
CC: Zilberman, Lonny M.; 'Wilson Claudette G.'; Mike Sullivan; Deborah Baranowski
Subject: Etnyre v. QC = Dr. Kalish
Paul,
Dr. Kalish is available for his deposition on June 27th at 1:00,28th at 9:00, or 29th at 1:00. He would like
to do the deposition at'his office. Please let us know which date you prefer. Then, let us kmow when you
Would be available for the pre-trial meeting of counsel. Thank yeu.
Melissa
Melissa LIstug Klick I Direct: 619.243.1562
Paul, Plevin,
P Sullivan &
sp Connaughton LLP

San Diego, CA 92101
T:.619,237.5200 1 F: 619.615.0700
www.DauIDIevin.com
Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail is confidential and intended only for the recipients listed above. If you have received
this e-mail in error, please delete it immediately and inform the sender of the error or contact admin@Daulolevin.com
6/27/2011
Page 1 of 1
From: Paul Kendrick [kondrick@msn.coml
Sent: Monday, June 20, 2011 6:48 PM

CC: Zilberman, Lonny M.; Wilson Claudette G.; Mike Sullivan; Deborah Baranowsld
Subject: Re: Etnyre v. QC - Dr. Kalish
Melissa,
Let'splan on June 28111 ®9:00 amat my omce. Then, we canfurtherproceed

with the ATR meet & confer.
-Paul
--- Original Message --

To: Paul Kondrick
Cc: Zilberman. Lonnv M. ; Wilson Claudette G. ; IMike Sullivan ; Deborah Baranowski
Sent: Momday, June 20, 2011 9:1,2 AM
Subject: Etnyre v. QC - Dr. Kalish
Paul,
Dr. Kalish is available for his deposition on June 27th at 1:00, 28th at 9:00, or 29th at 1:00. He
would like to do the deposition at his office. Please let us know which date you prefer. Then,
let us know when you would be available for the pre-trial meeting of counsel. Thank you.
Melissa
Paul, Plevin,
Sullivan &
Connaughton LLP

L)(3 San Diego, CA 92101
T: 619.237.5200 1 F: 619.615.0700
www.Daul[)levin.com
have received this e-mail in error, please delete it immediately and inform the sender of the error or
contact admin@Daulolevin.com
6/27/201 i
EXHIBIT E
art
I.
fj I
'- 309.81 posttraumatic Stress Disorder 463
Diagnostic criteria for

4 300.3 Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (continued)
1
S C. The obsessions or compulsions cause marked distress, are time consuming (take more
than l' hour a day),or significantly interfere with the person's normal routine, occu-
pational (or academic) functioning, or usual social activities or relationships.
D. If another Axis I disorder is present, the contemt of the obsessions or compulsions Ils
not restricted to it (e.g., preoccupation with food inthe presence of an Eating Disor-
15
der; hair pulling in the presence of Trichotillomania; concern with appearance in the
presence of Body Dysmorphic Disorder; preoccupation with drugs:in the presence of
a Substance Use Disorder; preoccupation with having a setious illness in the presence
of Hypochondriasis: preoccupation with sexual urges or fantasies in the presence of
a Paraphilia; or guilty ruminations in the presence of Major Depressive Disorder). 12
E. The disturbance is not due to the direct physiological effects of. a substance (e.g., a
drug of abuse, a medication) or a general medical condition. :{i
21
Specify if:
With Poor insight if, for most of the time during the current episode, theiper-
son does not recognize that the obsessions and compulsions are excessiveor un-
reasonable
1,1,4 f 1
-i
11.1
309.81 Posttraumatic Stress Disorder
Diagnostic Features
jiti
The essential feature of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder is the development of charac-
.1,],ir
teristic symptoms following exposure to an extreme traumatic stressor involving di-
rect personal; experience ef an event that involves actual or threatened death or
serious injury, or other threat to one's physical integrity; or witnessing an event that
involves death, injury, or a threat to thephysical integrity of another person; or learn-
ing about unexpected or violent death, serious harm, or threatof deathor injury ex- t
periencedl by a family member or other close associate (Criterion Al). The person's
1
response to the event must involve intense fear, helplessness, or horror (or in chil-
-#PE 31
dren, the response must involve disorganized or agitated behavior) (Criterion A2).
The characteristic symptoms resulting from the exposure to the extreme trauma in-
clude persistent reexperiencing of the traumatic event (Criterion B), persistent avoid-
ance of stimuli associated with the trauma and numbing of general responsiveness
(Criterion C), and persistent symptoms of increased arousal (Criterion D). The full
symptom picture must be present for more than 1 month (Criterion E), and the dis-
-i
turbance must cause clinirally significant distress or impairment in social, oceupa-
tional, or other important areas of functioning (Criterion F).
Traumatic events that are experienced directly include, but are not limited to, mil-
15{
itary combat, violent personal assault (sexual assault, physical attack, robbery, mug-
ging), being kidnapped, being taken hostage, terrorist attack, torture, incarceration as 1 1 1,
a prisoner of war or in a concentration camp, natural or manmade disasters, severe
F
|464 Anxiety Disorders. 31
automobile accidents, or being diagnosed with a life-threatening illness. For children, li

sexually traumaticeventsmay include developmentally inappropriate,sexual experi- 4
ences without threatened or actual violence or injury. Witnessed events include, but y
are not limited to, observing the serious injury or unnaturaldeath of another'person 3
due to violent assault, accident, war, or disaster or unexpectedly witnessing a dead *
body or body parts. Events experienced by others that are learned about include, but E!
arenot limited to, violent personal assault, serious accident, or serious injury experi- 42
enced by a family member or a close friend; learning about the sudden, unexpected 35
death of a family member or a close friend; or learning that one's child has a life- /
threatening disease. The disorder may be especially severe or long lasting when the @
stressor is of human,design (e.g., torture, rape). The likelihood of developing thisdis- *
order may increase as the intensity of and' physicalproximity to the stressor increase. {,
The traumatic event can be reexperienced in various ways. Commonly the person *
has recurrent and intrusive recollections of the event (Criterion Bl) or recurrent dis- 9
tressing dreams during which the event can'be replayed Or otherwise represented '
(Criterion 132). In rare instances, the person experiences dissociative states that last :4*
from a few seconds to several hours, or even days, during which components of the 4
event are relived and the person behaves as though experiencing the event at that t
moment (Criterion 133). These episodes, often referred to as "flashbacks," are.typicallv ' f*
brief but can be associated with prolonged distress and heightened arousal. Intense di
,psychological distress (Criterion 134) or physiological reactivity (Criterion B5) often *
occurs when the person is exposed to triggering events that resemble or symbolize an f
aspect of the traumatic event (e.g., anniversaries of the traumatic event; cold, snowy 4*
weather or uniformed guards forsurvivors of death camps in cold climates; hot, hu- 2
mid weather for combat veterans of the South Pacific; entering any elevator for a *
woman who was raped in an elevator)·
Stimuli associated with the trauma are persistently avoided. The person common- s
ly makes deliberate efforts to avoid thoughts, feelings, or conversations about the 3
traumatic event (Criterion Cl) and to avoid activities, situations, or people who *
arouse recollectionsof it (Criterion C2). Thisavoidance of reminders may include am- g
nesia for an important aspect of the traumatic event (Criterion C3). Diminished re- f
sponsiveness to the external world, referred to as "psychic numbing"or "emotional f
anesthesia," usually begins soon after the traumatic event. The individual may com- 4
plain of having markedly diminished interest or participation in previously enjoyed 3
activities.(Criterion (4),of feeling detached or estranged from other people (Criterion S
C5)> or of having markedly reduced ability to feel emotions (especially those associ- S
ated with intimacy, tenderness, and sexuality) (Criterion CEO. The individual may f.
have a sense of a foreshortened future (e.g., not expecting to have a career, marriage, j:
childrenv or anormallife span),(Criterion CD.
The individual haspersistent symptoms of anxiety or increased arousal that were 4
notpresentbeforethe trauma. These symptoms may include difficulty falling or stay- 4
ing asleep that may be due to recurrent nightmares during which the traumatic event :@
is relived (Criterion Dl), hypervigilance (Criterion D42, and exaggerated startle re- :1
sponse (Criterion D5). Some individuals report irritability or outbursts of anger (Cri- t
terion D2) or difficulty concentrating or cempleting tasks (Criterion D3).
d 9
4$
L 1 4 L:4
1..: -3.2
1.- *f:
465 1 51 , 4, 11• 7,
f. 1 1, '11
'f '1
1= 1 309.81 Posttraumatic Stress Disorder 1"1 11 1)4
*t 1:H'f
1
l',1
Specifiers
A.'3
The following specifiers may be used to specify onset and duration of thesymptoms /' 1
1 'flf' rf#
flf#*r of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder:
B-*555 I 1 1!*
1 4 1 ZI
14*S€ -
Acute. This specifier should be used when the duration of symptoms is less 8.11.11 -1 , 3
than 3 months.
Chronic. This specifier should be used when the symptoms last 3 months or f 1, 45 1 :t ·'
*5
1 . .5 If :/f,
With Delayed Onset. This specifier indicates that at least 6 months have
longer.
Erei. 05 passed between the traumatic event and the onset of the symptoms. 4. ,\1, j
1; f
Is 't
}34' -1
Associated Features and Disorders i'/1
L
1
1 55365,5 Associated descriptive

Disorderfeatures andbemental
painfuldisorders.
guilt feelingsIndividuals
about surviwith
vingPost-
:f
traumatic Stress may descri when

others did not survive or about the things they had to do to survive. Avoidance pat-
terns may interfere with interpersonal relationships and lead to marital conflict, di-
-W:«4 11,9 1
f 44 4.4 U .., fl B i
vorce, or loss of job. Auditory hallucinations and paranoid ideation canbe present m
'' 4 f 1 1,1 2
.«36 *19, I /{ 4 i . 1
1 somemay
severe and chronic cases. The following associated constellation of symptoms
occur and are more commonly seen in association with an interpersonal stressor 2 i k 1111 1
1 6111 1
331 Of (e.g., childhood sexual or physical abuse, domesticdissociative

ive behavior; battering): imsymptoms;
paired affectsomatic
modu- iff E,L
-334 *'. compllation;

LZE. 5
7 //b L _
i n self-destructive and impuls

manentlyfeeldamaged;
a ts; ings of inaeffecti
loss ofveness,
previouslshame,
y sustaidespai
ned belr, oriefs;hopel
hostiessness;
lity; sociafeel
l wiitnhdraw-
g per- t
at feeling constantly threatened; impaired, relationships with others; or a change

51 4. 4,
from the individual's previous personality characteristics. 2 r t. ,
Posttraumatic Stress Disorder is associated with increased rates of Major Depres-

21.' P}
sive Disorder, Substance-Related Disorders, Panic Disorder,Social

Agoraphobia, Obses-
Phobia, Specific
.,Fed' , i
sive-Compulsive Disorder, Generalized Anxiety Disorder,

9* 4,13]
4 4 - Phobiaconcurrently
r .
& f 'L.5,
, and Bipolawith
- lp·
r Distheorder. These disorders can either precede, follow, or emerge

onset of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder.
3 4. A fe, i
t
Associated laboratory findings. Increased arousal may be measured through stud-

t *C
S. fy,. 11'I,t,z8//84
23 . '
ies of autonomic functioning (eg., heart rate, electromyography, sweat gland activity). )Sh} W. -.
I.e i w .4 A lf.
Rht, 31 1
-*5 2
* 9 Associated physical examination findings and general medical conditions. il Ski} 4,• :
.!'' b 1 1 ... .'
Physicalinjunes may occur as a direct consequence of the trauma. In addition, chron- 1' % i it 18 9
ic Posttraumatic Stress Disorder may be associated with increased' rates of somatic

1*A,.4
.t'
S *i
complaints and, possibly, general medical conditions. 1': jill Af- 1 255,
Scy i.:;
his'
.
* A 011'
Specific Culture and Age Features A':241{ )S---

Individuals who have recently emigrated from areas of considerable social unrest Dll
5*4111 1 E *
.*4493,1
and civil conflict may have elevated rates of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder. Such in- 1 ,]- ]1 1 iZ_>«
dividuals may be especially reluctant to divulge experiences of torture and trauma
3% ar
due to their vulnerable political immigrant status. Specific assessments of traumatic

t»' .it,t
if -' Sl 11 *4 ·
ts, ''4 44
5>
experiences and concomitant symptoms are needed for such individuals. P .kt 04/
1¥*I
k.lipt I -
If
I 2 , ' fili ,
aill:
466 Anxiety Disorders
In younger children, distressing dreams of the event may, within several weeks,
change into generalized nightmares of monsters, of rescuing others, or of threats to
self or others. Young children usually do not have the sense that they are reliving the
past; rather, the reliving of the trauma may occur through repetitive play (e.g., a child
who was involved in a serious automobile accident repeatedly reenacts car crashes
with toy cars). Because it may be difficult for children to reportillminished interest in
significant activities and constriction of affect, these symptoms should be carefully
evaluated with reports from parents, teachers, and other observers. In children, the
sense of a foreshortened future may be evidenced by the belief that life will be too
short to include becoming an adult. There may also be"omen formation"-that is, be-
lief in,an ability to foreseefuture untoward events.Children may also exhibit various
physical symptoms, such as stomachaches and headaches.
Prevalence
Community-based studies reveal a lifetime prevalence for Posttraumatic Stress Dis-

order of approximately 8% of the adult population in the United States. Information
is not currently available with regard to the general population prevalence in other
countries. Studies of at-risk individuals (i.e., groups exposed to specific traumatic in-
cidents) yield variable findings, with the highest rates (ranging between one-third
and more thanhalfof thoseexposed) found amongsurvivors of rape, military combat
and captivity, and ethnically or politically motivated internment and genocide.
Course
Pesttraumatic Stress Disorder can occur at any age, including childhood. Symptoms
usually begin within the first 3 months after the trauma, although there may be a de-
lay of months, or even years, before symptoms appear. Frequently, a person's reac-
tion to a trauma initially meets criteria for Acute Stress Disorder (see p. 469) in the
immediate aftermath of the trauma. The symptoms of the disorder and the relative
predominance of reexperiencing, avoidance, and hyperarousal symptoms may vary
over time. Duration of the symptoms varies, with completerecovery occurring within
3 months in approximately half of cases, with many others having persisting symp-
toms for longer than 12 months after the trauma. In some cases, the course is charac-
terized by a waxing and waning of symptoms. Symptom reactivation may occur in
response to reminders of the original trauma, life stressors, or new traumatic events. 2.
The severity, duration, and proximity of an individual's exposure to the traumatic

event are the most important factors affecting the likplihood of developing this disor-
der. There is some evidence that social supports, family history, childhood experiences,
personality variables, and preedsting mental disorders may influence the develop-
ment of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder. This disorder can develop in individuals with-
out any predisposing conditions, particularly if the stressor is especially extreme.
Familial Pattern
There is evidence of a heritable component to the transmission of Posttraumatic

