DeclarationCal. Super. - 6th Dist.January 6, 2020KOOOQONUl-RUJNH NNNNNNNNNr-‘r-‘r-‘r-‘r-‘r-‘r-‘r-‘HH OOQONUI-RUJNHOKOOOQONUI-bwwr-‘O 200V361271 Santa Clara - Civil A. Flo h . Electronically Filed Fred W. Sc wmn (SBN 225575) by Superior Court of CA,Raeon R. Roulston (SBN 255622) County of Santa Clara,Matthew C. Salmonsen (SBN 302854) 21 _ PMCONSUMER LAW CENTER, INC. 0" 8/6/20 5-53 1435 K011 Circle, suite 104 Rewewed By: A- Floresca San Jose, California 95 1 12-4610 Case #20CV361 271 Telephone Number: (408) 294-6100 Envelope: 701 631 5 Facsimile Number: (408) 294-6190 Email Address: fred.schwinn@sjconsumerlaw.com Attorneys for Defendant/Cross-Complainant RYAN KINGSLAND SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA MIDLAND FUNDING, LLC, Case N0. 20CV361271 (Unlimited Civil Case) Plaintiff, V' DECLARATION OF RAEON R. ROULSTON IN SUPPORT OF MOTIONRYAN KINGSLAND FORATTORNEY FEES AND COSTS BY Defendant. RYAN KINGSLAND RYAN KINGSLAND, Hearing Date: September 30, 2021 Hearing Time: 9:00 a.m. Cross-Complainant, Hearing Dept; 20 Hearing Judge: Hon. Socrates Manoukian V‘ Hearing Location: 161 North First Street MIDLAND FUNDING, LLC, a Delaware San Jose, Cahforma limited liability company; MANDARICH LAW GROUP, LLP, a California limited liability partnership; CHRISTOPHER D. MANDARICH, individually and in his official capacity; and ROES 1 through 10, inclusive, Cross-Defendants. I, Raeon R. Roulston, declare under penalty 0f perjury, under the laws 0f the State of California, that the following statements are true: 1. I am an attorney at law duly licensed to practice before all the courts 0f the State 0f California and am senior associate attorney at the law firm Consumer Law Center, Inc., attorneys 0f _ 1 _ DECLARATION OF RAEON R. ROULSTON Case No. 20CV36127 1 esca KOOOQONUl-RUJNH NNNNNNNNNr-‘r-‘r-‘r-‘r-‘r-‘r-‘r-‘HH OOQONUI-RUJNHOKOOOQONUI-bwwr-‘O record for Defendant/Cross-Complainant, RYAN KINGSLAND (hereinafter “KINGSLAND”). 2. I have personal knowledge 0f the following facts, and if called as a Witness, I could and would competently testify thereto. 3. I am a member in good standing 0f the bars 0f the following courts: Supreme Court of California Sacramento, California 2008 U.S. Court oprpeals for the Ninth Circuit San Francisco, California 2010 U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California San Francisco, California 2008 U.S. District Court for the Eastern District 0f California Sacramento, California 2008 U.S. District Court for the Central District 0f California Los Angeles, California 2008 EDUCATION AND EXPERIENCE 4. I am a 2007 graduate of Santa Clara University School of Law in Santa Clara, California, and a 2003 graduate magma cum laude 0f Morgan State University in Baltimore, Maryland. I am a member of the State Bar 0f California, American Bar Association, National Association 0f Consumer Advocates, National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys, and Santa Clara County Trial Lawyers Association. 5. My practice is limited exclusively to the representation of consumers, with particular emphasis 0n representing consumer debtors under the United States Bankruptcy Code. In addition t0 Bankruptcy cases, I handle matters under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, Truth in _ 2 _ DECLARATION OF RAEON R. ROULSTON Case No. 20CV36127 1 KOOOQONUl-RUJNH NNNNNNNNNr-‘r-‘r-‘r-‘r-‘r-‘r-‘r-‘HH OOQONUI-RUJNHOKOOOQONUI-bwwr-‘O Lending Act, Telephone Consumers Protection Act, Uniform Commercial Code, common law fraud, misrepresentation and deceit, usury, and other laws enacted t0 protect consumers. My firm, Consumer Law Center, Inc., undertakes representation in many consumer cases with the expectation of being paid a contingency amount from the proceeds 0f recovery, 0r being paid based on an award 0f fees pursuant t0 fee shifting statutes such as the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, California Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, California Rees-Levering Automobile Sales Finance Act and California Unruh Act. 6. I have given a number of lectures t0 consumers and professional groups 0n consumer law issues, including Community Legal Services in East Palo Alto, Pro Bono Project in San Jose, and the Veterans’ Administration in Menlo Park, California. 