Doria v. Case-Mate - Am. Compl.

7/29/2019 Doria v. Case-Mate - Am. Compl.

1/44

Case 2:12-cv-09544-GAF-AJW Document 7 Filed 03/19/13 Page 1 of 26 Page ID #:30

1 Daniel M. Cislo, Esq., No. 125,378Kelly W. Cunningham, Esq., No. 186,2292 CISLO & THOMAS LLP1333 2nd Street Suite 5003 Santa Monica, California 90401-4110Tele]?hone: (310) 451-06474 Telefax: (310) 394-4477

5 Attorneys for PlaintiffDoria International, Inc.6

ti\::1.-::!

, . ,(--:![ '"'

i " ' l l ' _ ~::::::--1...r?-lc;:

C: ) - ~ " ' ._ '( n ~ - ~ J ; : : : - - ~ : : : - ~

~ ~ ~ 1rq fJJ (") - -.~ : : : ~ .

~ - ~ ~ ~ ~- 1

....,=..,.,;:ll:~ "'


2/44

2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

CISLO&

THOMASLLP

AonyaLw

SUTE500

13332nStr

SATAMONICACAFORIA90401-4110

T

310)451-0647

Fcml310)394-4477

Plaintiff Doria International, Inc. (Doria), alleges as follows:

I. THE PARTIES

1. Doria is a California corporation with its principal place of business

located at 1149 3rd Street, Suite 210, Santa Monica, California 90403 in this

judicial district.

2. Upon information and belief, Defendant Case-Mate, Inc.

(Defendant), is a Georgia corporation with its principal place of business

located at 2048 Weems Road, Tucker, Georgia 30084.

3. The true names and capacities, whether individual, corporate or

otherwise of Defendants Does 1-9 inclusive, are unknown to Doria, who therefore

sues them by such fictitious names. Doria will seek leave to amend this complaint

to allege their true names and capacities when they have been ascertained. Doria

is informed and believes and thereon alleges that each of the fictitiously named

Defendants is responsible in some manner for the occurrences herein alleged and

that Dorias damages as herein alleged were proximately caused by those

Defendants. At all times herein mentioned, Defendants Does 1-9 inclusive were

the agents, servants, employees or attorneys of their co-defendants, and in doing

the things hereinafter alleged were acting within the course and scope of their

authority as those agents, servants, employees or attorneys, and with the

permission and consent of their co-defendants.

II. JURISDICTION & VENUE

1. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to

28 U.S.C. 1331, 1338(a), 1367, and 2201(a) since the right to a declaratory

judgment arises under the federal Declaratory Judgment statute, 28 U.S.C.



3/44

3

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

CISLO&

THOMASLLP

AonyaLw

SUTE500

13332nStr


T

310)451-0647

Fcml310)394-4477

2201(a), the patent invalidity and noninfringement claims arise under the patent

laws of the United States, including 35 U.S.C. 281 and 289, and the trade

dress invalidity and noninfringement claims arise under the federal Lanham Act,

15 U.S.C. 1051, et seq.

2. Venue is proper in this judicial district under 28 U.S.C. 1391(b)

since a substantial part of the events and omissions giving rise to the claims

occurred in this judicial district. Additionally, venue is proper in this judicial

district under 28 U.S.C. 1400(b) to the extent that the Defendants several

offers for sale through online commercial websites, through which Defendants

have offered the accused products, constitutes a regular and established place of

business in this judicial district.

4. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant in that it maintain

a web site at www.case-mate.com through which it actively markets, advertises

promotes, sells, and services California residents as its customers. Defendant

web site is freely available to any online user worldwide, including users in thi

judicial district. On its web site, Defendant advertises and offers for sale iPhone

cases, among other things, and users can purchase these items directly from

Defendants web site, making Defendants web site an interactive website tha

subjects Defendant to personal jurisdiction in this judicial district.

III. FACTUAL BACKGROUND

5. Doria is a global supplier of innovative fashion-forward accessories

for mobile phones and other personal consumer electronic devices. From the

beginning, Doria has had a commitment to approachable fashion and customer-

centric design.

6. Today, Doria continues to break new ground in fashion and design

for mobile accessories, pairing warm, sophisticated design with industry leading



4/44

4

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

CISLO&

THOMASLLP

AonyaLw

SUTE500

13332nStr


T

310)451-0647

Fcml310)394-4477

innovation. It has hundreds of stylish and functional accessory designs, many of

which enjoy their own intellectual property protection. They are novel, unique

innovative, and highly acclaimed.

7. On or about September 18, 2012, Doria received a cease and desist

letter from Defendant in which Defendant asserts trade dress rights in and to

certain shapes of camera windows in mobile phone cases. In the letter, Defendant

itself describes this feature as, a camera window with two perpendicularly-

angled edges connected by a curved arc. Doria attaches as Exhibit 1 hereto a

true and correct copy of a cease and desist letter dated September 18, 2012 as

Doria received it purporting to be from Defendants counsel with this description

of Defendants purported trade dress.

8. Doria adamantly denies that Defendant has developed any trade dress

right in a camera window with two perpendicularly-angled edges connected by a

curved arc or that it even could have a trade dress right in a camera window

with two perpendicularly-angled edges connected by a curved arc. Doria also

adamantly denies that any of its highly acclaimed designs infringe any trade dress

right Defendant attempts to assert.

9. In the last paragraph on the first page of Defendants cease and desist

letter, Defendant also asserted that, These actions . . ., in anticipation of their

allowance by the Patent Office(s), will be in violation of Case-Mates design

patent rights upon issuance. Doria recently learned that the United States Patent

and Trademark Office (PTO) issued U.S. Design Patent No. D673,554 (the

554 Patent) to Defendant on January 1, 2013. Doria attaches as Exhibit 2

hereto a true and correct copy of the 554 Patent.

10. Doria contends that the 554 Patent is invalid for several reasons,

including, but not limited to, the grounds that every feature of the claimed design

is functional and the prior art anticipates or renders obvious the claimed design.



5/44

5

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

CISLO&

THOMASLLP

AonyaLw

SUTE500

13332nStr


T

310)451-0647

Fcml310)394-4477

11. Doria contends that the 554 Patent is not enforceable for several

reasons, including, but not limited to, the grounds that Defendant failed to

disclose highly relevant prior art references to the United States Patent and

Trademark Office during prosecution.