Stress Disorder. Furthermore, a history of depression in first-degree relatives has
er
309.81 Posttraumatic Stress Disorder 467
been related to an increased vulnerability to developing Postraumatic Stress
TAsorder.
Differentla.11 Diagnosis
In Posttraumatic Stress Disorder, the stressor must be of an extreme (i.e.,life-threat-
ening) nature. In contrast, in Adjustment Disorder, the stressor can be of any sever-
i
ity, The diagnosis of Adjustment Disorder is appropriate both for situations in which
the response to an extreme·stressor does not meet the criteria for Posttraumatic Stress
Disorder (or another specific mental disorder) and for situations in which the symp-
tom pattern of Posttraumatic Stress, Diaorder occurs in response to a stressor that is
not extreme (e.g., spouse leaving, being fired).
Not all psychopathology that occurs in individuals exposed to an extreme stressor
should necessarily be attributed to Posttraumatic Stress Disorder. Symptoms of
avoidance, numbing, and increased arousal that are present before exposure to the
stressor do not meet criteria for the diagnosis of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder and
require consideration of other diagnoses (e.g., a Mood Disorder or another Anxiety
/! i
Disorder). Moreover, if the symptom response pattern to the extreme stressor meets
criteria for another mental disorder (e.g., Brief Psychotic Disorder, Conversion Dis-
order, Major Depressive Disorder), these diagnoses should be given instead of, or in
addition to, Posttraumatic Stress Disorder.
Acute Stress Disorder is distinguished from Posttraumatic Stress Disorder be-
cause the symptom pattern in Acute Stress Disorder must occur within 4 weeks of the
traumatic event and resolve within that 4-week period. If the symptoms persist for
more than 1 month and meet criteria for Posttraumatic Stress Disorder, the diagnosis
is changed from Acute Stress Disorder to Posttraumatic Stress Disorder.
In Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder, there are recurrent intrusive thoughts, but
these are experienced as inappropriate and are not related to an,experienced traumat-
ic event. Flashbacks in Posttraumatic Stress Disorder must be distinguished from
illusions, hallucinations, and otherperceptual disturbances that may occur in.Schizo- P, i'{ff )
phrenia, other Psychotic Disorders, Mood Disorder With Psychotic Features, a de-
lirium, Substance-Induced Disordem, and Psychotic Disorders Due to a General
Medical Condition.
Malingering should be ruled out in those situations in, which financial remunera-
tion, benefit eligibility, and forensic determinations play a role.
21
Diagnostic criteria for

309.81 Posttraumatic Stress Disorder
A. The person has been exposed to a traumatic event in which both of the following
Were present:
(1) the person experienced.·witnessed. or was confronted with an event or events 11·'#r
that involved' actual or. threatened death: or serious injury, or a threat to the
physical integrity of self or otheri
(2) the person's response involved intense fear. belplessness, or honror. Note: In
children, this may be expressed instead by disorganized or agitated behavior
468
Anxiety Disorders
32.:.
Diagnostic criteria for 13
309.81 Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (continued)

The traumatic event is persistently reexperienced in one (or more) of the following
Y
f:
..f
(1) recurrent and intrusive distressing recollections of the event, including images,
thoughts. or perceptions. Note: In young children, repetitiveplay may occur
in which themes or aspects of the tfaurna are expressed:
(2) recurrent distressihg dreams of the event. Note: In children, there may be
frightening dreams without recognizable content.
(3) acting or feeling, as if the traumatic event were recurring (includes a sense of
reliving the experience, illusions, hallucinations, and dissociative flashback epi-
sodes, including those that occur on awakening or When into*icated). Note:
lin young children, trauma-specific reenactment may occur.
(4) intense psychological distress at exposure to iinternal or external cues that sym-
bolize or resemble an aspect of the traumatic event
(5) physiological reactivity on exposure to internal or external cues that symbolize
or resemble an aspect of'the traumatic event
6
:%# f
C
Persistent avoidance:of stimuli associated with the trauma, and numbing of general
responsiveness (not present before the trauma), as,indicated by three (or more) of
the following:
(1) efforts to avoidthoughts, feelings, orconversations associated with the/trauma

(2) efforts to avoid activities places, or people that arouse recollections of the trauma
(3) inability to recall an, important aspect of the trauma
(4) markedly diminished interest or participation in significant activities
(5) feeling of detachment or estrangement from others
(6) restricted range of affect (e.g., unable to have loving feelings)
'41
(7) sense of a foreshortened future (e.g., does not expect to have a career, mar-
riage, children, or a normal life span)
D. Persistent symptoms of increased arousal (not present before the trauma), as indicat-
ed by two (or more), of the following:
f/
(1) difficulty falling or staying asleep
(2) irritability or outbursts of anger
(3) difficulty concentrating
(4) hypervigilance
(5) exaggerated startle response
E. Duration of the disturbance (symptoms in Criteria B. C and' D) is more than 1 month.

F. The disturbance causes clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupa-
tional, or other Important areas of functioning.
Specify if:
Acute: if duration of symptoms is less than 3 months

Chronic if duration of symptoms is 3 months or more
Specify if:
With Delayed Onset: if onset of symptoms is atjleast 6 months after the stressor
Exhibit F
.
*?
1 CERTIFIED COPY
4
)
5 COURTNEY S. ETNYRE, individually,) Case No.:
) 37-2009-0010:1537-
6 Plaintiff. ) CU-OE-CTL
)
7 VS. )
)
corporation, and DOES 1 through )
10 40, inclusive. )
)
11 Defendants. )
)
12
13
14 DEPOSITION OF DEEANN WONG. M.D.
15 VOLUME I, PAGES 1 THROUGH 74
16 San Diego, California
17 May 4, 2011
18
19
20
21 REPORTED BY HEIDI J. JOHNSON, RPR, CSR NO. 12525
22
23 Hutchings Number: 318125
24
25
HUTCHINGS
COU RT REPORTERS
Forbestresults, we recommend Adobe AcrobatorAdobe Reader(free ati http://getadobe.com/reader/).
.
COURTNEY S. EINYRE vs. SANDIP ("MICKEY") MINHAS
1 Q Would you say that most of the time where you
2 have concluded that an individual was trying to lie or
3 malinger has been in a jail, a prison context7
4 A That's probably the highest rate of
5 malingering, particularly because of the type of
6 patient population that you work with. However, there
7 is malingering that happens outside the jail and prison
8 setting.
I9 0 What are the SDecific facts that you try to
10 consider and assess in determining whether or not
11 somebody is lying or malingering? What are the factors
12 vou look for?
13 A The things that I look for is the words that
14 they use to describe their exgerience. Are thev using
15 words and terminology and Dhrases that are consistent
16 with who they are as a person, or are they reporting
17 something out of the DSM-IV? Do they parrot back
18 questions I mean. parrot back answers in a way that
19 it's clear that they have not experienced what I'm
20 asking them?
21 I also look for__Con=igtann¥_within the story.
22 I also look for the nonverbal cues as they're telling
23 their story. Are the nonverbal cues, facial
24 expressions, behaviors consistent with what they're
25 reporting?

800-697-3210
.

Wong, M.D., Deeann on, 05/04/2011
I1 Q Anything elsel'
2 A As they're giving the story, are they
3 reporting in a way that is consistent with other
I 4 patients who have -- who are clearly not reporting what
5 they're reporting for secondary gain7
6 Q Anything else?
7 A How does the patient react when or if I do
8 not give them what they are expecting or wanting?
9 Q Anything else?
10 A Not that I can think of at this time.
11 Q Just to get clarification on a couple of
12 those issues, if somebody seems to be parroting back
13 your words when you are asking them questions, that
14 would be an indication to you that they -- a factor.
15 that might indicate that they were not being truthful?
16 A Correct.
17 0 If an individual is being inconsistent in
18 what thev say. that would be a factor that would
19 indicate to you that thev miaht be untruthful?
20 A Possibly.
21 Q I assume that the nonverbal cues are sort of
22 a subjective assessment that you're doing as opposed to
23 looking for certain objective nonverbal cues; is that
24 right?
25 A I'm looking for objective nonverbal cues.

.
Hutchings Coart Reporters - Global tegal' Services Page 21

800-697-3210
.
1 very unhappy, very sad.
2 Q Okay. What is under Axis III?
3 Hydrocephalus?
4 A Hydrocephalus.
5 Q What is that?
6 A Hydrocephalus means that there is excess
7 fluid on the brain.
8 Q What caused you to conclude that?
9 A This is what she reported to me.
10 Q Oh, that was just --
11 A I was taking her medical history.
12 Q Okay. Did you reach any conclusion in your
13 first meeting with Ms. Etnyre with regard to her
14 veracity?
15 A Can you define "veracity."
16 Q Truthfulness.
17 A So what vou're asking is: Did I determine
18 what was her truthfulness during that initial
19 apnointment?
20 0 Yes.
21 A Yes. I believe she was an accurate reporter.
22 0 And you believe that the information, then,
23 that she provided to you in that initial meeting was
24 accurate7
25 A Correct.

8004697-3210
1 too. But you've been designated as a treating expert,
2 if you will. You're a treating physician.
3 A I'm not the -- I'm the treating physician,
4 not the expert witness.
5 Q I think you've been designated not as the
6 formal expert but --
7 MR. SULLIVAN: Well, let me ask it of
8 Mr. Kendrick: Is Dr. Wong going to be asked to give
9 any type of expert opinion at trial?
10 MR. KONDRICK: She's been designated per
11 the I think as we're required to as the treating
12 physician or health care practitioner.
13 MR. SULLIVAN: SO
14 THE WITNESS: I cannot be an expert witness.
15 BY MR. SULLIVAN:
16 Q Why not7
17 A Because it was -- it's a conflict of ethic --
18 it's a conflict of interest. As a treating phvsician,
19 mv bias is towards the patient with obiectivity.
20 An expert witness, that person needs to be
21 completely obiective to the case and not have a
22 relationshin with the patient such as I have had.
23 0 Because at the end of the day. you consider
24 that one of vour roles is to serve. although with some
25 obiectivity. as an advocate for the patient?
Hutchings Court iReporters - Global Legal Services Page 59

800-697-3210
Wong, M.D., Deeann on 05/04/201'1
1 A Correct.
2 Q Are there any other opinions that you have
3 with regard to Ms. Etnyre, other than the diagnoses
4 that you've previously discussed and what you have said
5 with regard to the personality traits of her sometimes
6 being passive aggressive?
7 A No.
8 Q Are you in your role as a physician generally
9 familiar with the duties and obligations of an expert
10 witness to familiarize themselves with certain
11 information in order to give expert opinion testimony?
12 A No.
13 MR. BELSKY: Lacks foundation.
14 MR. SULLIVAN: I'm sorry?
15 MR. BELSKY: Lacks foundation.
16 You can respond.
17 THE WITNESS: No.
18 BY MR. SULLIVAN:
119 Q Have you done any professional research
20 relating to Ms. Etnyre's case beyond what you would do
121 to provide her with clinical psychiatric care?
22 A "Research" meaning?
23 Q For example -- thanks for seeking
24 clarification on that.
25 For example, an expert witness might go and

800-697-321'0
.
1 CERTIFIED COPY
)
6 Plaintiff, )
)
7 VS. )No. 37-2009-00101537
) CU-OE-CTL
9 Incorporated. a Delaware )
corporation and DOES 1 through 40, )
10 inclusive, )
)
11 Defendanes. )
)
12
13 VOLUME II
14 DEPOSITION OF DEEANN WONG, M.D.. a witness
15 herein, noticed by Paul, Plevin, Sullivan
16 & Connaughton. at 591 Camino de la Reina,
17 Suite 640, San Diego. California, at
18 2:16 p.m .. Friday, June 10, 2011, before
19 Jennifer K. Winters, CSR 8543.
20
22
23
24
25
HUTCHINGS
COU RT REPO!RTERS
800 697-3210 www.hutchings.com
Forbestresults, we recommend'Adobe AcrobatorAdobe Reader(free at http://get. adobe.com/reader/).

1 what Ms. Etnyre was describing to you factually about
2 what occurred with her former boss, Mr. Minhaus7
3 A. That's not the focus of my care with her.
4 Q. So you did not discuss that with her?
5 A. No. 3$14P
6 Q. Did you understand who created the type written
7 portions of the document?
8 A. No, that was not clear to me either.
9 Q. Okay. Did you ever ask Ms. Etnyre who created
10 the type written portions of the document?
11 A. No.
12 Q. Actually, I'm sorry, I forgot one thing, if we
13 could go back to Exhibit 13 for just a moment. On or
14 about March 31, 2008, you had a discussion with
15 Ms. Etnyre's attorney, Mr. Crosby, correct?
16 A. Uh-huh.
17 Q. Yes?
18 A. Yes.
19 0. And he asked vou if vou believed that
20 Ms. Etnvre had been raped7
21 A. Yes.
22 0. And vou told him that as her treating Dhvsician,
23 you were not evaluating her from a forensic point of
24 view so your bias was towards her.
25 A. Correct. 3115P
Hutchings Court Reponters - Global ILegal Services Page 109

800-697-3210
. .
1 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ,ss
3 I, Jennifer K. Winters, CSR 8543, do hereby
4 declare:
9 Procedure;
10
14
16 event of the action.
17
18 I declare-under penalty of perjury under the laws
20 and correct.
21
22 ·WITNESS my hand this 22nd day of

000..444"
23 June , 2011 . 40 COURT * 24.
0.-$
24 .GLA 1
:2
3 f TRANSCRIPT
rn:
E : CERTIFICATION /3 25
.
r, .
Je2ik#*]rK.r45%.rlt-?rESR 8-543
.
25
144
6,*..2.......0.*1-:
-/tts
HUTCHINGS -COURT REPORTERS, LLC - GLOBAL 'fmaEk'SCES
80,0.697.3210
Exhibit G
1
CE*TIFIED COPY
2
)
6 Plaintiff, )
)
7 VS.
No. 37-2009-0010
) 1537-CU-OE-CTL
individually, QUALCOMM Incorporated. )
9
a Delaware corporation and DOES )
1 through 40. inclusive, )
10
)
Defendants. )
11
)
12
13
14
DEPOSITION OF ARLENE E. POLLARD. LCSW, a witness
15
herein, noticed by Paul. Plevin. Sullivan &
16
Connaughton. LLP, at 401 B Street, Tenth Floor,
17
San Diego, California, at 10:06 a.m., on Friday,
18
May 6, 2011. before Jeannette M. Kinikin,
19 CSR 11272.
20
21
Hutchings Number 310934
22
23
24
25
HUTCHINGS
COURT REPORTERS
Forbestresults, we recommend Adobe AcrobatorAdobe Reader(free at: http:#get.adobe.com/reader/),
1
be, or if a referral would be more appropriate. 10:31
2
Q. Okay. And then, fram that point, once you
3 establish that sort of baseline of what the issues are,

,1
4
what do you do -- what is your goal in terms of
5
addressing that? Are you trying to help them actually 10:.31
6
resolve those issues in their life or are you trying to
7
help them resolve the emotional issues internally, learn
8 coping skills, that kind of thing?
9
A. Almost always the latter because I may not have
10 any influence or control or ability to change the 10:32
11 circumstantial parts of it.
12
0. Right. Riaht. Okay. And I'm assuming there's
13
not really a fact-finding component to your treatment7
14
I'll ask you that a better way.
15
If someone comes into your office and says. my 10:32
16 husband's abusive to me, you don't trv to establish
17
whether the person coming in to you is telling you the
18 truth about that?
19 A. Correct.
20 0. You iust take that information at its face 10:32
21
value and try to help the person deal with it; is that
22 correct7
23 A. I do. But I am always mindful that what I am