7. In 2013, I was one 0f two recipients 0f the Attorney 0f the Year award by the Community Legal Services in East Palo Alto non-profit. I have been a member of the National Association of Consumer Advocates since 2008 and have attended at least seven (7) national conferences exclusively 0n consumer law issues. 8. I am my firm’s primary trial counsel 0n collection defense matters, and I have tried most of the cases my firm has taken to trial in the past 13 years. I have assisted numerous consumers in both chapter 7 and chapter 13 bankruptcies, and been involved in many consumer cases involving a range 0f consumer protection laws. 9. I have been counsel 0f record 0r materially assisted 0n several cases that have resulted in reported decisions favorable t0 consumers including: CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT o Meza v. Portfolio Recovery Assocs., LLC, 6 Cal. 5th 844 (Cal. 2019) (CiV. Proc. Code § 98(a) requires affiant’s personal presence at location within 150 miles 0f place 0f trial for a reasonable period Within the 20 days prior t0 trial if personal service 0f trial subpoena would ordinarily be necessary t0 secure that affiant’s attendance at trial). _ 3 _ DECLARATION OF RAEON R. ROULSTON Case No. 20CV36127 1 KOOOQONUl-RUJNH NNNNNNNNNr-‘r-‘r-‘r-‘r-‘r-‘r-‘r-‘HH OOQONUI-RUJNHOKOOOQONUI-bwwr-‘O APPELLATE COURTS Timlick v. Nat’l Enter. Sys., Ina, _Cal. App. 5th_ (Cal. App. lst Dist. 2021) (trial court had jurisdiction t0 hear and grant renewed discovery motion that was pending when order granting summary judgment motion, Which was later reversed 0n appeal, was entered). Davis v. Mandarich Law Grp., 790 F. App’x 877 (9th Cir. 2020) (reversing and remanding FDCPAjudgment for Defendants). Meza v. Portfolio Recovery Assam, LLC, 762 F. App’x 431 (9th Cir. 2019) (vacating and remanding district court’s summary judgment order dismissing FDCPA Class-action claims). Timlick v. Nat’l Enter. Sys., Ina, 35 Cal. App. 5th 674 (Cal. App. lst Dist. 2019) (debt collector cannot unilaterally “pick off” the named plaintiff and avoid class action litigation). Professional Collection Consultants v. Lujan, 23 Cal. App. 5th 685 (Cal. App. lst Dist. 2018) (Delaware 3-year statute of limitations applies in California debt buyer’s collection cases). Meza v. Portfolio Recovery Assocs., LLC, 860 F.3d 1218 (9th Cir. June 22, 2017) (certifying question of state law to California Supreme Court). Professional Collection Consultants v. Lauron, 8 Cal. App. 5th 958, (Cal. App. 6th Dist. Feb. 16, 2017) (Delaware 3-year statute of limitations applies in California debt buyer’s collection cases). Yj/e v. Salomon (In re Salomon), 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 23221 (9th Cir. Dec. 23, 2016) (affirming denial of motion to extend time for filing appeal). Johnson v. CFS II, Ina, 628 Fed. Apr. 505 (9th Cir. Cal. 2016) (affirming judgment for consumer Plaintiff in FDCPA case). Montgomery v. GCFS, Ina, 237 Cal. App. 4th 724 (Cal. App. lst Dist. 2015) (construing Cal Fin. Code § 22340(a)). Lauron v. Prof’l Collection Consultants, 2014 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 8983 (Cal. App. 6th Dist. Dec. 18, 2014) (denying debt collectors’ interlocutory appeal). Lujan v. Prof’l Collection Consultants, 2014 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 8555 (Cal. App. 1st Dist. NOV. 26, 2014) (denying