12. Doria also contends that it does not infringe the 554 Patent for

several reasons, including, but not limited to, the grounds of intervening prior

art.

13. This dispute, therefore, gives rise to the following causes of action.

IV. FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF

Declaratory Judgment of Design Patent Invalidity

(Under 35 U.S.C. 101, 102, and 103)

14. Doria hereby repeats and incorporates herein the allegations set forth

in paragraphs 1 through 13 above.

15. In the last paragraph on the first page of Defendants cease and desist

letter, Defendant also asserted that, These actions . . ., in anticipation of their

allowance by the Patent Office(s), will be in violation of Case-Mates design

patent rights upon issuance. Upon information and belief, the 554 Patent is the

design patent Case-Mate was asserting against Doria in its cease and desist letter

since it was the only design patent for which Case-Mate had any PTO notice of

allowance at the time Case-Mate delivered its cease and desist letter.

16. Doria, on the other hand, contends that the 554 Patent is invalid for

several reasons. First, every feature of the claimed design is functional. The

scope of the design claimed in the 554 Patent is defined by the solid lines shown

in Figures 1-7 thereof. (See, Exhibit 2, pages 3 and 4). Every facet of this

claimed design, however, is dictated by the most efficient case shape for covering

and conforming to the outer surfaces of a standard iPhone.



6/44

6

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

CISLO&

THOMASLLP

AonyaLw

SUTE500

13332nStr


T

310)451-0647

Fcml310)394-4477

17. Second, the prior art anticipates or renders obvious the claimed

design. In particular, numerous iPhone cases existed as of November 30, 2011,

the earliest possible priority date for the 554 Patent. These iPhone cases

comprise this claimed design, and therefore, anticipate it.

18. Should there be any slight difference between the design of these

prior art iPhone cases and the claimed design, then the differences are

insubstantial such that the prior art iPhone cases, at a minimum, render the

claimed design obvious.

19. That is, Doria contends that the claimed design is entirely dictated by

functional concerns, is anticipated by designs found in the prior art, and/or at a

minimum, is rendered obvious by the teachings of the prior art. Accordingly,

Doria contends that the 554 Patent is invalid.

20. This creates an Article III case and controversy warranting a

declaratory judgment by this Court. Doria therefore requests a judgment

declaring that the 554 Patent is invalid.

V. SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF

Declaratory Judgment of Design Patent Unenforceability

(Under 35 U.S.C. 101)



22. Again, Defendant asserted in its cease and desist letter to Doria tha

Doria will infringe Defendants patent rights once the allowed patent application

issues as a design patent, namely, the 554 Patent.

23. Doria, on the other hand, contends that the 554 Patent is

unenforceable on the grounds of inequitable conduct on the part of Case-Mate for

failure of Case-Mate to disclose materially relevant prior art references.



7/44

7

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

CISLO&

THOMASLLP

AonyaLw

SUTE500

13332nStr


T

310)451-0647

Fcml310)394-4477

24. The prior art is replete with numerous iPhone cases that existed as of

November 30, 2011, the earliest possible priority date for the 554 Patent. These

iPhone cases comprise this claimed design, and therefore, would have blocked the

554 Patent, but for Case-Mates failure to disclose them to the PTO during

prosecution of the 554 Patent.

25. That is, Doria contends that the PTO would not have issued the 554

Patent, but for Case-Mates failure to disclose materially relevant prior art design.



declaring that the 554 Patent is unenforceable.

VI. THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF

Declaratory Judgment of Noninfringement of Design Patent

(Under 35 U.S.C 101)



28. Again, Defendant asserted in its cease and desist letter to Doria tha

Doria will infringe Defendants patent rights once the allowed patent application

issues as a design patent, namely, the 554 Patent.

29. Doria, on the other hand, contends that it does not infringe the 554

Patent. Dorias design is distinct in several ways, and several prior art references

intervene between the design claimed in the 554 Patent and Dorias designs, and

any attempt to extend this design to encompass Dorias design would be improper

as it would ensnare numerous prior art designs as well.



declaring that Doria does not and has not infringed the 554 Patent.



8/44

8

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

CISLO&

THOMASLLP

AonyaLw

SUTE500

13332nStr


T

310)451-0647

Fcml310)394-4477

VII. FOURTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF

Declaratory Judgment of Functionality of Trade Dress

(Under 15 U.S.C. 1125(a)(3))



32. Defendant insists that certain identified Doria products infringe

Defendants trade dress and demands that Doria stop selling these identified Doria

products to avoid any further infringement.

33. Doria additionally contends that Defendants claimed trade dress is

functional and therefore not protectable as a trade dress.

34. First, Doria contends that Defendants description of its purported

description is singularly unintelligible. To the extent Defendant meant the shape

shown on the first page of the attachments to Defendants letter (denoted by

Defendant with a circle-A), only a very few alternative designs for a camera

window exist. Defendants circle-A design is merely a rectangular window that,

along one corner, conforms to the curvature of the corner on the mobile phone

itself since it abuts this corner. That is, all aspects of this design are dictated by

function. A rectangle is one of the most, perhaps the most, efficient camera

window shapes. When the rectangle occupies the upper-left-most corner of the

mobile phone case, it naturally will need to conform to the upper left-hand corner

of the mobile phone case. The shape of the upper left-hand corner of the mobile

phone case is dictated by the shape of the upper left-hand corner of the mobile

phone. (See, for example, camera windows shown in the pages of Defendants

attachment to its cease and desist letter, reproduced as Exhibit 1 to this

Complaint).

35. Any other shape would be inefficient and arbitrarily complex for no

good reason. Trade dress protection should not force competitors to adopt less



9/44

9

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

CISLO&

THOMASLLP

AonyaLw

SUTE500

13332nStr


T

310)451-0647

Fcml310)394-4477

efficient, less workable, or arbitrarily fanciful camera window designs that would

put the competitors at a financial disadvantage. This is what the doctrine of

functionality is intended to prohibit.

36. An actual case and controversy therefore exists between Doria and

Defendant as to whether Defendant is barred by the doctrine of functionality from

claiming a trade dress right in either a camera window with two perpendicularly-

angled edges connected by a curved arc or the camera window shown in its

attachment circle-A to its cease and desist letter, which is reproduced as Exhibit 1

to this Complaint.