24 hearing is that person's perspective. So I'm listening
25 also for inconsistencies that I would want to be aware 10}:33
Hutchimgs Court Reporters - Global Legal Services Page 24

800-697-3210
..
COURTNEY S. ETNYRE vs, SANDIP ("MICKEY") MINHAS

1 of.
10:33
2
Q. Okay. And if you found inconsistencies, and
we'll just take this example of the wife who comes in

4
and says my husband's abusive, do you probe? Do you try
5
to find out, well, are you participating in that, are 10:33
6 you are you abusive too, or do you just wait to see

7
if inconsistencies show up in the explanations that
8 she's giving you7
1
A. I would question a client as part of, yau know,
1 10 complete information gathering. I'll leave it there. 10.:33
11
Q. If you determine that a client was
12
misrepresenting the facts of their circumstances, would
13
you confront them with that conclusion?
14 A. Yes. Yes, I would.
15
Q. Okay. Would you do any investigation to find 10:34
16 out if they were telling you the truth?
17 A. Not necessarily, no.
18 Q. Okay. When you say, "not necessarily," would
19
there be circumstances where you would -- for example,
20
you have someone who comes in and says, I was -- I was 10:34
21
attacked on the street and the person was arrestedand
22
put in jail and, for various reasons, you don' t believe
23
they're telling the truth, would you ever go out and do
24
a fact finding to see if there was a criminal record or
25 anything like that7 10:34

800-697-321'0
0 0
COURTNEY S. IETNYRE vs. SANDIP ("MICKEY") MINHAS
1
whether or not that is what's going on in terms of a 12:07
2
reinterpretation of the events if someone's story
3
changes constantly over exactly how those events
4 occurred7
'1 5
A. Could you rephrase that? 12:07
6
Q. Yeah. That wasn't a very good one either.
7
If in a circumstance where you have someone who
8
and we'll just use the example of consensually had sex.
9 A. Yes.
10 O. And, after the fact. for whatever reasons. 12:08
11
really rearets the decision and starts rewriting history
12 in their own mind as to what haDDened. is it more likely
13
that thev're rewritina history if they're inconsistent
14
in how they describe those events over time. and the
15 events change over time7 12:08
16
A. I would think that would be likely.
17 0. That that would --
18 A. Yes.
19 0. -- indicate thev've rewritten the facts7
20
A. Possiblv. [ 12:08
21 0. Okay.
22 A. I would have more concern about it if the facts

23 changed over time.
24
Q. Okay. And, again, just going back to generally
25
looking at your notes, here are the issues that I 12:08

800-697-3210
COURTNEY S.,ETNYRE vs. SANDIP ("MICKEY") MINHAS
'1 rape7 13:41
2 A. Yes.
3
0. Okay. And you. I'm assuming. never really
4
exDlored that with Ms. Etnvre because you thought she
5 was telling you a true version of the facts? 13:41
6 A. That's right.
7
Q. Okay. Would you describe Ms. Etnyre as
somebody who gets very angry with people over fairly

9 small slights?
10 A. Sometimes. I3:42
11 Q. Okay. Can you give me any examples?
12
A. Well, I'm trying to think of a specific
13
example. I'm thinking back on numerous conversations
14
about conflicts at work or with co-workers where, if one
15
could interpret something very personally or not, it 13::42
16
would more likely feel very personal. And I can't think
17 of a specific example right now.
18
Q. Okay. And one that I saw that may be in that
19
category was, I know -- I think it was in your notes,
20
that Dr. Wong had gone into her reception room and not 13:42
21 seen Ms. Etnyre?
22
A. That was not in my notes.
23 Q. That was not in your notes. Okay. That was
24 probably Dr. Wong's.
25 MS. LISTUG KLICK: That was Dr. Matson. 13:43

800-697-3210
i,Pollard, LCSW, Arlene on 05/06/2011
1 Q. Have you ever done forensic expert work? 14127
2 A. No.
Q. Sorry. I just wanted to make sure there wasn't
4 going to be some sound that came out of that.
5 So, at this time, you have no expectation or t4:27
6 intention of testifying in this matter?
7 A. No.
8 0. Okav. When you see a patient, do vou assess
9 their credibilitv or voracity of what they're telling
10 you to heln with vour treatment? 14:27
11 A. Yes. Although. sometimes that is subjective.
12 0. What are some of the thinas that you do. tools
13
that you use or look for in order to assess credibility
14 of a client7
15 A. Consistency of information. the inconsistency 14:28
16 of information. is the affect consistent with the verbal
17 presentation or description, anv outside information
18 that I may be getting. in this case. from Dr. Wona. from
19 Paul Kendrick that would be contradictory from what I'm
20 hearina from her. 14:28
21 0. And do you recall any instances where something
22 that Ms. Etnyre said or did was contradicted by a
23 discussion that vou had with an outside person like
24 Dr. Wong or Mr. Kondrick?
25 A. No. 14:29

800-697-3210
D t
i P.
F 196.
3 I, Jennifer K. Winters, CSR 8'543, do hereby
1 ).
4 declare:
4. 5
sal

%l
h 8 to Section 20'93(b·) and 2094 of the Code: of Civil
9 Procedure;
I.
10
14
15 2 further declare that I have no interest in the
17
18 I declare under perralty of perjury under the laws

P .
20 and correct.
f 21
1lth
22, WITNESS ,my hand this day of 1
%,t%§,8,5,1„044
23
April 2011 40 rOURTP "4
..0.
fs/
iii i
i i C=*11 j'3,3
24
K Qr .* .4-*i,,) I \K-JV-_-
25 0-
:
'h -2
d
Jennif**1 K. «nters, CSR 8543 t. ...
9 99
2.- 1 *F*'5/
.
t''
HUTCHINGS COURT REPORTERS, LLC - GLOBAL LEGAL SERVreEB ! 1

800.697.3210
t
I1 112
: 11
i!·l
Exhibit H
0
.
1 CERTIFIED COPY
)
6 Plaintiff. )
)
7 VS. )No. 37-2009-00101537
) CU-OE-CTL

10 inclusive. )
)
11 Defendant. )
)
12
13
14 DEPOSITION OF JUDITH MATSON, Ph.D.. a
15 witness herein. noticed by Paul. Plevin, Sullivan
16 & Connaughton. at 401 B Street, Tenth Floor,
17 San Diego, California, at 1:40 p.m., Friday,
18 March 25. 2011. before Jennifer K. Winters.
19 CSR 8543.
20
22
23
24
25
HUTCHINGS
COU RT REPORTERS
Forbestresults, we recommend Adobe AcrobatorAdobe Reader(free at http://get.adobe:com/readerO.
4
.
Matson, Ph.D., Judith on 03/25/2011
1 from being a Multiple Personality Disorder person.
2 Q. Did she ask you if she was -- did she ever ask
3 you if she was delusional?
4 A. I think she may have wondered at some point.
5 Q. Do you recall how you responded?
6 A. She did not -- I don't think she was
7 delusional.
8 0. Did you ever come to any conclusion about 3:3OP
9 Ms. Etnyre's credibility7
10 A. Credibilitv about what7
11 0. Whether or not you found what shestated to you
12 to be credible.
13 A. In aeneral. yes.
14 Q. Did you come to any conclusions about
15 Ms. Etnyre's perception of reality?
16 A. I tend to be a little more positive than she
17 was. She tended to see it as a little more threatening.
18 Q. So she might see something that wasn't intended
19 to be as negative in a negative light based on her
20 perception; is that correct?
21 A. She might.
22 Q. Did Ms. Etnyre discuss with you any of her
23 previous employment before ,Qualcomm?
24 A. Not in terms of specifics. I knew she had had
25 several other paralegal positions.

800-697-3210
TI
1,1
7*2
gi
1 · STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ss
C-r=
fat 3 I, Jennifer K. Winters, CSR 8543, do hereby

d:. 4 declare:
..: 14'
7 the foregoing deposition wa's by me duly sworn pursuant

/1
9 Procedure; 11
{ffi,
[H I
'41
11 That ,said deposition was taken down by me in lili
1...4 12 shorthand at the time and place therein named and lili
SM-
13 thereafter reduced to text under my direction. uI
14
11, 1.
t:11
1:6 event of the action. 11
17
'11 , 11
18 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws '11 1 1!

4:r
20 and correct.
111 ,
21
; r.'
11th 111 t
d E
22 WITNESS my hand this
April 2011
day of
/10
t.,9,50,0..0.
u RT .'
111!:1
' jpl 23 , .0 5 ....0006.:.4
IP,
fs/ :.04%
I Se
\AE
4/ 6.__ i l d CERTIFICATION , -5
Itil
=0. TRANSCRIPT i-':

24
-CAL'*©.*1
1,
25
1 + Stf ,&/
1 M 1% 99 :
-2 14
%
J ...
Jennif K.- Wnters„ CSR 8543 , %,.... 6<. SEAL, 14/

1 40» HUTCHINGS COURT REPORTERS, LLC - GLOBAL LEGAL SERVPCEN
800.6'97.3210
It
4 '*«U
- '.· t.
& iw:
k ies lili, '

''il 7
2 'PAUL, PLEVIN, SULLIVAN & CONNAUGHTON LLP
401 B Street, Tenth Floor j
FILED
Telephone: 619-237-5200 Cle,k of the Superlor Court
4 Facsimile: 619-615-0700
JUN 2 9 2011
By: Anthony Shirley, Depu¥
6
7
21 IN GQ'11 28 305
8
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIF6RNiA
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

9 ,
10 COURTNEY S. ETNYRE, individually, CASE NO. 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL
11 Plaintiff, 1 DEFENDANT QUALCOMM

INCORPORATED'S OPPOSITION TO
12 V. PLAINTIFF'S MOTION IN LIMINE TO
PRECLUDE DEFENDANTS PRESENTING
13 SANDIP ("MICKEY") MINHAS, EVIDENCE CONCERNING PLAINTIFF'S
individually, QUALCOMM Incorperated, a PRIOR EMPLOYMENT, ENCLUDING HER
14 Delaware corporation and DOES 1 through PERFORMANCE, COMPLAINTS OR
40, inclusive, REASONS FOR LEAVING
15
Defendants. 12 of 21
16
17 Date: July 1, 2011

Time: 8:45 a.m.
18 Dept: 70
Judge: Honorable Randa Trapp
19 Complaint Filed: November 2,2009
Trial Date: July 1, 2011
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PAUL, PLEVIN
SULLIVAN & ' OPPo to MIL to Preclude Defs. Presenting Evidence
CONNAUGHTON uP Concerning Plaintiffs Prior Employment ORIGINAL
1 I.
2 INTRODUCTION
3 In her' second motion in limine, plaintiff Courtney Etnyre ("Etnyre") seeks to exclude
4 , evidence regarding her prior employment (including her performance, complaints or reasons for
5 leaving). As grounds for her motion, she asserts that such information is irrelevant and
6 prejudicial, but fails to provide any showing whatsoever as to why. Citing to non-controHing
7 Indiana law and inapplicable California cases addressing the standard for the discovery of
8 personnel' records - which have already been produced - Etnyre also claims that she has a right to
9 privacy in her prior work history. Etnyre's motion fails for several' reasons:
10 • Evidence of her prior work history is probative and directly relevant to the issue of
11 Etnyre's pattern and practice of vindictive and untruthful beha¥ior when an
12 employer criticizes her performance;
13 • The evidence is directly relevant to challenging Etnyre's treating providers'
14 opinions that Etnyre has difficulty speaking up, and is necessary to Qualcomm's
15 psychiatric expert's opinion to show Etnyre's assertive behavior; and
16 • Not only is Etnyre's reliance on Indiana law misplaced in this Caiifornia case, but
I7 she has waived her right to privacy under California law by allowing discovery and
18 the production of documents on this admittedly relevant subject.
19 Because this evidence is probative, and is not unduly prejudicial, Etnyre's motion must be
20 denied.
21 II.
22 BACKGROUND
23 Personnel records from Etnyre's employers prior to Qualcomm were produced in
24 discoveryto Qualcomm after a "first look" by Etnyre that allowed her to object to certain records
25 being produced. She turned over the records, however, without objection.
26 To summarize this evidence, it demonstrates that Etnyre had conflicts with her supervisors
27 arising out of criticism of her job performance, or conflicts with coworkers, at those prior jobs;
28 : that she always responded in a strong, vindictive and untruthful manner; and that she was then
PAUL, PLEVIN, 1
SULLIVAN & Oppo to MIL to Preclude Defs. Presenting Evidence
CONNAUGHTON up Concerning Plaintiffs Prior Employment
..
1 0 terminated or resigned from employment with these prior employers and was untruthful about the
2 circumstances of her departures. These previous employers include the law firms of Casey Gerry,
3 land Howrey & Simon, and the pharmaceutical company, Pfizer.
4 1 Etnyre's employment records from Casey Gerry clearly evidence that she was
5 1 in*oluntarity terminated from employment, indeed, the records specifically note that she did"not
6 respond well to being supervised." (Klick Decl. 112, Exh. A [CASEY 113,106,57,56,531.) In
7 response to her involuntary termination, Etnyre retained an attorney and sent a letter to Casey
8 Gerry threatening a lawsuit for retaliation and wrongful termination. (Klick Decl. 112, Exh. A
9 [CASEY 251.) Notably, Etnyre was untruthful in her deposition and in her application to
10 Qualcomm about the reason that she left Casey Gerry. (Klick Decl 117; Exh. F [Etnyre Depo.
11 970:20-971:51.)
12 During Etnyre's employment with the Howrey & Simon law firm, she received a negative
13 performance review fromher female supervisor. (Klick Decl. 11 3, Exh. B [HOWREY 58-60].)
14 Her immediate respense was to send an email to management accusing her supervisor of
15 harassment, retaliation and a"blatantly hostile and discriminating working environment." (Klick
16 Decl. 113, Exh. B [HOWREY 631.) During her independent medicalexamination ("IME")
17 conducted by Qualcomm's psychiatric expert, Dr. Mark Kalish, Etnyre admits she did not like her
18 supervisor at Howrey & Simon, but denies any performance problems. (Klick Decl. 7 5, Exh. D
19 [IME transcript, 75:14-76::191.)
20 During her IME, Etnyre states that her employment at Pfizer was terminated for altering 1
21 another employee's resume with derogatory sexual and profane language, but Etnyre alleges it
22 was because she was a witness to a sexual harassment claim and was upset at the person she ,
23 believed brought the claim, (Ilick Decl. lili 4-5, Exhs. C IPFIZER 15-18]; D [IME transcript,
24 73:6- 75:131.) Significantly, Etnyre admits she altered the employee's resume because Etnyre did
25 not like this employee and was "angry" with her and was"getting back at her" for allegedly
26 causing the termination of another employee. Ud) When she applied for her position at
1
27 1 Qualcomm, her next employer, she lied about her reasons for leaving Pfizer. (Decl. Klick 1,7;
28 Exh. G [QETNY 76-781.)