debt collectors’ interlocutory appeal). Yj/e v. Salomon (In re Salomon), 2014 Bankr. LEXIS 897 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. Mar. 7, 2014) (affirming denial 0f motion t0 extend time for filing appeal). Target National Bank v. Rocha, 216 Cal App. 4th Supp. 1 (Cal. Super. Ct. 2013) (holding that Code 0f Civil Procedure § 98 declarants must be physically present within 150 miles of the place of trial). Fontaine v. Superior Court, 175 Cal. App. 4th 830 (Cal. App. 6th Dist. 2009) (Peremptory writ 0f mandate was issued. Venue proper in Santa Clara County pursuant t0 California Code of Civil Procedure § 395(b)). Resurgence Financial, LLC v. Chambers, 173 Cal. App. 4th Supp. 1 (Cal. Super. Ct. 2009) (Superior Court erred in failing t0 apply Delaware’s three year statute of limitations required by contract choice-of-law clause). U.S. DISTRICT COURTS (previous ten years only) Griego v. Tehama Law Grp., P.C., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 152306 (ND. Cal. Aug. 21, 2020) (granting motion t0 remand Rosenthal case). Credit Consulting Servs. v. Scott, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 29660 (ND. Cal. Feb. 25, 2019) -4- DECLARATION OF RAEON R. ROULSTON Case N0. 20CV361271 KOOOQONUl-RUJNH NNNNNNNNNr-‘r-‘r-‘r-‘r-‘r-‘r-‘r-‘HH OOQONUI-RUJNHOKOOOQONUI-bwwr-‘O (granting motion to remand FDCPA class action cross-complaint). Izett v. Crown Asset Mgmt., LLC, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 211459 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 14, 2018) (granting motion t0 strike affirmative defenses in FDCPA case). Timlick v. Nat’l Enter. Sys., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 130921 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 16, 2017) (granting motion to remand RFDCPA class action case). Carlson v. Gatestone & C0. Int’l, Ina, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 93348 (ND. Cal. June 16, 2017) (granting motion to remand RFDCPA class action case). Garcia v. Stanley, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 32550 (ND. Cal. Mar. 7, 2017) (granting motion for attorney fees and costs in FDCPA case). Jacobson v. Persolve, LLC, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 173058 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 14, 2016) (granting motion for attorney fees and costs in class action FDCPA case). Garcia v. Creditors Specially Sena, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 159686 (N.D. Cal. NOV. 16, 2016) (granting summary judgment in a FDCPA case). Ciganek v. Portfolio Recovery Assocs., LLC, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 74905 (ND. Cal. June 7, 2016) (construing Cal. Code of Civil Procedure § 98). Datta v. Asset Recovery Solutions, LLC, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 36446 (ND. Cal. Mar. 18, 2016) (granting class certification under Rule 23(b)(3) in a FDCPA class action case). DeLeon v. Elite Self Storage Mgmt., LLC, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 29744 (E.D. Cal. Mar. 7, 2016) (granting motion to strike affirmative defenses in part in B&P 17200 case). Ditlevson v. Legal Express, Ltd. , 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 159621 (ND. Cal. NOV. 24, 2015) (granting motion t0 strike affirmative defenses in FDCPA case). Neves v. Benchmark Recovery, Ina, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 152829 (ND. Cal. NOV. 11, 2015) (granting motion for default judgment). Camacho v. Jeflerson Capital Sys., LLC, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 127004 (ND. Cal. Sept. 21, 2015) (granting in part motion for summary judgment in FDCPA case). Meza v. Portfolio Recovery Assocs., LLC, 125 F. Supp. 3d 994 (N.D. Cal. 2015) (construing Cal. Code of Civil Procedure § 98). Krulee v. Receivables Performance