VIII. FIFTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF

Declaratory Judgment of Lack of Secondary Meaning in Trade Dress

(Under 15 U.S.C. 1125(a))





products to avoid any further trade dress infringement.

39. Doria contends that Defendants description of its purported trade

dress is singularly unintelligible. To the extent Defendant meant the shape shown

on the first page of the attachments to Defendants letter (denoted by Defendant

with a circle-A), Doria contends that the camera window shown denoted as circle-

A does not serve as a trademark or trade dress and has not developed any

trademark significance.

40. Doria insists that Defendant therefore does not own the asserted trade

dress, that Defendant has not acquired secondary meaning in the asserted trade

dress, and that it therefore does not perform as a trademark or trade dress.



10/44

10

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

CISLO&

THOMASLLP

AonyaLw

SUTE500

13332nStr


T

310)451-0647

Fcml310)394-4477

41. Defendants asserted camera window is inherently not distinctive, and

there are a multitude of similar and near-identical camera window shapes that

have been on the market long before Defendants purported products. The field is

too crowded, especially for such a non-distinctive camera window design, for

there to be any secondary meaning among the consuming public.


Defendant as to whether Defendant has a trade dress right in either a camera

window with two perpendicularly-angled edges connected by a curved arc or the

camera window shown in its attachment circle-A to its cease and desist letter,

which is reproduced as Exhibit 1 to this Complaint.

IX. SIXTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF

Declaratory Judgment of Noninfringement of Trade Dress

(Under 15 U.S.C. 1125(a))





products to avoid any further trade dress infringement.

45. First, Doria contends that Defendants description of its purported

description is singularly unintelligible. To the extent Defendant meant the shape

shown on the first page of the attachments to Defendants letter (denoted by

Defendant with a circle-A), however, Doria contends that none of its products

contain any camera window that is sufficiently similar to this to constitute trade

dress infringement. Only a very few of its numerous different designs contain

anything like this, and even these few camera windows are noticeably different

(see, for example, camera windows shown in the remaining pages of Defendants



11/44

11

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

CISLO&

THOMASLLP

AonyaLw

SUTE500

13332nStr


T

310)451-0647

Fcml310)394-4477

attachment denoted by Defendants with a circle-B).

46. Doria therefore contends that it does not infringe and has no

infringed Defendants professed trade dress rights.


Defendant as to whether Dorias accused camera window designs infringe

Defendants purported trade dress rights.

X. DORIA INTERNATIONAL INC.S PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Doria International, Inc., prays that this Court:

1. Enter a declaratory judgment that U.S. Design Patent No. D673,554

is invalid;

2. Enter a declaratory judgment that U.S. Patent No. D673,554 is

unenforceable;

3. Enter a declaratory judgment that Doria does not infringe U.S.

Design Patent No. D673,554;

4. Enter a declaratory judgment that Defendant does not have any trade

dress rights in its asserted camera window design on the grounds of functionality.

5. Enter a declaratory judgment that Defendant does not have any trade

dress rights in its asserted camera window design on the grounds that there is no

secondary meaning.

6. Enter a declaratory judgment that Doria does not infringe and has no

infringed Defendants professed trade dress rights.

7. Grant judgment for Doria for the costs of this action and its

attorneys fees incurred; and



12/44


,...,....,.,.q.01C)

0--0:.. ' : ' ~....l -...l oi.iv : !If ) 0 X;S t iet i-'i .. u;; o a : : f ~. . : : ~ o c \ i ~'-' onoo- ~ z " -- " N-I-.. ..J t iil ( ' ) ~~ ~ (I ').~ l'lC)


13/44


12

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

3 Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ .P. 38, Plaintiff Doria International , Inc. hereby4 demands a trial by jury on all issues raised by the Complaint that are triable to a5 JUry.6789

10 Dated: March 19 , 2013111213141516171819202122232425262728

T:\1227042\FirsLamended complnilu rordcc l:oraLOry judgmcnL.doc

Respectfully submitted,CISLO & THOMAS LLP

fLti1k:t'Kelly W. Cunningham, Esq.Attorneys for PlaintiffDoria International, Inc.


14/44

EXHIBIT 1



15/44


'

GARDNERGROFFGA RDNE R GROFF GREENWALD & VILLANUEVA, PCPATENT, TRADEMARK AND COPYRIGHT LAW AND RELATED MATTERS EXCLUSIVELY

September 18,2012Doria lntemationallnc. Via [email protected]/o American Certification Institute4301 E. Valley Blvd. 02Los Angeles, CA 90032

Re: Intellectual Property NoticeOur File: 2C25.9-200

To Whom It May Concern:

(Confirmation via FedExJTracking #: 7989 8869 4332

This firm represents Case-Mate, Inc. in intellectual property matters. Case-Mateis a well-known electronics case manufacturer and enjoys international sales of itsinnovative designs. Correspondingly, Case-Mate invests significant resources toprotect the intellectual property embodied in its innovative cases.For example, Case-Mate has developed and marketed the distinctive andornamental case feature as shown in Attachment A, comprising a camera window withtwo perpendicularly-angled edges connected by a curved arc. As a result of significantmarketing exposure and sales, this camera-window design has become distinctlyrecognized in the marketplace as trade dress of Case-Mate, protected under Section43{a) of the United States Lanham Act. Additionally, Case-Mate has filed a number ofdesign patent applications, both domestic and internationally, to protect this designfeature.It has been brought to our attention that Doria International Inc. (a.k.a. "X-Doria11)has begun marketing a mobile telephone case with a camera window design that islikely to cause confusion in the marketplace with Case-Mate's above-described tradedress and patent-pending design. Specifically, Attachment B shows a variety of the XDoria cases with camera window designs that are virtually indistinguishable from CaseMate's design.These actions are in violation of Case-Mate's trade dress rights, and in

anticipation of their allowance by the Patent Office(s), will be in violation of Case-Mate'sdesign patent rights upon issuance. Accordingly, we hereby demand that X-Doriaimmediately and permanently terminate any and all marketing and sale of mobiletelephone cases with camera windows that create a likelihood of confusion with theabove described Case-Mate design. Since X-Doria is at least now aware of CaseMate's rights, any continued marketing or sale by X-Doria of such cases will beconsidered willful and may be subject to enhanced damages in a court of law.

