To Complaint

Response

Cal. Super. - 6th Dist.August 9, 2018

Ro pe rs Ma je sk i K o h n & Be nt le y A Pr of es si on al C o r p o r a t i o n Sa n Jo se N Y o h BA W N 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 DENNIS J. WARD (SBN 78493) Electronically Filed MATTHEW K. SUESS (SBN 320441) by Superior Court of CA, ROPERS, MAJESKI, KOHN & BENTLEY County of Santa Clara, 50 West San Fernando Street, Suite 1300 on 1/8/2019 12:30 PM San Jose, CA 95113-2429 Revi dBv: Y. Ch Telephone: (408) 287-6262 eviewed by: Y. Chavez Facsimile: (408) 918-4501 Case #18CV333005 Email: dennis.ward@rmkb.com Envelope: 2351745 Attorneys for Defendant BIZLINK TECHNOLOGY, INC. SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA TANISHA BROOKS, TATIANA CASE NO. 18CV333005 BUFFIN, AND TAYA BUFFIN, ANSWER TO COMPLAINT Plaintiffs, Vv. Judge: Hon. Mary E. Arand Action Filed: August 8, 2018 HUI LING CHANG, YANNCHIU Trial Date: TBA WANG, BIZLINK TECHNOLOGY, INC. AND DOES 1 to 25, Defendants. Defendant, BIZLINK TECHNOLOGY, INC., in answer to the unverified Complaint of Plaintiffs herein, herewith denies each and every, all and singular, the allegations of said unverified Complaint, and in this connection, Defendant denies that Plaintiffs have been injured or damaged in any of the sums mentioned in said Complaint, or in any sum, or at all as the result of any act or omission of this answering Defendant. AS A FIRST, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE COMPLAINT ON FILE HEREIN, AND TO EACH ALLEGED CAUSE OF ACTION CONTAINED THEREIN, this answering Defendant alleges that said Complaint fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against this answering Defendant. AS A SECOND, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE COMPLAINT 4841-1014-0292.1 wi |= ANSWER TO COMPLAINT Ro pe rs Ma je sk i K o h n & Be nt le y A Pr of es si on al C o r p o r a t i o n Sa n Jo se Oo XX N N nn BA 10 11 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 99 28 ON FILE HEREIN AND TO EACH ALLEGED CAUSE OF ACTION CONTAINED THEREIN, this answering Defendant alleges that Plaintiffs were careless and negligent in and about the matters alleged in the Complaint, and that said carelessness and negligence on the part of said Plaintiffs, proximately caused or contributed to the happening of the incident and to the injuries, loss and damage complained of, if any there were; that should Plaintiffs recover damages, Defendant is entitled to have the amount thereof abated, reduced or eliminated to the extent that the negligence of Plaintiffs caused or contributed to Plaintiffs’ injuries, if any. WHEREFORE, this answering Defendant prays for judgment as follows: 1 That Plaintiffs take nothing by their Complaint; 2 For reasonable attorney's fees and costs of suit incurred herein; and 3. For such other and further relief as the Court deems proper. ROPERS, MAJESKI, KOHN & BENTLEY Fr I By: DATED: January 8, 2019, 2015 DENNIS J. WARD Attorneys for Defendant BIZLINK TECHNOLOGY, INC. 4841-1014-0292.1 a Hes ANSWER TO COMPLAINT R o p e r s M a j e s k i K o h n & B e n t l e y A Pr of es si on al C o r p o r a t i o n Sa n Jo se 0 N l O Y i n B W NY ) PR O DN DN N N N N N N e e m e m pe t p m b e d pe d p d p k ww N N N n n B R A W N = D Y S y B R A W N e o CASE NAME: Brooks v. Chang ACTION NO.: 18CV333005, Santa Clara County Superior Court PROOF OF SERVICE METHOD OF SERVICE X] First Class Mail [J Facsimile O Messenger Service OJ Overnight Delivery [1 E-Mail/Electronic Delivery 1. At the time of service I was over 18 years of age, not a party to this action and a lawful resident of the United States. Zz My business address is 50 West San Fernando Street, Suite 1400, San Jose, CA 95113, County of Santa Clara. 3s On January 8, 2019 I served the following documents: ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 4. I served the documents on the persons on the attached service list (along with their fax numbers and/or email addresses if service was by fax or email). 5; I served the documents by the following means: a. By United States Mail: I enclosed the documents in a sealed envelope or package addressed to the persons at the addresses specified on the attached service list and placed the envelope for collection and mailing, following our ordinary business practices. Iam 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 at the address listed in paragraph 2, above. b. O By Overnight Delivery: I enclosed the documents in an envelope or package provided by an overnight delivery carrier and addressed to the persons at the addresses on the attached service list. I placed the envelope or package for collection and overnight delivery at an office or a regularly utilized drop box of the overnight delivery carrier. ¢. 00 By Messenger: I served the documents by placing them in an envelope or package addressed to the persons at the addresses listed in on the attached service list and providing them to a messenger for service. (Separate declaration of personal service to be provided by the messenger.) d. OO By Fax Transmission: Based on an agreement between the parties and in conformance with FRCP, rule 5, and/or as a courtesy, I faxed the documents to the persons at the fax numbers listed on the attached service list. (Separate Proof of Transmission by Fax to be provided.) e. O By Fax Transmission: Based on an agreement between the parties and in conformance with Rule 2.306, and/or as a courtesy, I faxed the documents to the persons at the fax numbers listed on the attached service list. (Separate Proof of Transmission by Fax to be provided.) f. O By Email or Electronic Transmission: Based on an agreement between the parties and/or as a courtesy, | sent the documents via my electronic service address to the persons at the email addresses listed in the attached service list. I did not receive, within a reasonable time after the transmission, any electronic message or other indication that the transmission was unsuccessful. 4841-1014-0292.1 -3- ANSWER TO COMPLAINT R o p e r s M a j e s k i K o h n & B e n t l e y A Pr of es si on al Co rp or at io n Sa n Jo se NO 0 N N O N Wn BA W N B O r = = e d e m t p t md p e d p m p e d e t © NO 0 N N Wn BR W N = O \] N o N o b o NI b o ro bo 0 I am employed in the office of a member of the bar of this court at whose direction the service was made. I certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. 4 \ | | Dated: January 8, 2019 “Raslle Dalily Kathy Matul&wicz ey SERVICE LIST Brooks v Chang Santa Clara County Superior Court Case No. 18CV333005 Louis S. Abronson Attorneys for Plaintiffs Abronson Law Offices I (408) 687-9155 236 N. Santa Cruz Avenue, Suite 227 F: (408) 395-1955 Los Gatos, CA 95030 E: Louise@redhouselawyer.com 4841-1014-0292.1 willl ANSWER TO COMPLAINT