Mgmt., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 101282 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 3, 2015) (denying FDCPA Defendants’ motion for attorney fees and costs). Martel] v. Baker, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 83528 (ND. Cal. June 25, 2015) (granting motion for attorney fees and costs in FDCPA case). Jacobson v. Persolve, LLC, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 73313 (N.D. Cal. June 4, 2015) (granting class certification under Rule 23(b)(3) in a FDCPA class action case). Picard v. ABC Legal Servs., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 70713 (N.D. Cal. June 1, 2015) (denying process server’s motion for summary judgment in FDCPA case). Marnam' v. Mezzetti Fin. Servs., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24153 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 24, 2015) (granting motion to strike affirmative defenses in FDCPA case). Bentkowsky v. Benchmark Recovery, Ina, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12694 (ND. Cal. Feb. 2, 2015) (granting motion t0 alter 0r amend judgment t0 specify that collection agency principal was jointly and severally liable). Gold v. Midland Credit Mgmt., 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 142758 (ND. Cal. Oct. 7, 2014) (granting class certification under Rule 23(b)(3) in a FDCPA class action case). Camacho v. Jeflerson Capital Sys., LLC, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 141216 (ND. Cal. Oct. 2, 2014) (granting motion t0 strike affirmative defenses in FDCPA case). Krulee v. Receivables Performance Mgmt., LLC, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 141181 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 1, 2014) (granting motion to strike affirmative defenses in FDCPA case). -5- DECLARATION OF RAEON R. ROULSTON Case N0. 20CV361271 KOOOQONUl-RUJNH NNNNNNNNNr-‘r-‘r-‘r-‘r-‘r-‘r-‘r-‘HH OOQONUI-RUJNHOKOOOQONUI-bwwr-‘O Jacobson v. Persolve, LLC, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 115601 (ND. Cal. Aug. 19, 2014) (granting motion to strike affirmative defenses in FDCPA class action case). Davis v. Midland Funding, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 109309 (E.D. Cal. Aug. 6, 2014) (denying debt buyers motion for summary judgment in FDCPA case). Skinner v. Mt. Lion Acquisitions, Ina, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 106815 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 1, 2014) (denying debt buyers’ motion to dismiss in FDCPA case). Long v. Nationwide Legal File & Serve, Ina, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 101670 (ND. Cal. July 23, 2014) (awarding attorney fees and costs in FDCPA case). Bentkowsky v. Benchmark Recovery, Ina, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 110259 (N.D. Cal. July 10, 2014) (compelling document production in FDCPA case). Gold v. Midland Credit Mgmt., 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 93461 (ND. Cal. July 9, 2014) (compelling Rule 30(b)(6) deposition topics in FDCPA class action case). Gold v. Midland Credit Mgmt, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 93448 (N.D. Cal. July 9, 2014) (compelling document production in FDCPA class action case). Neves v. Kraft, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 70670 (N.D. Cal. May 22, 2014) (granting motion for default judgment in FDCPA case). Younger v. Michael & Assocs., P.C., 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 60916 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 30, 2014) (granting motion for attorney fees and costs in FDCPA case). 