PAWL. PLEVIN. i 2
Oppo to MIL to Preclude Defs. Presenting Evidence
SULLIVAN &
CONNAUGHTON Lip Concerning Plaintiffs Prior Employment
1 III.
2 EVIDENCE REGARDING ETNYRE'S PRIOR EMPLOYMENT HISTORY IS
3 DIRECTLY RELEVANT TO HER PATTERN AND PRACTICE OF VINDICTIVE
4 BEHAVIOR INRESPONSE TO EMPLOYER CRITICISM
5 Evidence is relevant if it has "any tendency in reason to prove or disprove any disputed
6 fact that is of consequence to the determination ofthe action." (Evid. Code § 210; OWearn v.
7 Hillcrest Gym andFitness Center, Inc. (2004) 115 Cal.App.4th.491, 501.) Evidence of a person's
8 habitor custom is admissible to prove conduct on a specified occasion in conformity with that
9 habit or custom. (Evid. Code § 1105; Marshall v. Brown (1983) 141 Cal. App.3d 408, 416.)
10 Here, evidence of Etnyre's prior work history with three 6mplbyers prior to Qualcomm, as
,11 described above, is probative and directly relevant to the issue of her habit of vindictive and
i
12 untruthful behavior when an employer criticizes her work performance. Indeed, here, Etnyre did
13 not complain about Minhas until after she was unsatisfied with a performance review (a 4.5 rating
14 out of 5) and only after it was determined that her review was fair. Notably, at that time, although
15 she used the words "sexual harassment" she did not admit to having sex with Minhas until after
16 Minhas admitted to the conduct and she affirmed that his version was accurate.
17 Again, in the next review cycle, she received a review that she felt was not good enough,
18 complained about the review, and again, when it was not changed to her liking, she filed the
19 workers' compensation claim that predicated her current story of a brutal rape. Qualcomm must
20 be allowed to admit evidence that this was, indeed, her mode of operation - rather than a once,
21 twice, three times occurrence. Indeed, it occurred on five occasions (including the three prior
22 employers). Therefore, the evidence should be admitted.
23 IV.
24 EVI<DENCE REGARDING ETNYRE'S WORK HISTORY IS NECESSARY TO EXPERT
25 OPINION REGARDING ETNYRE'S PSYCHIATRIC CONDITION
26 Etnyre's treaters have opined that Etnyre has difficulty voicing her complaints and tries to
27 i1 offer explanations as to why Etnyre was not truthful, forthcoming, 0r consistent in her reports of
28 Ithe alleged rape. (Klick Decl 11 6, Exh. E [Wong Depo. 130:2-6, 131 :15-22, 132:1-13, 134:1047,
PAUL, PLEVIN,
SULLIVAN & Oppo to MIL to Preclude Defs, P.resenting Evidence 3
CONNAUGHTON LLP Concerning Plaintiff's Prior Employment
.
1 135:23-136:11, 138:15-139:16], Exh. H [Fidaleo Depo. 31:9-15,33:11-17], Exh. I[Pollard Depo,
2 97:6-20].)Dr. Wong rendered her opinion without having reviewed Etnyre's prior work history.
3 (Klick Decl. 116, Exh. E [Wong Depo. 55:12-58:171.) Qualcomm's psychiatric expert, Dr. Mark
4 Kalish, on the other hand, has reviewed Etnyre's prior work history and records, as described
5 above, and based on this evidence, will testify that her past work history reveals that Etnyre is
6 assertive and vindictive when confronted with negative situations at work. Moreover, he will
7 testify that this history is important in assessing Etnyre's current symptoms, her diagnosis, and her
8 claims ofcausation. He will rebut the justifications provided by Etnyre's providers because her
9 history of this behavior is objectively counter-indicative of the opinions of her providers.
10 Accordingly, evidence of Etnyre's prior work history is necessary to Qualcomm's
11 psychiatric expert's opinion regarding Etnyre's behavior.
12 V.
13 EVIDENCE REGARDING ETNYRE'S WORK HISTORY IS HIGHLY PROBATIVE
14 AND DOES NOT CREATE ANY RISK OF UNDUE PREJUDICE
15 Without any explanation whatsoever, Etnyre asserts that evidence ofher prior work
16 history should be excluded as unduly prejudicial pursuant to Evidence Code sectien 352. Her
17 motion should be denied for failure to provide any reason why such information is unduly
18 prejudicial.
19 In any event, to establish "undue prejudice," it is not enough to allege that evidence is
20 I damaging. Most evidence offered againsta party is"prejudicial," but that is no basis to exclude it
21 , under Evidence Code section 352. (People v. Coddington (2000) 23 Cal.4th 529,588 (overruled
22 on other grounds in Price v. Superior Court (2001) 25 Cal.4th 1046, 1069) ["prejudicial" is not
23 synonymous with"damaging'l; Rufo v. Simpson (2001) 86 Cal.App.4th 573,597 ["prejudicial" in
24 § 352 "does not mean 'damaging' to a party's case, it means evoking an emotional response that
25 has very little to do with the issue on which evidence is offered"],)
26 For the reasons set forth herein, Etnyre's prior work history is probative ofthe issue of
27 Etnyre's pattern and practice of vindictive and untruthful behavior when an employer criticizes
28 her performance, and Dr. Kalish's opinion regarding same.

PAUL, PLEVIN, 4
SULLIVAN & Oppo to MIL to Preclude Befs. Presenting Evidence
CONN*UGHTON LLP Concerning Plaintiffs Prior Employment
I, 4
2 ETNYRE HAS WAIVED ANY RIGHT TO PRIVACY IN HER PREVIOUS WORK
3 HISTORY
4 Etnyre' s reliance on Indiana law and California discovery cases to assert that she has a
5 right to privacy in her prior work history is misplaced. Indiana state law on rights to privacy is
6 not controlling in this California case. Additionally, plaintiffhas waived her right to privacy by
7 providing, or allowing the production 0f, information regarding her prior employment in
8 discovery. (See Evidence Code § 912; Britt v. Superior Court (1978) 20 Cal'.3d 844,858.)
9 Etnyre did not object to the production of her prior employers' production of her personnel
10 records in this case after she was providedan opportunity to review them first, nor to her
11 discussion'of same with Dr. Kalish during her independent mental examination.1 In.any event,
12 any potential right to privacy in this information is outweighed by the direct relevance of this
13 information to the issue of Etnyre's pattern and practice ofvindictive anduntruthful behavior
14 when an employer criticizes her performance, and Dr. Kalish's opinion regarding same, as set
15 forth above. (See Brin, supra, 20 Cal.3d at 859.)
16 VII.
17 CONCLUSION
18 For these reasons, Qualcomm respectfully requests that the Court deny Etnyre's motion in
19 limine to exclude evidence pertaining to her prior employment history.
20 Dated: June 29, 2011 PA , EV , S IVAN & CONNAUGHTON LLP
21
22 I B
C C. SUUWAN
23 LISTUG KLICK
24 Qualcomm Incorporated 11
25
26
1 The Court is respectfully requested to take judicial notice ofEtnyre'sopposition to<Qualcomm's motion
to compel her independent mental examination which contained numerous objections andconditions, but
27
none of which addressed her former employment history.
28
PAUL, PLEVIN,
SULLIVAN &
Oppo to MIL to Preclude Defs. Presenting Evidence 5
CONNAUGHTONLIP Concerning Plaintiffs Prior Employment
.
(7 1 1
5€,1,4 ESrk,6 L 4-5
A,6 (ejurniA t,; Couiel
MELISSA LISTUG KLICK (SBN 228470) A'.
3 401 B Street, Tenth Fioor
San Diego, California 92101-4232 FiLEn
Clerk of the Superlor Court
4 Telephone: 619-237-5200
Facsimile: 619-615-0700
JUN 29 2011
5 JUN 29 '11 00 7:72
Attorneys for Defendant By: Antkny ill,Mdkbepull
8
9
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO'
10
11
Plaintiff, DECLARATION OFMELISSA LISTUG
SANDIP ("MICKEY") MINHAS, IN LIMINE TO PRECLUDE DEFENDANTS
14 individually, QUALCOMM Incorporated, a PRESENTING EVIDENCE CONCERNING

Delaware corporation and DOES 1 through PLAINTIFF'S PRIOR EMPLOYMENT,
15 40, inclusive, INCLUDING HER PERFORMANCE,
COMPLAINTS OR REASONS FOR
16 Defendants. LEAVING
17 [2 of 21
18
Date: July 1, 2011
19 Time: 8:45 a.in.
Dept: 70

22
24 1. I am an associate in the law firm of Paul, Plevin, Sullivan & Connaughton LLP,
25 attorneys of record for Defendant Qualcomm Incorporated ("Qualcomm") in the above-entitled
26 i matter, and am licensed to practice before this Court. I have personal' knowledge of the following
27 facts and, if called as a witness, could and would testify competently thereto.
28 111
PnTE.ployment ORIGINAL
PAUL, PLEVIN, r
SULLIVAN& Decl. of Melissa Listug Klick ISO ofOppo to MIL re
CONNAUGHTON up
f
. .
1 2. Attached hereto as Exhibit A are true and correct copies of certain relevant
2 personnel records of plaintiff Courtney Etnyre received by Qualcomm from the law firm of Casey,
3 Gerry in response to Qualcomm's subpoena of these records in this case.
4 3. Attached hereto as Exhibit B are true and correct copies of certain relevant
5 personnel records ofplaintiff received by Qualcomm fromthe law firm ofHowrey & Simon in
6 response to Qualcomm's subpoena of these records in this case.
7 4. Attached hereto as Exhibit C are true and correct copies of certain relevant
8 personnel records ofplaintiff received by Qualcomm from Pfizer, Inc. in response to Qualcomm's
9 subpoena of these records in this case.
10 5. Attached hereto as Exhibit D are true and correct copies of relevant portions of
11 the transcript ofthe April 20, 2011 independent medical exam of plaintiff conducted by Dr. Mark
12 Kalish.
13 6. Attached hereto as Exhibit E are true and correct copies of relevant portions of
14 the deposition testimony of DeeAnn Wong taken on May 4, 2011 and June 10, 2011 by
15 Qualcomm'scounsel.
16 7. Attached hereto as Exhibit F are true and correct copies ofrelevant portions of
17 the deposition testimony of Courtney Etnyre taken on July 20, 2010 by my office.
18 8. Attached hereto as Exhibit G is atrue and correct copy of Etnyre's application for
19 employment with Qualcomm.
20 9. Attached hereto as Exhibit H are true and correct copies of relevant portions of
21 the deposition testimony of Raymond Fidalee, M.D. taken on May 24, 2011 by my office.
22 10. Attached hereto as Exhibit I are true and correct copies of relevant portions of
23 ithe deposition testimeny of Arlene Pollard taken on May 6, 2011 bymy office.
24 I declare under penalty of pedury under the laws ofthe State of California that the
26 Executed on June 29, 2011, at San Diego, alifo ia. *
27
-
28 eliss kid Klick

PAUL, PLEVIN,
SULLIVAN & Decl. of Melissa Listug Klick ISO ofOppo to MIL re
CONNAUGHTON LLP Prior Employment
EXHIBIT'D
9
1 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
3 Case No. 37-2009-0'010537-CU-OE-CTL
4 C,omplaint Filed: November 4, 2009
6 -X
7 COURTNEY S . ETNYRE,
8 Plaintiff,
10 against
11
12 SANDIP ( "MICKY" ) MINHAS, INDIVIDUALLY,
13 QUALCOMM INCORPORATED, A DELAWARE CORPORATION,
14 AND DOES 1-40 INCLUSIVE,
15 Defendant.
16 ---------------------X
17 County of San Diego -
18 Central Division
19 220 West Broadway
20 San Diego, C.alifornia
21
22 April 20, 2011
23
24
25
Page 1
Veritext Nationall Deposition & Litigatien Services

866 299-5127
..
Courtney S, Etnyre Medical Examination by Dr. Kalish
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. Meaning you guys are sexual?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Okay. And that's going okay?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q+ All right.
7 Let's talk about your employment
8 immediatelyntior to OUALCOMM. Where flid yoU
9 work?
10 Pfizer.
11 Qi Okay. And you worked as a paralecial
12 there?
13 A-L Yes.
14 Okay. And when .did you work there?
15 A. From 2000 or 2001. I'm not Sure.
16 But I think it wa.s 2000 to 2003.
17 0. And what were the terms under which
18 you left that employment?
19 A. They dismi·ssed me.
20 0. And why did they dismiss you?
21 8-4 Because I changed this other woman's
22 resume. There was a whole sexual harassment
23 thing before th.at in which I was a witness
24 for. Not for the comnany.
25 0. Were you claiming that you were
Page 73
Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services

866 299-5127
..
Courtney S. Etnyre Medical Examihation by Dr. Kalish
1 sexually harassed there?
2 No.
3 0. Okay.
4 A_. There was an investigation.
5 Okay.
6 A. And they terminated the nerson that
7 was accused of being a harasser.
8 0. So. you were dismissed because you
9 altered another employee's resume?
10 A-+ I believe that's why.
11 0. Okay. And why would you alter
12 somebody else's resume?
13 A-w It was iust a stupid thing and.I
14 regretted I did it but --
15 Well. njo_ Ilm sure that ycu do
16 regret it and I probably would agree that it
17 was a stupid thing to do but why?
18 She was the woman that had the
19 alleclation against another woman.
20 Q.4 So. why would that cau,se you to
21 alter her -- I'm not following. Help me
22 understand.
23 Ultimately. she caused the firing
24 of -- of her boss.
25 Q_*. And 2-Q+ Y.Q.11 9.Qt angry?
Page 74
Vebtext National Deposition & Litigation Services

866 299-5:127
.
..
Courtney S. Etnyre Medical Examination by Dr. Kafish
1 Yes.
2 Q_.- And this waa yma way cf getting back
3 al her?
4 Yes.
5 24 Okay. An,d I think I saw the resume
6 and it's. fairly loaded with sexual content;
7 your alterations. Would that be fair?
8 I guess so.
9 0. That's fair?
10 Yeah. thats fair.
11 0. I mean you Use.d the C word and all
12 of that in there?
13 Yes.
14 Okay. All right.
15 Where did you work right before Pfizer?
16 Howrey.
17 CL- Can you spell that?
18 H-0-W-R-E-Y.
19 That's a law firm?
20 8_._ Yes.
21 0. And when did you work there?
22 I think iust the year 2000.
23 0- Okay. And yeu were a paraleqal
24 there?
25 Yes.
Page 75

866 299-5127
,
..
Courtney S. Etnyre Medical Examination by Dr. Kalish
1 and what were the terms of your
2 leaving that position?
3 8_. Z left to go ,b- Pfizer.
4 QU- Left on good terms?
5 Well. I didn't like my employer.
6 What didn't you like about your
7 employer?
8 A. I mean I liked Howrey; the woman
9 that I reported to I didnit care for.
10 Okay. What did'n't you care about
11 her?
12 A. She yelled and screamed and chased
13 me down the hall.
14 All right. Were there any
15 performance issues there?
16 NO.
17 0. That you iust said I found a better
18 job. I'm leaving. thanks much?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q:. Okay. Where did you work before
21 Howrey?
22 A. Lyon & Lyon.
23 Q. L-Y-0-N?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. And when did you work there?
Page 76

866299-5127
EXHIBIT E
.I
1
CERTIFIED COPY
)
5
COURTNEYS. ETNYRE. individually,) Case No.:
) 37-2,009-00101537-
6 Plaintiff. ) CU-OE-CTL
)
7 VS. )
)
corporation, and DOES 1 through )
10 40, inclusive, )
)
11 Defendants. )
)
12
13
14 DEPOSITION OF DEEANN WONG, M.D.
115 VOLUME I. PAGES 1 THROUGH 74
16
San Diego. California
17 May 4, 2011
18
19
20
21 REPORTED BY HEIDI J. JOHNSON. RPR, CSR NO. 12525
22
23
Hutchings Number: 318125
24
25
HUTCHINGS
COURT REPORTERS
Forbestresults, we recommendAdobe Acrobator.Adobe Reader (free at: http:#get. adobe. corn/reader/),
..
1 to yOU, her employment at Qualconmt, correct?
2 A
That was my source of information.
3 Q Right.
4 A Yes.
Q Your source of information was Ms. Etnyre and
6 then --
7 A Right.
8
Q -- those ether sources.
9
But much of what she described to you had to
10
do with her employment at Qualcomm, correct7
11 A Correct.
12
0 Okay. Did you ever have any discussions with
13
her about her employment with anv prior employers?
14 A No.
15
0 Did you ever have any discussions with her
16 about anv relationshigs that she had had. sexual
17
relationships. prior to aoina to Oualcomm?
18
MR. KONDRICK: Objection. Inappropriate
19 question. Invades Drivacy.
20 BY MR. SULLIVAN:
21 0 You can ao ahead.
22 MR. BELSKY: You can respond.
23
THE WITNESS: Okay. The only relationshiD
24
that comes to mind that occurred prior to Qualcomm was
25 the relationship with her daughter's father.

