10 i 12 13, 4 15 16 7 18 19 20 21 22 2B 24 25 26 27 28 ANDREW M. SPURCHISE, Bar No. 5360847 MEL M.C. COLE, Bar No. 293265 SEAN P. PIERS, Bar No. 305607 LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C, 333 Bush Street 34th Floor San Franciseo, CA 94104 Telephone: 415.433.1940 FaxNo.: 415.399.8490 Attomeys for Defendant EAZE SOLUTIONS, INC. ELECTRONICALLY FILED Supertor Court of Cattormi, ‘County of San Prancieco, 01/17/2017 Clerk of the Court SySOWNAN UO Deputy Gterk SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO. DAKOTA QUIGLEY, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. EAZE SOLUTIONS, INC., Defendant. Case No. CGC-16-550805 DECLARATION OF MEL M.C. COLE IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT'S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION RE: SCOPE OF DISCOVERY Date: February 1, 2017 Time 1:30 p.m Dept.: 305 Trial Date: None Set Complaint Filed: March 4, 2016 PAC Filed: May 17,2016 “COLE DECLARATION ISO DEF'S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION RE: SCOPE OF DISCOVERYwae 10 u 12 13 14 15 16 7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 I, MEL MC. COLE, hereby make this declaration in support of Defendant Eaze Solutions, Inc.’s (“Eaze”) Opposition to Plaintiff Dakota Quigley’s (“Plaintiff”) Motion Re: Scope of Discovery: I am an associate attorney with the law firm of Littler Mendelson, a Professional Corporation, and counsel of record for Defendant Eaze Solutions, Ine. in this action. I am licensed to practice law in the State of California and appear in the above captioned matter. All of the information set forth herein is based upon my personal knowledge and my knowledge and review of the records in connection with this matter. If called and sworn as a witness, I could and | would competently testify thereto, Attached hereto as Exhil it A is a true and correct copy of excerpts of the deposition testimony of David Kram, the Person Most Knowledgeable testifying on behalf of Defendant. That deposition took place on October 20, 2016. 3. Plaintiff has propounded several sets of discovery to which Defendant has responded, To date, Defendant has propounded a single set of discovery requests to continue its efforts to determine whether Plaintiff signed an agreement to arbitrate this dispute. In addition, Defendant has subpoenaed Santa Clara Mountain Farms (“SCME”), its fleet entity, MCG, Inc., and | the owner personally, all to no avail. 4. Early in the discovery process the parties agreed that Defendant would not produce any documents concerning dispensaries other than SCMF. Subject to that limitation, | Defendant has been fully cooperative as to the remainder of Plaintiff's discovery requests, Indeed, Defendant already produced a putative class list of SCMF drivers. Defendant offered, and Plaintiff accepted, that Defendant's Person Most Knowledgeable deposition (“PMK”) would have no SCMF limitation. Plaintiff's counsel was free to ask questions about Defendant's relationship with other dispensary customers and to obtain h their drivers. Plaintiff took Defendant's testimony about the practices those dispensaries have PMK’s deposition and counsel did in fact ask about other dispensaries, 6. After the PMK deposition the parties again met and conferred regarding the scope of discovery going forward. Defendant’s position was that the testimony clearly explained 2 ‘COLE DECLARATION ISO DEF"S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION RE: SCOPE OF DISCOVERY |eens 28 why Plaintiff's discovery should be limited to the dispensary he contracted with, as the PMK testified repeatedly that the company relates to each dispensary entirely differently. Plaintiff disagreed, and demanded discovery for the entirety of the state. The parties were unable to resolve their dispute, and raised the issue at a Case Management Conference on November 18, 2016, where the present briefing was ordered 7. Plaintif?’s Motion refers to a document that does not appear to be attached to any supporting declaration. Attached hereto as Exhibit B is the exhibit from to Plaintifi"s Request for Admission, Set One, which is a printout of a message board thread from www. Reddit.com. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Califomia that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed this 17th day of January 17, 2017 in San Francisco, California. Peri: 14501 30831088509. 1001 3 ‘COLE DECLARATION ISO DEF'S SPECIAL DEMURRER TO FAC.