130i v. Patenaude & Felix, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 52197 (ND. Cal. Apr. 15, 2014) (granting motion for attorney fees and costs in FDCPA case). Brown v. Mandarich Law Group, LLP, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 47020 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 2, 2014) (granting motion for attorney fees and costs in FDCPA case). De Amara] v. Goldsmith & Hull, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 45730 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 1, 2014) (granting motion for attorney fees and costs in FDCPA case). Claflin v. Mandarich Law Group, LLP, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22447 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 21, 2014) (denying motion t0 dismiss 0r stay action based on principles of abatement). Gold v. Midland Credit Mgmt., 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 27605 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 20, 2014) (compelling discovery in class action case). De Amara] v. Goldsmith & Hull, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18568 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 11, 2014) (granting summary judgment in FDCPA case). Johnson v. CFS II, Ina, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 180793 (ND. Cal. Dec. 27, 2013) (granting motion for attorney fees and costs in FDCPA case). Johnson v. CFS II, Ina, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 178542 OVD. Cal. Dec. 19, 2013) (denying Defendant’s motion t0 reconsider). Madison v. Goldsmith & Hull, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 153168 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 24, 2013) (striking affirmative defenses and awarding service costs and attorney fees pursuant to Fed. R. CiV. P. 4(d)(2)). Rivera v. Portfolio Recovery Assam, LLC, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 136002 (ND. Cal. Sept. 23, 2013) (granting motion for attorney fees and costs). Long v. Nationwide Legal File & Serve, Ina, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 132971 (ND. Cal. Sept. 17, 2013) (granting in part, motion for summary judgment). Ansari v. Elec. Document Processing Ina, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 124798 OVD. Cal. Aug. 28, 2013) (granting in part, motion for summary judgment). Holmes v. Elec. Document Processing, Ina, 966 F. Supp. 2d 925 (ND. Cal. 2013) (denying motion t0 dismiss and motion t0 strike FDCPA case). Chan v. Booska, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 109005 (N.D. Cal. July 15, 2013) (awarding attorney -6- DECLARATION OF RAEON R. ROULSTON Case N0. 20CV361271 KOOOQONUl-RUJNH NNNNNNNNNr-‘r-‘r-‘r-‘r-‘r-‘r-‘r-‘HH OOQONUI-RUJNHOKOOOQONUI-bwwr-‘O fees in FDCPA case). o Johnson v. CFS, II, Ina, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 61017 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 28, 2013) (granting summary judgment and awarding treble damages under Cal. Civil Code § 3345). o Ansari v. Elec. Document Processing, Ina, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24776 (ND. Cal. Feb. 22, 2013) (granting motion t0 strike affirmative defenses without leave to amend). o De Amara] v. Goldsmith & Hull, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24085 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 21, 2013) (denying motion t0 dismiss and motion to transfer). o De Amara] v. Goldsmith & Hull, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 172779 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 5, 2012) (denying motion t0 dismiss and special motion t0 strike). o Ansari v. Elec. Document Processing, Ina, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 128622 (ND. Cal. Sept. 10, 2012) (granting motion t0 strike affirmative defenses). o Gonzalez v. Heritage Pac. Fin, LLC, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 112195 (C.D. Cal. Aug. 8, 2012) (granting motion t0 strike affirmative defenses). o Gonzalez v. Heritage Pac. Fin, LLC, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 27315 (E.D. Cal. Feb. 29, 2012) (denying motion to dismiss for improper venue). o Dion v. Fulton Friedman & Gullace LLP, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5116 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 17, 2012) (granting motion t0 strike affirmative defenses). U.S. BANKRUPTCY COURTS o 7326 v. Salomon (In re Salomon), 2013 Bankr. LEXIS 354 (Bankr. N.D. Cal. Jan. 29, 2013) (granting discharge after trial in non-discharageability case). 