800-697-3210
..
1 BY MR. SULLIVAN:
2 0 Okay. You did not discuss any other
3 relationshiDs; is that correct?
4 A Not that I recall. 1
11 5 0 Did you consider her prior work history and

6 prior experiences in the workplace to be relevant
7 information for vou to evaluate in terms of assessing
8 the current situation that you were discussing with

9 her?
10 A You mean assessina her situation at Oualcomm
11
or assessing her medically for the depression and PTSD?
12 0 Both.
13 A
I did not feel that either were particularlv
14
relevant to the PTSD or the maior depression. which is
15 the main focus of my treatment with her.
16 Q Okay. Your focus was on treating her maior
17
depression and PTSD. not determining what events did or
18 did not haDDen at Oualcomm?
19 A Correct.
20 0 Okav. And you didn't believe that her prior
21 emplovment historv was relevant to vour determination
22 as to what she was presently experiencina with reaard
23
to the maior depressive disorder or the post-traumatic
24 stress svndrome. correct?
25 A Correct.
Hutchings Cowrt Reporters - Global Legal, Services Page 56

800-697-3210
0 0
1 0 And am I also understanding you that because
2
you weren't making an assessment of what did or did not
3
happen to her durina her employment at Oualcomm. you
4
did not feel it was necessary to gain any information
5
about her Drior employment history?
6 A Correct.
7 0 Is there a reason why anv information about
8
her prior emplovment history would not be relevant in
9
terms of vour assessment of her maior depressive
t 10 disorder and/or post-traumatic stress syndrome?
11
A Can vou repeat the question again?
12
0 Sure. Mv understanding was vou never made
13
any inquiry about her Drior employment history,
14 correct?
15 A Correct.
16
0 And why wasn't that relevant to what you were
17
assessina with regard to her psvchiatric condition?
18
A Because when you're assessing for maior
19
depression, what you're Drimarily going on is svmptoms,
20
the current state. as well as svmptoms in the previous
21 state.
22
Her current stressors were she was having
23 trouble with her current -- her current employer at
24
Oualcomm. And to diagnose maior depression as well as
25
PTSD. vou do not have to have a Drevious work history
Hutchimgs Court Reporters - Global Legal Services Page 57

800-697-3210
..
Wong, M.D., Deeann, on 05/04/2011
1 to determine what the correct diaanosis is.
2 0 Can it be helpful?
3
A Possibly. but it's secondary to really what
!4 the patient is reporting and what I am observing as I'm
interactina with the patient.
6
0 Would it be fair to sav that the prior work
7 history could be more or less relevant deDendina UDOn
8 what it was? In other words. if it contained certain

11
9 events. it miaht not be reallv relevant at all; if it
10 contained other events. it might be relevant?
11
A For the purposes of what I was treating
12 Ms. Etnyre for, it was probablv less relevant.
13 0 Okav. But you didn't know what those events
14 were to ever make that determination of whether it was
15 or was not relevant. correct?
16 A No. because that's not essential to getting
17 an adeauate historv of present illness.
18 Q What other opinions did you have about
19 Ms. Etnyre, other than the fact that she was
20 experiencing major depressive disorder and
21 post-traumatic stress syndrome?
22 MR. BELSKY: It's vague as to time.
2;3 BY MR. SULLIVAN:
24 Q Here's what I'm asking -- and if counsel
25 wants to kind of direct us in some way, that's fine
Hutchings Court Reporters -:Global Legal Services Page 58

800-697-3210
:SS.
4 I, HEIDI J. JOHNSON, a Certified Shorthand Reporter
6 Professional Reporter, do hereby certify: That the
7 witness in the foregoing deposition was first duly sworn
8 by me to testify to tell the truth„ the who,le truth, and
10. deposition was taken before me at the time and place
11 herein named; that the said deposition was reported by me
12 in shorthand and transcribed through computer-aided
13- transcription, under my direction; and that the foregoing
17 disinterested person and am in no way interested in the
20 respective counsel.
21 In witness whereof,,I have hereunto set my
22 hand Ablf"¥6,4 day of May , 2011.

/460\TI/4'4:>
.... 0 %
23 : &. -,
2 W :
2 *:
...+5%
. en +
24
5 zE TRANSCRIPT 12,1 11 i '. 5:/,r-Wiblizr
E 2 : CERTIFICATION i v' E UU
/ AS
25 15 + ... ... 1 2 HEIDI J. JOHNSON, RPR, CSR NO. 12525
,* SE;f * 6'* 74
-.
0 0
1 CERTIFIED COPY
)
6 Plaintiff, )
)
7 VS. )No. 37-2009-00101537
) CU-OE-CTL

9 Incorporated. a Delaware )

10 inclusive, )
)
11 Defendants. )
)
12
13 VOLUME II
14 DEPOSITION OF DEEANN WONG. M.D.. a witness
I 15 herein. noticed by Paul, Plevin, Sullivan
16 & Connaughton, at 591 Camino de la Reina,
17 Suite 640, San Diego, California, at
18 2:16 p.m., Friday. June 10, 2011. before
19 Jennifer K. Winters, CSR 8543.
20
22
23
24
25
HfUTCHINGS
COU RT REPORTERS
Forbestresults, we recommend Adobe AcrobatorAdobe'Reader(free at http://get.adobe.com/reader/).
..
Wong, M,D., Deeann on 06/10/2011
1 A. Yes.
2 0. And under the question what objective mental
3 impairment underlies these changes did you write
4 difficulty recalling events leading to and during rape
5 in a coherent, linear fashion?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Were you aware of any other objective mental 4:!09p
8 impairment that Ms. Etnyre was experiencing?
9 A. At the time that this was written7
10 Q. Yes.
11 A. I would need to review the chart.
12 Q. Did you record any other Objective mental
13 impairment?
14 A. It would be in the chart.
15 Q. Did you record any on this one?
16 A. No. Is there a way to redact or qualify that
17 statement?
18 Q. Sure.
19 A. If you look on the question above, list
20 observations or behaviors in your office that document
21 the change in functioning at work and non-work
22 activities, the last word is dissociation, which is a
23 mental impairment in that a person loses their ability
24 to concentrate, to focus and be present in a situation.
25 Q. Now -- I'm sorry, were you through? 44 10P
Hutchings Court Reporters - 'Global Legal Services Page 130

800-697-3210
..
I1 A. What?
Q. Did you complete your answer?
13 A. More or less.
Q. Well, I didn't want to interrupt you. Did you
1 5 have anything else you wanted to say?
6 A. Can you repeat back what I said?
7 MR. BELSKY: Why don' t we have the court reporter
8 read the question and the response for context.
9 (The record is read by the reporter.)
10 THE WITNESS: It's the ability to be mentally and
11 emotionally present in a situation so that they can
12 accurately assess what is going on around them at that
13 particular period of time.
14 MR. SULLIVAN:
15 0. And were you saying that she had a dissociation 4:12P
16 at the present time. at the time that vou wrote this?
17 A. She has had dissociation on and off throughout
18 her course of treatment with me and with other
19 therapists in that the way that dissociation often is
20 described bv a patient is that thev lose a lapse of time
21 and they cannot remember clearly or exactly events that
22 occurred.
23 Q. And how many times did she describe to you that
24 dissociation had occurred?
25 A. I don't recall.

800-697-3210
0 0
COURTNEY S.'ETNYRE vs. SANDIP ("MICKEY") MINHAS
1 0. Do vou remember any of the events where she
2 described that dissociation occurred?
3 A. It was when she was recalling the events that
4 happened between her and her ex-boss that night in the
5 business triD.
0. Okay. On the final night of that business trip
7 in New York?
8 A. Right. when there was obviously sexual activitv
9 happened. relations. whatever you want to call it.
10 There were parts of the story that were missing in that
11 it was not -- it was not remembered in a linear.
12 coherent fashion. It was like -- it's like watching a
13 movie and you're missing Dieces of the story.
14 Q. Okay. And was there any other time that she 4:13P
15 reported to you that you recall her having this
16 dissociation?
18 Q. Okay. Can someone have essentially the same
19 symptoms of dissociation, having blocks of time missing,
20 by being severely inebriated?
21 A. Yes. That's called a blackout.
22 Q. And do you ]mow whether or not, on the occasion
23 that you're referring to, whether or not Ms. Etnyre had
24 been drinking heavily?
25 A. I know that alcohol was involved. I don't know
Hutchings Court Reporters -{Global' Legal Services Page 132

800-697-3210
4 I ..
1 would it be material for you to understand, to know more
2 accurately whether or not she had or had not had
3 significant alcohol at that time?
4 A. Can you repeat the question? 4:16P
5 Q. Sure. You note here that you thought that she
6 had dissociation, correct?
7 A. Uh-huh.
8 Q. Yes?
9 A. Yes.
10 0. Would it be material if vou knew how much
11 alcohol she did or did not have that evening?
12 A. No. because her overall diaanosts is PTSD. She
13 is also reported recalling an uncle put his hands down
14 her pants in the Dast. And also with the family
15 dynamics that she has grown up with it is not unusual to
16 see patients with that historv being prone to
17 dissociation.
18 Q. Okay. But she did not report to you any other
19 dissociation event other than this one time when she was
20 watching T.V. with her boss and they had sexual
21 relations, correct7
22 A. There may have been other times either I have
23 observed it or the therapists have observed it but I
24 would have to go back in the chart and look.
25 Q. As you sit here now you don't recall any other 4:17P
Hutchings Court Reporters - Global'Legal Services Page 134

800-697-3210
0 0
1 event, correct7
2 A. No.
3 Q. Is that correct?
4 A. Not to my recollection.
5 Q. So that's correct?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. And what period or blocks of time was it your
8 understanding that she didn't recall from that night
9 where they were watching T.V. and then had sexual
10 relations?
11 A. I don't know.
12 Q. Do you have any recollection of whether it was
13 one minute, five minutes, an hour, two hours7
14 A. I do not know.
15 Q. Would that be material for you to know in
16 forming such an opinion as to whether or not she had
17 dissociation?
18 A. No.
19 Q. Was there anything that indicated to you that
20 she had dissociation other than her difficulty recalling
21 the events of that night?
22 A. Can you repeat the question7 4:18P
23 0. Sure. I'll trv to rephrase it for vou. Was
24 there any other symvtom or factor that you relied on in
25 reaching the conclusion that she had suffered
Hutchings Ceurt Reporters - Global Legal Services Page 1135

800-697-3210
0 0
COURTNEY S. EliNYRE vs. SANDIP ("MICKEY") MINHAS
1 dissociation other than the fact that she had difficulty
2 recalling the events of this night when she was watchina
3 television with her boss and the¥ had sexual relations?
4 A. Yes. It is based on the dynamics of her
5 family. particularly with her parents. It is also based
6 on her spontaneous reporting at one point that she
7 remembered her uncle putting his hands down her pants.
8 It is also based on workina with Courtney and other
9 patients who have had similar familv dynamics that they
10 are more prone to losing track of time or lapses in
11 their memory.
12 Q. Okay. Other than her family history and her 4:19P
13 recording that she had difficulty recalling the specific
14 events on that night is there anything else on which you
15 based your conclusion that she had suffered
16 dissociation?
18 Q. Okay. She hadn't reported to you having
19 dissociation of any other event since her childhood,
20 correct?
22 Q. She hadn't reported having any dissociation or
23 lack of recollection of events since the event with her
24 boss When they were watching television, correct?
25 A. Not that I recall. 4:2OP
Hutchings Couirt Reporters - Global Legall Services Page 136

800-697-3210
.
I 1 Q. So the answer is, no, you did not?
2 A. I did not because it is outside my scope of
3 practice.
4 Q. Okay. Have you experienced the situation where
5 an individual provided you with an inconsistent story
6 with lapses of time in their story and you later
7 determined that the reason for the inconsistencies or
8 lapses was simply because they weren' t telling the truth
9 as opposed to dissociation?
10 A. No. 4:22P
11 Q. So every time that anyone has reported to you
12 subjectively that they experienced lapses in their
13 recollection your diagnosis was dissociation?
14 A. That is incorrect.
15 0. Well, what other -- what other reasons have you
16 found for an individual to experience lanses in their
17 recollection other than dissociation?
18 A. Malinaering. factitious disorder. conversion
19 disorder. substance abuse.
20 0. Did vou -- what did vou do, if anything, to
21 rule out those four possibilities for Ms. Etnvre's lapse
22 of rec611ection?
23 A. Malingerina we covered in my prior deposition. 4:23P
24 Oftentimes malingerers. they will intentionally call
25 attention to their symptoms and make sure that vou know
Hutchings Court Reporters - Global :Legal Services Page 138

800-697-3210
..
1 that they're in distress or have some kind of
2 difficulty. That has been the opposite in Ms. Etnyre's
3 case. that. if anvthing. she's been verv reluctant to
4 disclose information. She -- it's taken a long time for
5 her to gain trust with mvself as well as other
6 therapists. which is not the case when vou see somebody
7 who is malingerina. They're oftentimes overly eager to
8 trust or. like I said, calI attention to their symptomsi
9 and reDort symptoms.
10 0. Anv reason that vou ruled out factitious
11 disorder?
12 A. Factitious disorder is the unconscious 4:24P
13 producing of symptoms. At the time when I first met
14 Ms. Etnyre there was no legal issues qoing on. There
15 was no attorneys involved. There was no lawsuits
16 involved.
17 Q. At the time you met her there was no legal
18 issues going on, is that your testimony?
19 A. To my -- she was -- to my knowledge at that
20 point in time.
21 Q. Okay. Would that change your viewpoint if you
22 kn6w that, in fact, she had retained counsel at that
23 time?
24 MR. KONDRICK: Objection, argumentative, assumes
25 facts not in evidence, incomplete hypothetical.
Hutchings Court Reporters - Global Legal Services Page 1,39

800-697-3210
.
:SS.
4 I, HEIDI J. JOHNSON, a Certified Shorthand Reporter
6 Professional Reporter, d6 hereby certify: That the
7 witness in the foregoing deposition was first duly sworn
8 by me to testify to tell the truth, the whole truth, and
10 deposition was taken be,fore me at the time and place
11 herein named; that the said deposition was reported by me
12 in shorthand and transcribed through computer«aided
13 transcription, under my direction; and that the foregoing
17 disinterested person and am in no way interested in the
20 respective counsel.
21 In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my
22 hand ;1292"¥6#1; day of May , 201 1 .