20 IS POWERS FERRY ROAD, SUITE 8 0 0 , ATLANTA, GEORGIA 3 0 3 3 9 U.S.A.TELEPHONE 7 7 0 . 9 8 4 . 2 3 0 0 FACSIMILE 7 7 0 . 9 8 4 . 0 0 9 8

WWW.GARONERGROFF COM


16/44


Doria International Inc.c/o American Certification InstituteSeptember 18, 2012Page -2-

Please provide us with confirmation of your understanding and compliance. If wereceive your agreement to these terms within two weeks of the date of this letter, CaseMate will agree to waive its claim for monetary damages for violation of its intellectualproperty rights on this matter to date. In the absence of such timely agreement, CaseMate reserves all rights to injunctive, monetary and other relief of any kind. I lookforward to your prompt response.

BKG:rjhEnclosurescc : Doria International Inc.3592 Rosemead Blvd, #220Los Angeles, CA 91770

Very truly yours,~' Bradley K. GroffFor the Firm

(Via FedEx - Tracking#: 7989 8871 6889)


17/44

Case 2:12-cv-09544-GAF-AJW Document 7 Filed 03/19/13 Page 17 of 26 Page ID #:46arely There Slim Case for iPhone 5 ICase-Mate http://www.ease-mate.com/iPhone-5-Cases/Case-Mate-iPhone-5-Ba

of 3

Home 1/J > Sma11phonc Cettlf h ltp.//Wt-.'w.ccie-mole .com/cclCS/SmoJIPhone--COlti O\P) > i?hone Co1e1 (hllp .I/Y.ww o u : ! c o m ( l r h o n e - - - ! 1 - C u u / i P h o n e csp} >il'none 5 Sc:el'f Inore Cme1

BARELY THERE for iPhone 5write a review (lil' hone-5-Cases/Case-Male-iPhone-5-Barely-There-Cases-write-review.asp)

I IDETAILS REVIEWS

Think thin wilh tho original slim case. The Barely There !Phone 5 case forms a classic andprotective design that shows off the timeless look of your device. The impact resistant hard shellcovers lhe back and sides. while lhe lay-flat feature protects lhc front of your iPhooe byextending tho bezel above U1e screen. A silicone interior liner provides Impact cushioning and animpressive detailed paHem.

l.JI.e 24 lwet 3 5 26

Select Color- Titanium GreyCM022398 In Stock!

$30.00 OTY ~PRODUCT DESCRIPTION

Utlra-Siim, snap-on design wilh tay-ftal screenprotection lor your iPhone 5

Interior patterned Inlay adds greater protection &finished feel throughout

Premium soft touch finish that's easy to hold Orders now ship September 21,2012

Also available lo r !Phone 4(4s lhtta l!www case-mate comliPhone-4-CasostCasc-Mato-IPhonc-4-45-Barcly-TbereCascs.aspl

ALSO RECOMMENDED

o ~ o . - - -

5-Cases/Case-

Tortolseshcii (/1Phonc-5-Cases/Case-Mate-1P hone-5Tortolsosheii-C:.sos.asp)foriPhone 5$40.00

Tough Case (/IPhone-5-Cases/Case-Mate-IPhone-Mate-IPhone-s-Tough-Casos.asp)5-TortoiseshEOl !Phone 5Cascs.asp) 540 .005-Cases/Case- e t 1 0 0 ~ . Recycled1.1ate-iPhoneiiiPhonc5-C:Isos/Case-M:.te-IPhone-5-Recycled-5-ToughCasos.asp) rPet-Cases.a.sp)(/!Phone- for !Phone 55-Cases S35 .00r.1ate-iPhone-sarety There / I P h o n o - 5 - C a s c s J C a M a t e - I P n ~ > -5-Rccycled-r P c t - C a s c s a ~ p ~ a r e l y - T h r c - C a s e s . a s p )for i?honc 5

530.005-Cascs/CascMate-iPhone-5-Barely-

GET THE LATEST ON T H ! t t ~ E T E S T DEALS Ienrcr your email address a"': :u :not :11cn\

9/ 17/20 12 10:53


18/44

Case 2:12-cv-09544-GAF-AJW Document 7 Filed 03/19/13 Page 18 of 26 Page ID #:47Doria

I of2

DDASHiPhone 5$34.99

I I

http://shop.x-doria.com/productslkick14098

KickiPnonc 5 $29.99Co lors Add to Cart>

~ ~ outSide the USA? r=l

OVERVIEW SPECS FAQ

K l c ~ back and enjoy handsfree Facclime(tm). movies and more witn Kick fO t ! J / , o l l ~ . . tiiiiii!IMI....... t l e . i l i ' ..... ~ ...................... , _ ,~ W M - I I I I l l l o " a e ! ~ a & J I I M : ( l) l l l l l l l l l ! l iap.._..... M ~ i a i N ' ~ I O I . l r - a . . . . . , _ . d C I J C . " " " - - . . m c . t l l l ...............~ - r ~ - . ~ t w - ~ l ! l l 4 c : Q . r . . a . l f 1 R i i ! J f o .. . . , . . . ~ - - . . . . . . , . . , . , . . , . . . _ . . . ~ . _ , . . . , . . _ . t t . ~

81768 G9r\\ ~ t - ~ ; ;

3:)1::1.::!0 HrHH 1-U'H 61 :S't mez:-vr-Ntlf- .. .- ..... -- - - - -- - - - - - --- C7:QT

- ~ --


30/44

Case 2:12-cv-09544-GAF-AJW Document 7-1 Filed 03/19/13 Page 4 of 18 Page ID #:59

~ - e - ' " ( " ' ~ J t f . L~ - "' " :c r...;:

B ot

JMT1At..S: ' rxJE t : ) f ~ G l ~ ~ W ~ r l K S I - l E E T F I ~ O S }, . Elf.i: . DATi -, ..ay .. _ ~ i - -._,t:eA,iC112TIME: ..d ~ - E f ; > 8:J.J.:9.5! " 1::!58 C 6 ~ A U L ' f DATI! ~ --~ A A C & ltlfOO: OIUGINAL SUP: ;:z :ltrr6. s--rru' \ \ - I ~ Y 8 SRACE END! .. AllJ. RE.Stll. OAYS: - . . ... ~ b lRJDO: ~ 9 Y . i l l . . 8 : i t . a ~ ADJ. SU P QA-rt!;1 1 ~ ~ " " " f l B n ""' l iM' Mft!: ~ w AUG ~ J U P T ' ~ N O V ~OI!.Ct t l ~ fl R.(t!S MAJI APR MAY .NNe oWLY AllO S&PT (leT NOV CEC