/> CO.U.:I.44£B:di
23 0 CO ...
....04 %
f 2/
2 4:
: A%
. rfi 0
IA
///
= z: TRANSCRIPT 1 5 E 1£1 &4540.0 M-1 '42(
.-n
24
% w : CERTIFICATION ?A- L./ 0
· :AS
25 ..·< Ob. HEIDI J. JOHNSON, RPR, 'CSR NO. 12525
44, SEAL ' 74
440""Hn.
Exhibit F
· ORIGINAL
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO -
COURTNEY S. ETNYRE', )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
VS. J No. 37-2009-'001,0

1537-CU-OE-CTL
SANDIP ("IMICKEY") MINHAS, )
individually, QUALCOMM Incorporated, )
a Delaware corporation and DOES )
)
Defendants. )
)
VOLUME V
VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF COURTNEY S. ETNYRE,
the plaintiff herein, noticed by Paul, Plevin,
Sullivan & Connaughton, LLP, at 401 B Street,
Tenth Floor, San Diego, California, at. 9:24 a.m.,
on Tuesday, July 20, 201.0, before Jeannette M.

Kinikin, CSR 11272.
Hutchings 'Number 265544
HUTCHINGS
COURT REPORTERS
GLOBAL LEGAL SERVICES
HEADQUARTERS:
6055 E. WASHINGTON BLVD,, 8TH FLOOR

1.05.ANGELES, CA 90040-2429
800.597.3110 323.888.6300
PAK: 323.888.6333 • www.hutchings. com
970
1 receiving such criticism?
2 A. No.
3 Q. Okay. Do you recall ever receiving any
4 criticism, before your employment with Qualcomm, about
5 inability to accept c6nstructive criticism or direction?
6 MR. KONDRICK: Same objection. Counsel, can we
7 just have a continuing objection on the grounds of
8 privacy, whether it's valid or not?
9 MR. SULLIVAN: Okay.
10 THE WITNESS: I don't recall, no.
11 MR. SULLIVAN:
12 Q You were previously employed by Sheppard
13 Mullin, correct?
14 A. As a temp, yes.
15 Q. Okay. And what was your reason for leaving
16 Sheppard Mullin?
17 A. I was a temp.
18 Q. Okay. And the assignment ended?
19 A. Yes.
20 9* Okay. What was your reason for leaving Casey
21 Gerry?
22 a* I went to Daralegal school.
23 O. dkay. So you voluntarilv resicmed from Casey
24 Gerry?
25 A. Mm-hmm. Yen.
.
971
1 MR. KONDRICK: Is that
2 MR. SULLIVAN:
3 Z Okav. And the only reason was to 40 to
4 paralegal school?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. And what was your position at Casey Gerry?
7 A. I had several different positions.
8 Q. At the time you left?
9 A. Calendar clerk.
10 Q. Do you -- do you recall --
11 MR. KONDRICK,: You, seem to have a question mark.
12 Was it definite or was it a question mark at the end of
13 that?
14 THE WITNESS: It ' s a question .
15 MR. SULLIVAN:
16 Q. Well, you can't ask me the questions. You've
17 got to give me the answers . If you don' t know, you
I8 don't know.
19 A. I don't know.
20 Q. Okay. You were never employed as a paralegal
21 at Casey Gerry, correct?
22 A. No.
23 Q. So you worked there as a as a calendar clerk
24 at some period of time?
25 A. Yes.
.
.
1
***
I declare under p6nalty of perj ury under the laws

4
of the State of California tllat the foregoing is true
5
and correct.
r:\.
7
1
Executed at Dan .LA eC) , California,
on Awy*t 23,2_CA O
8
9
1
10
1
11
i
12
CO S. 1RIA
l 0
13
j 14
15
16
17
18
19
<#,1:.:
20
21
22
23
42
24
25
994
..::Sfl*r -A.'·
'800:697.321,0
'1'=25**E44*..t:
-0*56
' ».W
H Zh,·
.. 'ff
DI
2
#494'
3 I, Jeannette Kinikin, CSR 11272, do hereby declare:

4
5 That, prior-to being examined, the witness named in

8 Procedure;
10
That said deposition was taken down by me in
13
14
I further declare that I have no interest in the
16
17 I declare under -penalty of perjury under the laws

19 and correct.
20
4th (1KS(]Rr *0314,

•98 80'004.
22
August ,
23" E l CERTIFICATION j·P'

TRANSCRIPT : M
\
3
/6 666 42 *--e*::I.-000.0,b,
'A 8
:g.
/ Jeadhette Kinikin, CSR 1127'2 \.,4, SEAL ,

995

800.697.3210
.a . /-
Exhibit U
MySourcer
Courtney S. Etnyre
,Location: Jamul, CA
Date Received: 04/03/2003
.ofile - Summary
Recent Company: Pflzer
Recent Job Title: Senior Paralegal
ID: 1622750
23 EInt
CANDIDATE
Name:
Courtney S. Etnyre
Address: 13726 Whispering Meadows Lane
Country: United States
City: Jamul
Stale: California Zip: 91935
SSN: 229-02-3132
Home Phone: 619/669-0596 Work Phone: 619/861-2695
Mobile Phone: Other Phone:

Email: cetnyre@yahoo.com
Salary Desired: 62,000
Desired
San Diego, CA
Location:
Date Available: 5/1/2003
'ployee Reference: QCEmployee#
Source
r,rst Year Experience: 10
Student? No
Student Where?
Student Program:
Seeking Internship: No
Prospect: No Willing to Relocate? No
Verify To Work: Yes Convicted: No
Security Clearance:
Patents:
Publications:
Date Created: 04/03/2003
Date Updated: 04/22/2003
:EO
.der: Female
liltps://metro.qualcomm.com/my:ourao/:tafBng.asplpage=summor,&candld=1622750&print=print 5/8/2001
QUALCOMMCONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION QETN¥0000076

.
Race: White
OTHER
DPL Verified: OK
,didale Type: New Hire
-livity Code:
Date App
Further Review: No 04/25/2003
Mnalked:
Employee Transfer: No Transfer Date:

(For relocation use only)
Best Interview Time
Password: {password hidden}

Candidate 10: 1622750 Resumix ID:
los
Why are you requesting an internal opportunity?
What are your key skills and competencies?
What previous prolects/tools have you worked on at Qualcomm?
What are your work amasof interest?
Other Information7
( RK EXPERIENCE
Employer Name: Pnzer Job Title: Senior Paralegal
City: San Diego State: CA
Country: USA Phone:
Date Started: 12/01/2000 Date Ended: 05/09/2003
Starting Salary: 53400 Ending Salary: 56400
Supervisor Name: Bryan Zielinski Supervisor Title: Senior Patent Counsel
Is Current Job: Y
Responsibilities: Prosecution of Plizer's intellectual property portfolio US and PCT filings Drafting and'formatting
Reason For Le. ving: Career Growth/Path
EDUCATION
School Name: University of Phoenix Graduated: 6/1997
Malor/Minor. Business Management Degree: BS
Years Completed: GPA: 3.1
Student ID: Verified: By Phone
litips://mao.qualoomm.com/mpoorce/slamng.asplpage=sommary&candld=1622750&print=print 5/8/2003
QWALCOMM CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION QETNY0000077

REFERENCES
Name: Mitchell Brusteln Relationship: Supervisor
Phone: 450-5749
Occupation: Patent Counsel
iall: Years Known: 2
Heterenee Text:
Staffing Comments:
Name: Unda Evans Relationship: Supervisor
Phone: 858 320-3406

Occupation: Patent attorney
Email: Years Known:
Reference Text:
Staffing Comments:
DOCUMENTS
hlips://motro.qualoomm.com/my:ourse/stamng.asp?pariammary&0:ndld=16227508,print=print 5/8/2001
QUALCOMM CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION QETNY0000078

Ex'hi bit H
.
1 CERTIFIED COPY
)
6 Plaintiff, )
)
7 VS. ) Case No. 37-2008-00101537
) CU-OE-CTL

t
corporation and DOES 1 )
)
11 Defendants. )
)
12
13
14
15 DEPOSITION OF RAYMOND A. FIDALEO. M.D.,
16 a witness herein. noticed by Paul, Plevin,
17 Sullivan & Connaughton, LLP. at 401 B Street,
18 Tenth Floor, San Diego. California, at 9:45 a.m.,
19 Tuesday. May 24. 2011. before Marc Volz. CSR 2863,
20 RPR, CRR.
21
23
24
2;5
HUTCHINGS
COU RT REPORTERS
Forbestresults, we recommend AdobeAcrobatorAdobe Reader(freeat: http:#get.adobe. com/reader/)

.
.
Fidaleo, Raymond on 05/24/2011'
1 the PTSD was from the family issues, the duration of it?
2 A. The duration was throughout most of her life.
3 Eight years at least.
4 Q. Did Ms. Etnyre ever talk to you about her
5 parents at all?
6 A. Just remember the father. Namely, he would try
7 to deal with the brothers, but he never was really able
8 to stop them from bothering her.
9 0. How was it that the father wasn't able to stop
10 the brothers from bothering her?
11 A. He would push them. but the behavior never
12 stopped. She had a real difficulty in dealing with
13 anger. She learned iust to shut down. If she cried she
14 would aet more by them. so she learned not to be
15 resoonsive.
16 Q. You indicated her brothers were two and four
17 years older than her.
18 A. She has a third one that was about eight years
19 older, but he wasn't involved in it.
20 Q. Did Ms. Etnyre ever discuss with you her
21 employment and her employment history at all?
22 A. Well, she just talked about that she had -- she
23 had a paralegal job at QUALCOMM, and her boss was the
24 vice president, and she described that he was
25 inappropriate with her on two prior occasions and then
Hutchings Court Reponters - Global 'Legal Services Page 31

800-697-3210
..
Fidaleo, Raymond on 05/24/2011
1 Q. Was she close to her older brother -- or oldest
2 brother7
3 A. Not particularly, no.
4 Q. Did you have any understanding as to whether
5 that had a great impact on her or not?
6 A. No. I didn't think she was experiencing grief
7 from that.
8 Q. Did she ever discuss with you her relationship
9 with her mother?
10 A. No. She may have, I don't recall that.
11 0. Do you recall that she had indicated that her
12 priority in entering the theranv Droaram was to be
13 assertive with her mother?
14 A. Yeah. I think there was some mention of that.
15 She was not assertive with anybody. That was the big
16 problem. To be assertive touched on beina anarv and
17 then she would close down.
18 Q. So you don't recall any specific problems with
19 her mother, her mother causing her trauma, criticizing
20 her, anything of that nature?
21 A. Might have. Didn't stick with me from my
22 reviewing it.
23 Q. Did Ms. Etnyre ever discuss with you that she
24 had been involuntary terminated or fired from any
25 employer?
Hutchings Court Reporters - G16bal Legal Services Page 33

800-697-3210
7
..
.
.
-1
***
-1

5 and correct.
8 Executed atbe, U }'14 , California,
9 on 212 2 t- l 4 1-0 L I
10
11
RAYMb A-. FIS ' EO, M.D.

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
120
HUTCHINGS COURT REPORTERS, LLC - GLOBAL LEGAL SRRVICES

800.697.3210
18
i.
3 I, Marc Volz, CSR 2863, do hereby declare:

7 to Section 20,93 (b). and 2,094 of the Code of Civil
8 Procedure;

13
16

19 and correct.
20
6th day of
2011
22 June
23
A.
24
L/V\/
/
Mard Volz, CSR 2 810, RPR, CRR

25
121

800.697.321:0
Exhibit I
1 CERTIFIED COPY
)
6 Plaintiff, )
)
7 VS. ) No. 37-2009-0010
) 1537-CU-OE-CTL
8 SANDIP ( "MICKEY") MINHAS[, )

individually. QUALCOMM Incorporated. )
9 a Delaware corporation and DOES )
1 through 40, inclusive. )
10 )
Defendants. )
11 )
12
13
14 DEPOSITION OF ARLENE E. POLLARD, LCSW, a witness
15 herein, noticed by Paul. Plevin, Sullivan &
16 Connaughton, LLP, at 401 B Street, Tenth Floor,
17 San Diego. California. at 10:06 a.m., on Friday,
18 May 6, 2011, before Jeannette M. Kinikin.
19 CSR 11272.
20
22
23
24
25
HUTCHINGS
COURT REPORTERS
Forbestresults, we recommendAdobe AcrobatorAdobe Reader(freeat http://getadobe.com/readerO.
..
1 A. I'm there. 14:05
2 Q. You're there. Sort of about three quarters of
3 the way down, it says, C, shuts down, stops talking, and
4 there's a reference, second conflict. Can you tell me
5 _what_those notes are referencing? 14:05
6 A. When she is stressed or feels at risk or
7 threatened. she becomes silent and withdraws.
8 0. Have you observed that yourself or is that
9 somethina that she describes to you?
10 A. She was describing it to me. And I have 14:06
11 observed it.
12 0. Okay. And in what circumstances have you
13 observed it in7
14 A. Earlier on in her treatment. when she was quite
15 visibly withdrawn and did not make eye contact, anything 14:06
16 that was at all intrusive, she would visibly and
17 literally and verbally shut down and withdraw. It was
18 something I saw quite often. It's part of the reason
19 whv a lot of the detailed information didn't come out
20 until much later in the treatment. 14:07
21 Q. Okay. The second sentence here is in -- I
22 guess, if you wouldn't mind reading that. I'm not sure
23 what that says. It starts -- it's maybe in HS?
24 A. Oh, in high school.
25 Q. Okay. 14:07
Hutchings Cowrt Reporters - Global ILegal 'Services Page 97

800-697-3210
'lili!
!lilli
.
3
5--41 1,
lilli
4"ill
F
d
2
4 {15 3 I, Jennifer K. Winters, CSR 8543, do hereby

Ad 4.-41-;
*Ys't.
4 declare:
-53.f *'
5
6 That, pr'ior to be.ing examined', the witness named in
8 to Section 2093 (b) and 2094 of the Code of Civil 11, IF i
I.M,
9 Procedure;
10
11 L li 1
f.,t i 11 That said deposition was taken down by me in 11
irt
:f',
13 thereafter reduced to text under my direction. 1j
«4
»4
14
16 - event of the action. h
n
17

11,

2£3 111
and correct. r
21
11th
22 WITNESS my hand this day of
I £*
9.
23
April 2011
42 COURTD .
·:> 06 .··..-.·4'4 '0
....0-60.
: 7. 5 il
I. t A Y 24
.
5 Ji TRANSCRIPT *p---
25 1 I \K-XES E Y : CERTIFICATION-//+
:3 : 1 1D:5
-r A x,A/4..(.t , '
a .%. "-A f
i *»3
Jennif*HK.
U
Wnters, CSR 8543
99 Il
9 9 E AL %/ ,
HUTCHINGS COURT REPORTERS, LLC GLOBAL LEGAL /ERVreEN
1.
YE 4 +
800..697.32.10
4
1 69
1*25
.
1
2 MELISSA LISTUG KLICK (SBN 228470)
EMILY J. FOX (SBN 262106) FILED
Clerk of the Superior Court
3 PAUL, PLEVIN, SULLIVAN & CONNAUGHTON LLP
401 B Street, Tenth Floor JUN 2 9 201,1
Telephone: 619-237-5200 By: Anmpm,St*le* Depu¥
5 Facsimile: 619-615-0700 .Vwn £3 '11 PM 364
7
9
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

10
11 COURTNEY S. ETNYRE, individually, 1 CASE NO. 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL
12 Plaintiff, PROOF OF PERSONAL SERVICE
13 V.
Dept: 70
14 SANDIP ("MICKEY") MINHAS, Judge: Honorable Randa Trapp

individually, QUALCOMM Incorporated, a Complaint Filed: November 2,2009
15 Delaware corporation and DOES 1 through Trial Date: July 1, 2011
40, inclusive,
16
Defendants.
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
«PAUL, PLEVIN, 1
Proof of Service
SULLIVAN &
CONNAUGHTON LLP
.3 ..
1 I, the undersigned, certify and declare that I am a citizen of the United States, over the age
2 of eighteen, employed in the County of San Diego, State of California, and not a party to the
3 within-entitledl action. My business address is P.O. Box 112037, San Diego, California 92101.
4 On June 29, 2011 I served a true copy ofthe within:
5 • DEFENDANT QUALCOMM INCORPORATED'S OPPOSITION TO

PLAINTIFF'S MOTION IN LIMINE TO PRECLUDE DEFENDANTS'
6 EXPERT, MARK KALISH, M.D., FROM OPINING AS TO PLAINTIFF'S
TRUTHFULNESS OR BELIEVABILITY [1 of 21
7
• DECLARATION OF MELISSA LISTUG KLICK IN SUPPORT OF
8
PLAINTIFF'S MOTION IN LIMINE TO PRECLUDE DEFENDANTS'
9
EXPERT, MARK KALISH, M.D., FROM OPINING AS TO PLAINTIFF'S
TRUTHFULNESS OR BELIEVABILITY 11 of 21
10 • DEFENDANT QUALCOMM INCORPORATED'S OPPOSITION TO
PLAINTIFF'S MOTION IN LIMINE TO PRECLUDE DEFENDANTS
11 PRESENTING EVIDENCE CONCERNING PLAINTIFF'S PRIOR
EMPLOYMENT, INCLUDING HER PERFORMANCE, COMPLAINTS OR
12 REASONS FOR LEAVING [2 of 21
• DECLARATION OF MELISSA LISTUG KLICK IN SUPPORT OF
13
PLAINTIFF'S MOTION IN LIMINE TO PRECLUDE DEFENDANTS
14
PRESENTING EVIDENCE CONCERNING PLAINTIFF'S PRIOR
15
EMPLOYMENT, INCLUDING HER PERFORMANCE, COMPLAINTS OR
REASONS FOR LEAVING [2 of 21
16
by delivering for personal service to the following:
17
H. Paul Kondrick Leonid M. Zilberman

H. Paul Kondrick, a Professional Corporation
3130 Fourth Avenue 550 West C Street, Suite 1050
19
Telephone: (619) 291-2400 Telephone: (619) 236-9600
20
E-Mail: kendrick@msn, com E-Mail: izilberman@wpkt.com
21
22 Place of delivery is San Diego, California. Executed this 29th day of June 2011, at San
23 Diego, California.
24 I hereby certify that I am employed by Accutech Messenger Service, San Diego,
25 1 California, at whose direction the personal service was made.
26
27
CUTEd'R MEMSENGER
28
PAUL, PLEVIN, 1
Proof of Service
SULLIVAN &
CONNAUGHTON LLP
. ORIGINAL
1 H. PAUL KONDRICK, A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
H. PAUL KONDRICK (88566)
2 3130 Fourth Avenue -
San Diego, CA 92103 '
3 Telephone: (619) 291-2400
Facsimile: (619) 291-7123
w;:+p:L-- E.:»:in 1
964(0,11,61®erk* Citw 1
4
Attorneys for Plaintiff JUN 28 2011

51 COURTNEY S. ETNYRE
8% Anthony Shirle* Depu¥
6 ! WILSON TURNER KOSMO LLP
1 CLAUDETTE G. WH,SON (110076) 0<*6 55cA la /11
LEONID M. ZILBERMAN (182829)
1 JESSICA A. CHASIN (214983)
8 550 West C Street, Suite 1050
1 San Diego, California 92101
9 Telephone: (619) 236-9600
Facsimile: (619) 236-9669
-101
11 ' SANDIP ("MICKY") MINHAS
12 PAUL, PLEVIN SULLIVAN & CONNAUGHTON

1,MICHAEL C. SULLIVAN (131817)
13 1 ' MELISSA L. KLICK (228470)
Telephone: (6,19) 237-5200
15 facsimile: (619) 615-0700

QUALCOMM Inc.
17
18 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
19 CENTRAL DIVISION
20 COURTNEY S. ETNYRE, individually, Case No. 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL
Rt
21 Plaintiff, STIPULATION AND [pROPeSED]
ORDER REGARDING
22 V. INADVERTENT ATTORNEY-
CLIENT DISCLOSURES
23 SANDIP ("MICKY'D MIN(HAS, individually,
QUALCOMM Incorporated, a Delaware Complaint Filed: November 4,2009
24 corporation, and DOES 1-40, inclusive
Trial: July 1, 2011
25 Defendants. Time: 8:45 a.m.
Judge: -Randa Trapp
26 Dept.: C-70
27
28
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING INADVERTENT ATTORNEY-CLIENT

DISCLOSURES
.
1 WHEREAS, Plaintiffplans to file a Motion in Limine toexclude evidence of
2 communications between Plaintiff and' her attorney(s) inadvertently disclosed by Plaintiffto
3 healthcare i,roviders and counselors, including DeeAnn Wong, M.D., Cathy Hammond, Rh.D.,
4 Judith Matson, Ph.D., Charles Nelson, Ph.D„ Arlene Pollard, and defendants' expert,
5 Mark Kalish, M.D.;

i . ·
6 WHEREAS, Plaintiff.and Defendants have met and conferred regarding this Motion;
7 WHEREAS, Defendants do not currently intend to introduce evidence of cemmunications
8 between Plaintiff and her attorney(s) inadvertently disclosedby Plaintiff to healthcare providers, and
9 counselors, including DeeAnn Wong, M.D., Cathy Hammond, Ph.D., Judith Matson, Ph.D., 'Charles
10 F Nelson, Ph.D., Arlene Pollard, and defendants' expert,
11 Mark Kalish, M.D.;
12 THE PARTIES STIPULATE AND AGREE AS FOLLOWS:
13 Defendahts witt not seek to introduce evidenceof communications between Plaintiff and her
14 attorney(s) inadvertently disclosed by Plaintiffto healthcare providers and counselors, including
15 DeeAnn Wong, M.D., Cathy Hammond, Ph.D., Judith Matson, Ph.D., Charles Nelson, Ph.D., Arlene
16 Pollard, and defdndants' expert, Mark Kalish, M.D.. If, duing the course oftrial, Defendants do
17 seek to, introduce ,evidence of communications between Plaintiff and her attorney(s) inadvertently
18 i disclosed by Plaintiffto healthcare providers and counselors, including DeeAnn Wong, M.D., Cathy
19 Hammond, Ph.D., Judith Matson, Ph.D., Charles Nelson, Ph.D., Arlene Pollard, and defendants'
20 expert, Mark Kalish, M.D., Defendants shall notify Plaintiffbefore doing se and allow Plaintiff a
21 Ill
22 111
23 '111 -
24
25
26
27
28
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING INADVERTENT ATTORNEY-CLIENT

DISCLOSURES
.
1 'reasonable opportunity to brief the issue for the Court before any efforts are made to introduce such
2 evidence.
3 IT IS SO STIPULATED AND AGREED.
4 i Dated: June F, 2011 Dated: . June 26 , 2011

5 H. PAUL KONDRICK, A WILSON TU ER KOSMO LLP
PROFESSIONAL CORPOR*rION 1t
p#. 4/1 p
H. PAUL KONDIICK AUDETTE . WIESON i
8 - ,
Attorney for Plaintiff LEONID M. ZILBERMAN
COURTNEY S. ETNYRE JESSICA A. CHASW
9 . SANDIP MINHAS
Dated: June 3< , 2011
10
PAUL, PLEVIN SULLIVAN &
11 CONNABTrl
1'2 By: CYLL 1 _
A MUCIAL'e>*ULLIN AN
13 'l-Ni4*A L. KLICK
Mttorney for Defendant
14 QUALCOMM INC.
15
t6
17 ORDER
18 IT IS SO ORDERED.
19 DATED:JURL 19:261/ 6331461**

4
Hot}OBABLE RANDA TRAPP
20 JUDBE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2-
STIPULATION AND[PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING INADVERTENT ATTORNEY-CLIENT

DISCLOSURES
. . ORIGINAL
1 H. Paul Kondrick, Esq. (State Bar No. 88566)

H. Paul Kondrick, a Professional Corporation
2 3130 Fourth Avenue
3 Telephone: (619) 291-2400
Facsimile: (619) 291-7123
4 Attorney for Plaintiff COURTNEY S. ETNYRE
-F -1 -T" E D
' Clerk of the Superior Court
JUN 2 8 2011
Claudette G. Wilson (110076)
6 Leonid M. Zilberman (182829) By: Anthony ShirleK Oem*
Jessica A. Chasin (214983)
7 550 West C Street Suite 1050
San Diego, California 92101 od¢ sirl 6 liA/"
8 Telephone: (619) 236-9600
Facsimile: (619) 236-9669
9 Attorneys for Defendant SANDIP (**MICKY') MINHAS
10 Paul, Plevin Sullivan & Connaughton

Michael C. Sullivan (131817)
11 Melissa L. Klick (228470)
Telephone: (619) 237-5200
13 Facsimile: (619) 615-0700
Attorneys for Defendant QUALCOMM Inc.
14
15
16
17
18 COURTNEY S. ETNYRE, individually, ) Case No. 37-2009-00101537-(DOE-CTL
) Sr
19 Plaintiff, ) STIPULATION AND *PRepeSEE)1
) ORDER REGARDING
20 V. PLAINTIFF'S SEXUAL CONDUCT
)
21 SANDIP (*'MICKY') MINHAS, individually, ) Date: July 1, 2011
QUALCOMM Incorporated, a Delaware ) Time: 8:45 a.m.
22 corporation, and DOES 1 through 40, inclusive, ) Department: DC-70
Judge: Hon. Randa Trapp
23 )
Defendants. )
24 )
25 WHEREAS, Plaintiffplans to file a Motion in Limine to exclude evidence concerning
26 Plaintiff's sexual conduct with individuals other than the alleged perpetrator in this action,
27 namely Defendant, SANDIP C'MICKY') MINHAS;
28 WHEREAS, Pluintiff and Defendants have met and conferred regarding this Motion;
-1- Stipulation Re Plaintiffs Sexual Conduct & [Proposed] Order

.
1 WHEREAS, Defendants do not currently intend to introduce evidence concerning
2 Plaintiff's sexual conduct with individuals other than the alleged perpetrator in this action,
3 namely Defendant SANDIP C'MICKY'D MINHAS;
5 Defendants will not seek to introduce evidence concerning Plaintiffs sexual conduct with
6 individuals other than the alleged perpetrator in this action, namely Defendant, SANDIP
7 C*MIC:Ky") MINHAS. If, during the course of trial, Defenciants do seek to introduce evidence
8 concerning Plaintiff's sexual conduct with individuals other than the alleged perpetrator in this
9 action, Defendants shall notify Plaintiffbefore doing so and allow Plaintiff a reasonable
10 opportunity to briefthe issue for the Court before any efforts are made to introduce such
11 evidence.
12 IT IS So STIPULATED AND AGREED.
13 Dated: Junei¥ 2011 Dated: Junet[, 2011

14 H. Paul Kondrick, a Professional Corporation:
Wilson T smo LLP
15
4 *- AL ly BM
16 H. Paul Kondrick Cl*d6tte G. Wilson
Attorney for Plaintiff, COURTNEY S. Leonid M. Zilberman
17
ETNYRE
Jessica A. Chasin
18 Attorneys for Defendant SANDIP ("MICKY'D

MINHAS
19
Dated: June - 2011
20
Paul, Plevin Sullivan & Connaughton:
21
22
23
Ildlsitaelg. Wlivan
MelksaL. Klick
24 Attorneys for Defendant, QUALCOMM Inc.
25
ORDER
26
rT IS SO ORDERED.
27
28
Dated: *Ul¢ 14,90//
0
»6241 orable Randa Trapp
Judge ofthe Superior Court
-2- Stipulation Re Plaintiffs Sexual Conduct & [Proposed] Order

. . ORIGINAL
1 H. Paul Kondrick, Esq. (State Bar No. 88566)
H. Paul Kondricki a Professional Corporation
2 3130 Fourth Avenue FiLE
Clerk of ehe Superior
3 Telephone: (619) 291-2400
Facsimile: (619)291-7123
Cur. JUN22.8,1 2987
4 Attorney for Plaintiff, COURTNEY S. ETNYRE By: Anthony Shirley, Depuv
Claudette G. Wilson (110076)
6 Leonid M. Zilberman (182829)
Jessica A. Chasin (214983)
7 550 West C Street Suite 1050
8 Telephone: (619) 236-9600
Facsimile: (619) 236-9669
9 Attorneys for Defendant, SANDIP ("MICKY') MINHAS
10 Paul, Plevin Sullivan & Connaughton

Michael C. Sullivan (131817)
11 Melissa L. Klick (228470)
Telephone: (619) 237-5200
13 Facsimile: (619) 615-0700
14
15
16
17
18 COURTNEY S. ETNYRE, individually, ) Case No. 37-2009-00101537-CU-OF:-CTL
19 Plaintiff, STIPULATION AND [PRepes]Cm