\8_ JAN Fe MAA APR MA"t .ruNE JU\.V AU


31/44


EXHIBIT 2


32/44


U. S. DEPARTMENT OF eoucRtt()JN I 0 PM 4: 23STUDENT FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE

I ~ I I I I I ~ I I I I ~ I ~ I I I I I ~ I ~ I I I ~ I I I I I ~ ~ ~ I O I I I I I I I U I I I I I ~ I I I I I I I# B W N ~ D M C **AUTO .#W G 0659Yll 523411 9#LOS ANGELES COUNTY OF PUBLIC SCHOOLS9300 IMPERIAL HWY STE RM132 DATE : JUNE 17, 2003DOWNEY CA ryo242-2813J(,J,,IJ iuuJ,J,Ju11al1laalriJ,,J nullnJI,IImllmlaluJ

SUNDAY A NYENKElfll-23-0659185,995.17ORDER FOR WITHHOLDING OF EMPLOYEE WAGESFOR DEBT OWED TO U.S . GOVERNMENT

PURSUANT TO SECTION 488A OF THE HIGHER EDUCATION ACT OF 1965, ASAMENDED, (20 U.S.C. l095A), AND NOTWITHSTANDING ANY PROVISION OF STATELAW TO THE CONTRARY, THE SECRETARY OF EDUCATION ORDERS YOU TO WITHHOLDAND REMIT TO THE U.S . DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AT THE ADDRESS LISTEDBELOW 10.% OF THE WEEKLY DISPOSABLE WAGES PER PAY PERIOD, OR SUCH LESSERAMOUNT AS IS PERMITTED BY FEDERAL LAW, OF THE ABOVE-REFERENCEDINDIVIDUAL ON ACCOUNT OF A DEBT OWED THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION


33/44

Case 2:12-cv-09544-GAF-AJW Document 7-1 Filed 03/19/13 Page 7 of 18 Page ID #:621TED STATES GOVERNMENE GARNISHMENT ORDER ( S F - ~ " " 9 B )

of !his Q ; 2. Dat e Mai led to Employer:

APRIL 21, 2004 APRIL 22 2004: 4. Employee Name:

SUNDAY A NYENKE

O: 6. Employer:LOS ANGELES COUNTY OF PUBLIC SCHOOLS

8. Creditor Agency:u. s. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONSTUDENT FINANCIAL ASSISTANCECOLLECTIONS

10. Contact Name:

ADAM EVANS12. In ternet e-m ail address:

FSA.AWGQ>ED . GOV

Amoun t Due:A-t .... .. - _ ._ , ,. .-"'i' . L O J 1 y ..,i) -t"J

15. As of (Month/Day/Year):.... , ,_ , , _ ,..._,

. : . : . ~ , c . ; . . . , " " ' " ' " t

3. Credit Agency T I ' O c k i n No. (refer to t his number in allcorrespondence):

5411230659S. Employee Social Security No.:

411-23-0659

7. Employer Mailing Address (include street address, p.o. box, suite no., city,state, z ip code):9300 IMPERIAL SUITE RM 132DOWNEY CA 90242-00.00

9. Creditor Ag;ency Ma iling Address {inctude street address, ci ty, sta te. zipa ~ d e ) : NATIONAL PAYMENT CENTERP .O. BOX 4142GREENVIllE, TX 75403-4142

11. Telephone No.:

404 -562-60 1313. Fax No.:

404-562 - 6110

Note: The amount due may be increased as a resof additional interest, penalties, and other costsbeing assesed by the Creditor Agency.

tion 1. ORDER. YOU, the Employer, are hereby ORDERED to deduct from all disposable pay paid by yEmployee the Wage Garnishment Amount described in Section 2 ofthis Order. You are ordered t o begductions on the first pay day after you receive this Order. If the first pay day is within 10 days after you r e c eyou may begin deductions on the second pay day after you receive this Order. You are ordered toinue deductions until you receive notification from the Creditor Agency to suspend or discontinue deductire further ORDERED to pay the Creditor Agency all Wage Garnishment Amounts deducted by you un

STANDAR D FORM 3298Prcscribed 31 CF

Vll 0001 235


34/44

Case 2:12-cv-09544-GAF-AJW Document 7-1 Filed 03/19/13 Page 8 of 18 Page ID #:63- - ' _._-..... -.,;,.

No.: 17. Acrount No.: 18. Agency c : ~ l i Code (ALC) No.:

N/ATitle: 20. Other information required (i.e, tr:lcklng no., debtor nam, etc.):

N/A, mail checks (postmarked within 3 business days of the withhoiding) to:

address for cheti< payments:DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

PAYMENT CENTER. DOX 4142TX 7 5 4 0 5 - ~ 1 4 2

2. WAGE GARNISHMENT AMOUNT.

1\l/A

The Wage Garnishment Amount is S per pay period in accordance with anbetween th e Creditor Agency and the Employee.

-OR-The Wage Garnishment Amount for each pay period is the lesser of:(l) % of th e Employee's disposable pay (not to exceed 15%);(2) the garnishment amount set forth in !5 U.S.C. l673(a)(2) (the amount by which the emp loyee'sdisposable pa y exceeds an amount equivalent to 30 times the maximum wage); or(3) 25% of the Employee's disposable pay less the amounts withheld under th e withholdingorders with priority. A withholding order with priority is a valid, legally enforceable withholding order thai. either (i) wasreceived by the Employer prior to this Order, or (2) is an order for family support regardless of date received. Upon terminationof any withholding order with priority or upon receipt of an order for family support subsequent to the receipt of this Order , th e amowithheld for this order shall be re calculated based on the formula described in this Section 2(b).

Mote: l'llie Employer may use ll.be attached Wage Garnishment Wmrksheetfl:o cakullate the Wage Garnishment Ammllnt.