ORDER REGARDING SUPPOSED
20 V. ) OR ALLEGED SOCCER GAME
) ALTERCATION
21 SANDIP C'MICKY") MINHAS, individually, )
QUAI£OMM Incorporated, a Delaware ) Date: July 1, 2011
22 corporation, and DOES 1 through 40, inclusive, Time: 8:45 a.m.
] Department: DC-70
23 Judge: Hon. Randa Trapp
Defendants.
24
25 WHEREAS, Plaintiffplans to file a Motion in Limine to exclude evidence concerning
26 Plaintiff's alleged or supposed altercation at a soccer game, or any arrest or litigation related
27 thereto;
28 WHEREAS, Plaintiff and Defendants have met and conferred regarding this Motion;
-1- Stipulation Re Soccer Game & [Proposed] Order

.
1 WHEREAS, Defendants do not currently intend to introduce evidence concerning
2 concerning Plaintiffs alleged or supposed altercation at a soccer game, or any arrest or litigation
3 related thereto;
5 Defendants will not seek to introduce evidence concerning Plaintiffs alleged or supposed
6 altercation at a soccer game, or any arrest or litigation related thereto. If during the course of
7 trial, Defendants do seek to introduce evidence concerning Plaintiffs alleged or supposed
8 altercation at a soccer game, or any arrest or litigation related thereto, Defendants shall notify
9 Plaintiffbefore doing so and allow Plaintiff areasonable opportunity to briefthe issue forthe
10 Court before any efforts are made to introduce such evidence.
11 IT IS SO STIPULATED AND AGREED.
12 Dated: Juned 2011 Dated: June26 2011

13 H. Paul Kondrick, a Professional-Corporation:
Wilson 16 Kosm*Ep:
14
15
BM
-0.lb/L1/
H. Paul Kondrick
-
Cl*fette G. MIson
Attorney for Plaintiff, COURTNEY S. Monid M. Zilberman
16 ETNYRE
Jessica A. Chasin
17 Attorneys for Defendant SANDIP (**MICKY')

MINHAS
18
Dated: June - 2011
19
Paul, Plevin Sulliv Connaughton:
20
21
Michael C. an
22
Melissa ick
23 Attorneys for Defendant, QUALCOMM Inc.
24
ORDER
25
IT IS SO ORDERED.
26
27
28
Dated:
3£,bjt O24i,40," H*#ilanda4Iapp
Judge ofthe Superior Court
-2-
Stipulation Re Soccer Game & [Proposed] Order
ORIGINAL
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFO COURT USE ONLY
, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
,
TITLEOF CASE (ABBREVIATED)
ETNYRE v. MINHAS BLEirh

TRLEPHONE' NO
F- CIVt NJBNESS OFF# 4#
ATTORNEY OR PARTY WITMOUT ATTORNEY (NAME AND ADDRESS)
CENm,LOMSION
CLAUDETrE G, WILSON ((110076)
W 'Xi " '# nr »77
LEONID M. ZILBERMAN (182829) Tel. (619) 236-9600
1 JON -2828-11
JESSICA A. CHASIN 014983) Fax; (619) 236-9669
WILSON TURNER KOSMO LLP
550 West C Street Suite 1050
San Diego, CA 921101

ATTORNEYS FOR: HEARINGDATE-TIME CASE NUMBER:
SANDIP"MICKY' MIATHAS 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL
PROOF OF SERVICE-CI¥IL
Check method of service, (only one)i

O By Personal Service 5 By Mail 0 By Overnight Delivery
O By Messenger Service O By Fax By Electronic Service
1. At the time of service I was over 18 years of age and not a party to this action.
2. My residence or'business address is: 550 West C Street Suite 1050, San Diego, CA 92101
3, .0 The fax number or electronic notiFication address from which I served the documents is:(complete if service was by fax or
electronic service):
4. On June 28,2011: I served the follawing documents (specify):

1. STIPULATION RE DEFENDANT SANDIP MINHAS' MOTION IN LIMIPIE TOEXCLUDE
EVIDENCE OF QUALCOMM'S INDEMNITY OF MINHAS
2. STIPULATION AND IPROPOSEDI ORDER REGARDING INADVERTENT ATTORNEY-

CLIENT DISCLOSURES
3. STIPULATION AND IPROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFF'S SEXUAL CONDUCT
4. STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING SUPPOSED OR ALLEGED SOCCER

GAME ALTERCATION
IE The documents are listed' in the Attachment to 'Proof of Service-Civil (Documents Served) (form POS-040(D)).
5. I served the documents on theperson or persons below, as follows:
a. Name of person served: SEE BELOW
b. 5 (Complete if service was by personal service, mail, overnight delivery, or nvssenger service.) Business or
residential address where person was served:
H. Paul Kondrick Michael C. Sullivan

H. Paul Kondrick, A Professional Corporation Melissa L. Klick
3130 Fourth Avenue Paul, Plevin Sullivan & Connaughton

San Diego, CA 92103-5803 401 B Street, 10* Floor
- Tel: (619) 291-2400 JSan Diego, CA 92101
Fax: (619)291-7123 Tel: (619) 237-5200
Attorneys, for Plaintiff, Courtney S. Etnyre Fax: (6,1,9) 64540700
c. 0 (Complete if service was by fax or electronic service.)
(1) Fax number or electronic notification address where person was served:
(2) Time of service:
01 The names, addresses, and other applicable information about persons served is on the Attachnent to Proof of Service--
Civil (Persons Served) (form POS-040(P)).
6. The documents were served by the following means (specify):
a. 0, By personal service. I personally dltivered: the documents:to the persons at the addresses listed h item 5.
(11') For a party represented by an attorney, delivery was madeto the attorney or at the attorney's office by
leaving the 'documents, in an envelope or package clearly labeled to identify the attorney being served, with
PROOF OF PERSONAL SERVICE - CIVIL

.
ETNYRE v. MINHAS
1 .
37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL
a receptionist or an individual in charge ofthe office, between the hours of nine in the morning and five in
the evening. (2) For a party, delivery was made to the party or by leaving the documents at the party's
residence with some person not younger'than 18 years: of age between tir hours of eight in themoming-and
six in the evening.
b. f# By United States mail. I enclosed thedocuments in a sealed envelope or package addressed,to the persons
at the addresses in item 5 and (specify, one):
(1) O . deposited the sealed envelope with the United States Postal Service, With the postage fully prepaid.
(2) placed the envelope for collection and mailing, following our ordinary business practices, I am
readily familiar with this business's practice for collecting and processing correspondence for mailing. On
the same day that correspondence is placed for collection and mailing it is deposited in the ordinary course
of business with the United States Postal Service, in a sealed envelope with postage fully:prepaid.
I am, a resident or,employed in the county where the mailing occurred. The envelope or packagewas placed in the
maill at San Diego, California:
C. 0 By overnight delivery. I enclosed the documents in an envelope or package provided byan overnight
delivery carrier and addressed to the persons at the addresses in item 5. I placed the envelope or package
for collection and oyernight delivery at an office or a regularly utilized drop boxof the overnight delivery
carrier.
a. U By messenger service. I served the documents by placing them in an envelope or package addressed to the
persons at the addresses listed in item 5 and providing them to a professional messeng,r service for service.
(A declaration by the messenger must accompany this Proof of Service or be contained in the Declaration
of Messenger below.)
e. !El By fax transmission. Based on an agreement ofthe parties to accept service by fax transmission, I faxed
the documents to the personsat the fax numbers listed in item 5. No error was reported by the fax machine
that I used. A copy ofthe record ofthe fax transmission, which I printed out, is attached.
f. 0 By electronic service. Based on a court order or an agreement of the parties to accept service by electronic
transmission, I caused the documents to be sent to the persons at the electronic notification addresses listed
in item 5. I did not receive, withina reasonable time after the transmission, any electronic message or other
indication that the transmission was unsuccessful.
I declare under penalty ofperjury under the laws ofthe State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.
Date: June 28, 2011} /
00361946
PROOF OF PERSONAL SERVICE - CIVIL

. .
FILE
2 Clerk of the Superior Court I)
3
JUN 2 8 201]
Cy: Anthony Shirley, Deputy
4
U &/ 0/" < - · 4

5

6
COUNTY OF' SAN DIEGO

7
8 COURTNEY S. ETNYRE, CASE NO. 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL

:ar
9 Plaintiff, -[PINE*)+ ORDER AFTEN·REGARDING
HEARSAY STATEMENTS
t0 V.
11 SANDIP ("MICKEY") MINHAS, Date: April 15, 2010

individually, QUALCOMM Incorporated, a Time: 8:30 a.m.
12 Delaware corporation and DOES 1 through I Dept; 70
40, inclusive, Judge: Honorable Jay M. Bloom

Defendants. Trial Date: None Set
14
15
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED FOR GOOD CAUSE APPEARING:
16
Pursuant to the parties' stipulation, during trial, the parties will not introduce evidence
17
through exhibits or questioning regarding inadmissible hearsay statements made to Etnyre by
18
Nancy Barnhardt, individuals from the Department of Fair Employment and Housing ("DFEH"),
19
or Marvin Glover.2 Additionally, counsel will make no mention of reference to such statements
20
in front ofthejury.
21
IT IS SO ORDERED.
22 A-
23 Dated: 44,26,2011
HONORABLE RANDA TRAPP
24
25
26
1 Within her deposition Etnyre erroneously referred to Marvin Glover as "Marvin Jefferson", sothe same
stipulation will also apply to discussions with "Marvin Jefferson" referenced Within her deposition.
27
28
3
Stipulation and [Proposedl Order
. .
1
li Bi 01 : 1 1 ,·, f 1 :49
2 VF-i . L -E 11
Clerk of the Superior Court
3 JUN 2 8 2011
4
By: Anthony Shirley, Deputy

6
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

7
8 COURTNEY S. ETNYRE, CASE NO. 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL

ar
9 Plaintiff, -[PRepesiEDfORDER REGARDING
MEDIATION
10 V.
11 SANDIP ("MICKEY") MINHAS, Date: April 15,2010

individually, QUALCOMM Incorporated, a Time: 8:30 a.m.
12 Delaware corporation and' DOES 1 through Dept: 70
40, inclusive, Judge: Honorable Jay M. Bloom

Defendants. Trial Date: None Set
4
15
16
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED FOR GOOD CAUSE APPEARING:
17
Pursuant to the parties' stipulation, during trial no party will mention or introduce any
18
evidence of, or related to, any settlement or mediation related communications.
19
Specifically, the following will be excluded:
20
1. Any discussion or communications relating to the parties' April 2008 mediation,
21
including any agreement believed by any party to have been reached during mediation, Etnyre's
22
decision not to resolve the matterat that time, Etnyre's resulting resignation/termination, and any
23
i follow-up communications.
24
2. The parties' September 2009 mediation.
25
3. Any communications between the parties regarding the agreements made to toll
26
Etnyre's claims while the parties attempted to resolve their disputes.
27
4. Any communications with the Department of Fair Employment and Housing regarding
28
3
Stipulation and [Proposed] Order
.
1 settlement ofany ofEtnyre's claims.
2 5. The parties' June 28, 2011 settlement conference.
3 IT IS SO ORDERED.
4
Dated: 2011 (-JA\_/ A 11 1-c J, 1 j,n
r'"' 6--4/0.7- -v_,-!
5
l HONORABLE RANDA TRAPP
6
10
11
12
t3
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4
Stipulation and [Proposed] Order

37 2009 00101537 Cu Oe CTL - Roa 302 - 04 28 17 - 1510702824754

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

37 2009 00101537 Cu Oe CTL - Roa 302 - 04 28 17 - 1510702824754

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

5.

-Superior Court of California

C205_C2759/38 Reg_Date: 04/21/2017

1- H. Paul Konddck, Esq. (Bar # 88566) (619) 291-2400; riltb

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO CLERK-SDI-ERKR COURT

OD Other (speci40. Complaint for Discrimination, Retaliation and Harassmeni

Date: July 26, 2011 , H. Paul Kondrick, Esq.

San Diego, CA 92101 San Diego, CA 92101

Date: July 26, 2011 -- Candice E. Caufield K - -

Code of Civil Procedure, § 581 et seq.;

CIV-120 [Rev. January 1, 20071 AND PROOF OF SERVICE www coun#nfo.ca.gov

H. Paul Kondrick, A Professional Corporation

t..- & i :.J: L' : 4

c,TYANpzip CoDe San Diego 92101

[--1 personal injury, property Damage, or Wrongful Death

1. TO THE CLERK: Please dismiss this action as follows:

a. (1) 1-fl With prejudice (2) F-7 Without prejudice

b. (1) El Complaint (2) 0 Petition

(4) F-1 Cross-complaint filed by (name): on Mate):

(5) Entire action of all parties and all causes of action

2. (Complete in all cases except family law cases.)

(TYPE OR PRINT NAME OF || ATTORNEY Fl PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY) (SIGNATURE)

7. a. 17 Attorney or party without attorney notified on Mate): JUL 1 2 2011

_ PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER: Courtney S. Etnyre CASE NUMBER:

2, DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT: Sandip ("Mickey") Minhas, et at. 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL

Declaration Concerning Waived Court IFees

2. The person in item 1 (check one):

(TYPE OR PRINT,NAME Opr-1 ATTORNEY |-3 PARTY MAKING DECLARATION) (SIGNATURE)

CIV-110 [Rev. July 1, 2009] Page 2 of 2

H. Paul Kondrick, A Professional Corporation

San Diego, CA 92103-5803

E-MAIL ADDRESS (Optiona/) f : JUL -8 PA 2: 4 0

CITY. AND ZIP CODE: San Diego 92101

F-1 Personal Injury, Property Damage, or Wrongful Death

1. TO THE CLERK: Please,dismiss this action as follows:

a. (1) ril With prejudice (2) Fl Without prejudice

b. (1) F7 Complaint (2) Fil Petition

(4) Fl Cross-complaint filed by (name): on (date):

(5) [ Entire action of all parties and all causes of action

2. (Complete in all cases except family law cases.)

(TYPE OR PRINT NAME OF -| ATTORNEY -| PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY)

7. a. 1[2 Attorney or party without attorney notified{ on (date): JUL 1 2 2011

PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER: Courtney S. Etnyre CASE NUMBER:

DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT: Sandip ("Mickey") Minhas, et al. 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL

Declaration Concerning Waived Court Fees

1. Thecourt waivedi fees and costs in this action for (name):

2. The person in item 1 (check one):

CIV-110 [Rev. July 1,2009] Page 2 of 2

COURTNEY S. ETNYRE, individually, ) Case No. 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL

I, Candice E. Caufield, declare that:

On July 7, 2011, I served the foregoing document(s) described as:

San Diego, CA 92101

12 Attorneys for Defendant QUALCOMM Incorporated

BY PERSONAL SERVICE: I personally gathered a true copy ofthe above

-2- Proof of Service

BY FACSIMII.E (as indicated above): By use offacsimile machine number, (619)

-3- Proof of Service

DATE: 06/28/201'1 TIME: 09:30:00 AM DEPT: C-73

JUDICIAL OFFICER PRESIDING: Steven R, Denton

CASE NO: 37-2009-00101537-CU-OE-CTL CASE INIT.DATE: 11/02/2009

EVENT TYPE: Settlement Conference (Civil)

Judge Steven R. Denton

DATE: 06/28/2011 MINUTE ORDER Page 1