AGENCY ClER1fHFJ!CATaON. The


35/44


EXHIBIT 3


36/44


T-0 ' dL0/S0 39\Jd

December 15, 2009Ms. Sunday Nyenke4750 West Washington BoulevardLos Angeles. CA 90016

Federal family Education LoansDebt No.: G199609000902107F1996040Il27630lf1996040 11276302F199604011276303F199604011276304F199604011276305Fl996040ll276306Balance: $76,414.85

GARNISHMENT HEARlN'G DEClSIONDearMs . Nyeuke:This letter presents the findings at!d conclusions r ~ a c h after the e0$I'it ~ o o s i d e , r a t i o

h ~ d n g requested by you regarding att objection to collection of l defaulted student loanaccount held by U.S. Department ofEducation. Federal Student Aid, through wagegarnishment action, This decision was n ~ d e r e d .rlte.r ~ e f h l r ~ v i e w ofyour argun1entsand all available recQJ:'ds relatedio you.. account, including those mlbmitted by you Mdthose held by the Department. OUr fmdinwo are conolusive and constitute t..heDqllil.f'tments :final decis!on on youro\Uectious.

Your letter dated .August 20, 2009; Q e o i s i o n ~

The Department's original determination thai yOUt'wages are subject to a garnishmentorder, as proposed in at the;. rate of lS percent ofyour disposable pey, stands.

On b ~ 9, 2008, the ~ a r t . m e n t iswecl a decision that this debt is o r c ~ a b l e bywage garnishment at the rate stated in the decision. You ttow object to wage gsmisbm@nt

81?68 29 8T.8S30 I..:::l.::IO 1'r\lJI

:DI.:::l=:!O H9IH Nf8lg6ll0 1T8LS60l0Tt


37/44


C:0"dL0 /10 39'ii'd

Page 2. - Ms. Sunday Nyenkedue to financial hardship. We therefore consider your curr-ent objection to he a request forreoonsideTatioo ofthe prior decigion thlllt the debt was enforceable bywage garnishmentat the r.ate sW.ted inthe deci3iQn.$ You object to the ptoposed garnishment 6lCtion on the grounds that the Department 'apri"Vate CQUection agency contractor has either !efused to work with you lo resolve thedebts in question or hag in some manner "i.o!e.ted. your rights under the Fair DebtCQllection Practices Act.W@ :regret that you


38/44


md "lt:Hru

s::0 dL0/00 39\td

Pagc3 - Ms. SundayNycnk.eY >u must submit your l.Vl'it.tenallegations against the private collection agency io theaddress below:

U.S. D ~ p a r t m e n i ofEducationATTN: Contract Services Branch61 Forsyth Street. Sutu l9T89Atla.trta, GA 30303However, these allegations have no bearittg on the validity or the existence offh.e debts,the status, or the araount due Of past due on the debts.o You W . t ~ that yott have no t :receivo" a r-esponse to yonr previous inquiries.Our recorda indka!.te that on September24, 2004, we sent a letter to yol.l addressing yourconcerns.

You "vish to avoid garnishment by establishing a. voluntary e p a y m ~ agreement.0-uf recor


39/44


1:0 "d39'v'd

Page 4 SundayNyenke.Our r.,cords indicata tlmt w ~ sent you a notice on A1.1gust 15,2000. Th isnotice stated inpart that if we oid not receive payments. we would refer your account to Treasucy foroffset. TI1e R\Otice nlso provided a telephone number you could contact for infonnationabo1.rt. your repayment options. However. we did not receive any payments within 65 ~ y softhe notice. 1htJ funds t.M..at "have been offset will not be returned to you. Your accountwill be removed from the offset r v c e & ~ > when hi s debt is satisfleiL

You objected to garnishment on the basis that withholding at the rate o:f 15 percent ofyour disposable pay would cause a financial hardship to you_TheRequest for Hea.ting advised ycu to submit a :financial discloSLU"e statetnen't in orde;to be considered in evaluating your objection to garnishmellt. k oft.\e date ofthls letter,the Department bas not received a. completed finMcial di.sclosu:re s t ~ t e m e n t or etherexplam\tion ofyour financicd circumstances to supJX>rt your clttim of G n . a n c i ~ I hardship.

\Ve conclude that this debUs ciL'frceable by garnishment aithis time in the amount statedin the notice. with aC\..-"Tued interest and costs of collection, at the rate o f 15 percent ofyout disposable pay. Because your Reque'llt fur Hearing was not timely f!led. theDepartment ~ directed your employer to garnish 15 percent of your &posable pay.bal"'-nce sho'Wil includes the outstanding principal of$60,417.55, accrued interest of ..,$1 .038.82. 31td unpaid fees aXld projected coUection ~ ; o s t s of$14.958.48. The unpaidprill!:ipal balance noted above wiH confuwe to accrue n t ~ r e s t . You .::an have tbis wageganlisbment action cancelledby the Deprutment by sending pn.yment in :full.

Send paynlcnt in fuH to;U.S. Department of EducationNational Payment CenterP.O. B o ~ :H)5028Atlanta, GA 30348-.5028

Make all p t i Y m ~ n t instru-vnents payable to the 11U.S . D e p ~ e n t o f d u C G ~ t i o n andinclude yout name and Social u . . r i t y Number on the :fu.cf} ofthe payment 1:nsttument.You may requestto hnve us reconsider this decision en lu, existence. a m o u n t . ~ past dt.Hlstatus, and enforceability of his clebi:. To obtain reconaideration, you must submitevidence that you did not previously aubmit lliat yetSUades us that we should e c o r ~ d e rIfwe agree to teconsider this detision, we will notify you.

817GB


40/44


Pag 5 - Ms. Stmda.y Nyen..l(e

You may also request e c o n s i d ~ a t i o n of his dt1cision due to financial h a n l ~ i p . Toreque$ eith o n s i d e r a t i o n or e ~ o n s i d e r a t i o n on the grounds of inancial haroship, youmust submit evidettCe with your ~ q u e s t that demonstrates that your i n ~ ' l c i a l situationbas materially changed since we issued our decision so t.hat we shot.old reduce:: the amountissued under t.he orde:r. You may ~ q u e s t n ..Financial Disclosure Statement" from ourcustomer service representative at l - ~ 0 0 - 6 2 1 - 3 1 1 5 o.r download tlle form atwww.lSOOiwiUpay cont/awgfs.The request fo r n s i d e r a t i o n or reconsideration wili no!. delay Qr ctmcel the a ~wifuholdins; tntder any order thai bas already been issued. P l ~ s e submit your request.along with a copy of he original dedsioa and the eviden{Je you W


41/44


EXHIBIT 4

~ 3 ~ r - :2--5- -


42/44

Case 2:12-cv-09544-GAF-AJW Document 7-1 Filed 03/19/13 Page 16 of 18 Page ID #:71- - - ~ - ~ - - ~ A - ~ - - - - - ~ - ..--------- - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - " " " " ' " " ' ' " - " ' " _ " __________________ - - - - - - -

LEDGER UPDATE ----- -- - - -- ----- - -- - -------- --- -- 23 - 06 59 PT5484282 NYENKE,SUNDAY A DISTRICT: 10199 LA CO. OFFICE OF EDUCATION

CURRENT BAL EMP STATUS VENDOR FEE CODECASE NUMBER999/El

EFFECTIVE DATE07/ 10/2003

ORIGINAL BAL185,995.17 188,315.10 ACTIVE 0000005221 US DEPT OF EDUCATIO N NPCENTER

Student LoanGARN STATUSACTIVE

PRIORITY1

PRIME CYCLEE1

----- B WARRANT - - ---------- --------------- A ARRANT -- -- - - - - - - - -- -- -E- ~

- - - - - - - - - - - - - ; c ~ = : J c : ~ J c=.JCOMMENT:

UBNIT i f ;

NUMBER: - - - - - - -------,. I- - - ~ - - - - - - - - - . . 1

DATE PAY SCHED AMOUNT PAYMENT APPLY TO BAL[ ~ : ~ = : = ~ _ : : ~ ] Yes -

FREE FORM C:OMI>'.ENT:!_________________________________________ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ....................... - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

CANCEL- G.iill_Nl$H MEi'!T SUrlMAR'( [ VIEW ! IRS 0ARNJSif \1LNl'S- - - -- - - - - - - - -.- - - - ~ ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - . - . ----- B WARRANT- ----- -- -------- A WARRANT -- -- - - - -

DATE NUMBER DATE

86043

61934

33

6452958

71 4 22

53497411

5401269119

298759242669

161

674450

5

0 2/04/201301/03/201312/04/201211/02/ 201210/04/201210/01/ 201209/10/ 201209/07/ 201209/04/201208/02/201207/05/2012

000 7340276 03/05/20130007294836000724936500071987390007151468000710628400071052850007077707000707713800070645530007036855

0006995824

02/05/201301/04/201312/05/201211/05/ 201210/05/201210/ 01/201209/ 10/ 201209/07/ 201209/05/ 201208/03/201207/09/201207/05/2012

07 /05/2012 - .. 0006995824 07/05/201207/03(2012 . 0006995824 07/05/201206(04/2012 0006944486 06/05/201203/02/201202/02(201201/04/201212/0 2/201111/03/201110/0 4/201109/0 1/2 0 1108/04/20 1107/01/201106/ 01/201105/03/ 201104/04/ 20110 3/03/201102/03/201101/04/201112/03/201011/04/201010/04/ 201009/02/201008/03/20 1007/01/201006/02/ 201005 /04/201004/02/201003/04/201002/04/20 1001/0 4/ 201012/03/ 200911/ 03/200910/ 02/ 200 909/03!200909/01/200908/04/200907/02/200 906/04/200905/04/200904/03/200903/03!200902/03/200901/05/200912 /04/2008

000679818500067538150006710259000665 78210006608027000655907300065203890006496669000644959600063970660006346876000629650200052466750006196193000614806400060889500006036935000598446800059467120005921436000587149100058162410005760406000570578300056508040005598608000554583300054869280005430788000537323400053289290005328697000529878600052459060005182715000512099600050599770009470841000941223000093465730009275917

05/ 24/2 01203/05/201202/03/201 201/05/201212/05/201111/04/201110/05 / 201109/02 / 201108/05/2 01107/05/201106/03/201105/05/ 201104/05/2 01103/04/201102/0 4/201101/05/201112/03/201011/05/201010/0 5/201009/03/ 201008 /05/ 201007/02/201006/04/201005/05/201004/05/201003/05/201002/05/201001/05/201012/0 4/200911/05/200910/05/ 200909/04/200909/01/200908/05/200907/02/200906/05/200905/05/200904/03/ 200903/05/200902/05/200901/05/200912/05/2008

PAYSCHEDE1PE1NEllElJElHEl f271C3B249ElDE1BE1XE1XElXE1VE1PE1NElLEllE1HEl fElDElBElXE1VEITE1RElPEl NEl lEllE1HE1FElDEl BE1XE1VElTEl RElPElNEllEl JE1HElFElDE1BE1XE1VElTE1RElPElNEllElJ

AMOUNT1,030.0 51,046.411,013.49950.62930.61

1,096.27900.81341.99107.58

1,1 75.99916.48

- 1 ,194.881 ,080.96- -1"13;921,194.881,093.63

-99,999.99949.51954.87947 .59935.75956.40944.11927.25929.1594 5.91945.91945.91945 .91945 .91945.91944.16949 .62949.62947.82930.64931.82937.93

1,114.661,097.131,064 .9 1988.6296 1.75962.261,055.04

1 ,025.14954.04

1,058.36214.9692 1.29933.68937.89938.90938.90938.90928.89

1,001.92925 .61

BALANCE PMT GARN OPERATORDUE Y /N STAT INITIALS

188,315.10 A IBM189,345 .15 A IBM190,391.56 A IBM191,405.05 A IBM192,355.67 A IBM193,286.28 A IBM194 ,382.55 A JOE195,283.36 A JOE195,625.35 A JOE195,732 .93 A IBM196,908.9 2 A IBM198,906.36 N A JOE197 ,825.40 A JOE198,906.36 N A JOE197,711.48 A IBM198,906.36 A IBM199,999.99 N P JOE100,000.00 P IBM100,949.51 A IBM101,904.38 A IBM102,8 51.97 A lBM103,787.72 A IBM104,744.12 A IBM105,688 .23 A IBM106,6 15.48 A IBM107.544.63 A IBM108,490 .54 A IBM109,436.45 A110,382.36 A111,328.27 A112,274.18 A113,220.09 A114,164.25 A115, 113.87 A116,063.49 A117,011.31 A117,941.95 A118,873.77 A119,811.70 A120,926.36 A122,023.49 A123,088.40 A124,077.02 A125,038.77 A126,001.03 A127,056.07 A128,081.21 A129,035.25 A130,093.61 A130,308 .57 A13 1,229.86 A132,163.54 A133,101.43 A134,040.33 A134,979.23 A135,918.13 A136,847.02 A137,848.94 A

COMMENTS

SUPP 249 1'-JC 0'1-06 :ll112.JB

J?.c\L_AOJ BASfQ_QtA ~ k - . l ~ \ 0 7 - Q 2 : : ~ Q; ~ A I L E D OllT TO V#5 221 ON 07-10201216 iBQ5..T.:::.?J;.iif' REFUND : . \ l . ; } : . f l l . E ! ~ 16-WT : 1 l!i(iCt.tICEU.ED 07-092.0l2m

ROti J ' . A ~ I CALC


43/44


153053

10/ 02/2 00809/05/200808/0 4/ 200807/01/200806/03/200805/05/200804/04/200803/04/200802/05/200801/03/200812/04/200711/05/200710/09/200709/05/200708/03/200707/03/200706/05/200705/04/200704/05/200703/05/200702/05(200701/05/200 712/05/200611/03/200610/05/200609/05/200608/04/ 200607/05/200606/05/200605/05/200604/04/200603/03/200602/03/200601/04/200612/05/200511/04/ 200510/ 04/200509/02/200508/05/200507/0 5 /200506/03/200505/05/200504/05/200503/04/2 00502/04/200501/04/200512/03/200411/ 05/200410/05/200409/0 3/200408/05/200407/22/ 200407/02/200406/0 4/200405/04/200404/05/200403/05/200402/05/200401/05/200412/05/200311/04/200310/03/200309/05/ 200308/05/2003

00091384750009090919000905447700089878550002998108000882797400087521530008676045000859928000085291280008448041000837264500083028200 008244478000816401200080959480008010965000793142000078576980007773698000769176700076224070007534977000746212200073919800007335076000728566800072152580007121472000704603900069638450006888576000681595400067456030006665598000658974600065198920006464770000641753600063448340006265101000518407400061016950006022191000594715100058762340005796211000572123300056469460005593577000555253200055402310005483575

00053995790005323095000524940900051721680005100718000502982300049494330004676346000480284700047464710004700730

120 - P A . Y M ~ N T S

10/03/200809/05/200808/05/200807/03/200806/05/200805 /05/200804/04/200803/05/200802/05/200801/04/200812/05/200711/05/200710/05/200709/05/200708/03/200707/05/200706/05/200705/04/200704/05/200703/05/200702/05/ 200701/05/200712/ 05/200611/0 3/200610/05/200609/05/200608 /04/ 200607/05/200605/ 05/200605/05/200604/05/200603/03/200602/0 3/200601/05/200612/05/200511/04/200510/05/200509/02/200508/05/200507/05/200506/03/200505 /05/200504/05/200503/04/200502/04/200501/05/200512/03/200411/05/200410/05/200409/03/200408/05/200407/22/200407/02/200406/15/200406 /04/200405/0 5/200404/05/200403/05/200402/05/200401/05/200412/05/200311/05/200310/03/200309/05/200308/05/2003

TOTALING

ElFElDE1BE1X E1VElTE1RE1PE1NEl lEUE1HElFElDElBElXE1VElTE1RE1PElNEl lElJE1HElFE1DElBElXE1VE1TE1RElPE1NEl lElJE1HElFE1DElBElXElVElTE1RElPE1NEllElJE1HE1FE1DE1B

ElXE1VElTE1RElPE1NEllElJElHElFElDElB

916.31955.55

1,059.611,033.001,062.591,019.571,038.391,038.391,051.831,022.261,025.561,065.581,047.071,014.851,046.48993.30882.34786.14643.01935.61953.29985.55

1,003.021,003.021,025 .7 0915.05852.26809.44809.44809.44809.44809.44809.44799 .9 9796.76795.76796.76789.86789.86756.76756.76743.51743.51743.51743.51743.51741.67741.67741.67735.35735.3588.89

707.270.00

471.51478.52518.09511.71471.51471.51471.10471.10471.10466.90506.09

3,625.36

139,710.55140,526.86141,582.41142 ,642.02143,675.02144,737.61145,757.18146,795 57147,833.96148,885.79149,908.05150,933 61151,999.19153,046.26154,051.11155,107.59156,100.89156,983.23157,769.37158,412.38159,347.99160,301.28161 ,2 87.83162,290.85163,293.87164,319.57165,234.62166,086.88166,896.32167,705.76158,515.20169,324.64170,134.08170,943.52171,743.51172,540.27173,337 03174,133.79174,923.65175,713.51176,470.27177,227.03177,970.5 4178,714.05179 ,457 .56180,201.07180,944.58181,686.25182,427.92183,169.59183,904.94184,640.29184,729.18185,436.45180,686.03181,157.54181,636.06182,154.15182,665.86183,137.37183,608.88184,079.98184,551.08185,022.18185,489.0 8

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

MODIFIED

- - - - -


44/44


1

234

56789

1011121314151617

18

PROOF/CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, the undersigned, certifY that I am over 18 years of age and not a party tothis action. My business address is 100 Oceangate, l ih Floor, Long Beach, CA90802.

On March 13 , 2013, I served copies of the following document(s):Plaintiff's First_Amended Complaint Against Defendant, U.S. Department o

Educationon the interested parties in this action as follows:1.

2.

Roger West, Esq.U.S. Attorney's Office (Civil)Centra] District of California300 North Los Angeles Street, i hFloorLos Angeles, CA 90012General CounselU.S. Department of Education400 Maryland Avenue S WWashington DC, 20202

*I hereby certifY that I served the above-described document by depositing it in the1920/. 1

2 223

United States Mail in a sealed envelope with the postage thereon fully prepaid.*I hereby certify that I am a member of he Bar of the United States District Court,Central Djstrict of California.*I hereby certifY under the penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.

: : Executed on March 13 , 2013, at o n : _ : ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ - : : ~ ~ ~ - 1 t s 1 ~ - l ~ S l _____________2 627

28

LAW OFFICE OF ALABA A J E T U N ~ O B I100 Oceangate, 12 1 FlooLong_Beach CA 9080Tel.: 56'2.628.5578Fax: 562,628.557

Doria v. Case-Mate - Am. Compl.

Documents

Transcript of Doria v. Case-Mate - Am. Compl.