10. Ihave been approved and appointed as adequate class counsel in several consumer class action cases including: Case Name Court Case N0. / Date Judge Timlick v. NCB Management Services, Inc. Lake County CIV-4169 1 9 Lunas (February 2, 2021) Chambers v. Merchants & Medical Credit Santa Clara County 18-CV-324210 Kulkarni Corporation, Inc. (November 23, 2020) Brady v. Patenaude & Felix, APC Santa Clara County 18-CV-338737 Lucas (August 25, 2020) Credit Consulting Services, Inc. v. Scott San Benito County CL-18-00541 Rodriguez (January 9, 2020) Pajarit v. Grassy Sprain Group, Inc. San Mateo County 18-CIV-05015 Weiner (November 18, 2019) Scribner v. Simm Assam, Ina, et al. Santa Clara County 17-CV-3 12803 Kuhnle (October 7, 2019) Guzman v. Mandarich Law Group, LLP, et Santa Clara County 18-CV-322871 Walsh al. (August 16, 2019) -7- DECLARATION OF RAEON R. ROULSTON Case N0. 20CV361271 KOOOQONUl-RUJNH NNNNNNNNNr-‘r-‘r-‘r-‘r-‘r-‘r-‘r-‘HH OOQONUI-RUJNHOKOOOQONUI-bwwr-‘O Homer v. Crown Asset Management, LLC Santa Clara County 17-CV-3 1 5221 Kuhnle (March 8, 2019) Carlson v. Gatestone & C0. International, Santa Clara County 17-CV-306698 Kuhnle Ina, et al. (November 30, 2018) Lock v. Global Credit & Collection Santa Clara County 2015-1-CV-283297 Kuhnle Corporation, et al. (November 13, 201 8) Pajarit v. Velocity Investments, LLC San Mateo County 17-CIV-03046 Weiner (October 19, 2018) Newsom v. Cavalry SPVI, LLC Santa Clara County 16-CV-299973 Kuhnle (October 12, 2018) Corso v. ML. Zager, P.C., et al. Santa Clara County 16-CV-298607 Kirwan (June 29, 2018) Atlantic Credit & Finance Special Finance Santa Cruz County CIS-CV-182328 Burdick Unit III, LLC v. Nevarez, ez‘ al. (June 25, 2018) Davis v. Cavalry SPVI, LLC Santa Clara County 2016-1-CV-30173O Kuhnle (April 2, 20 1 8) Datta v. Asset Recovery Solutions, LLC Northern District 0f 5:15-CV-00188-LHK Koh California (January 13, 2017) Jacobson v. Persolve, LLC Northern District 0f 5:14-CV-00735-LHK Koh California (June 7, 2016) Gold v. Midland Credit Management, Inc Northern District 0f 5:13-CV-02019-BLF Freeman California (October 7, 2014) 11. My work in connection with this case is shown on the schedule attached as Exhibit “A” t0 the Declaration of Fred W. Schwinn filed simultaneously herewith. I prepared my time records contemporaneously With my performance 0f the work, using the MyCase online software for law offices. The time records d0 not duplicate work performed in any other file. TIME AND HOURLY RATE 12. For my services as an attorney in this case, Consumer Law Center, Inc., seeks my hourly rate 0f $600.00. This is the hourly rate that my firm currently charges t0 our fee-paying clients. This hourly rate is reasonable, and comparable to the rates being charged by attorneys 0f similar experience and expertise in the San Francisco Bay Area’s federal and state courts. 13. On January 1, 2021, I raised my hourly rate t0 $600.00, representing the first _ 8 _ DECLARATION OF RAEON R. ROULSTON Case No. 20CV36127 1 KOOOQONUl-RUJNH NNNNNNNNNr-‘r-‘r-‘r-‘r-‘r-‘r-‘r-‘HH OOQONUI-RUJNHOKOOOQONUI-bwwr-‘O increase in my hourly rate since January 1, 2019. Courts in the San Francisco Bay Area have awarded my previous hourly rate of $550.00 in a number of cases, including: Case Name Court Case N0. / Date Judge Timlick v. NCB Management Services, Lake County CIV-4 1 69 1 9 Lunas Inc. (June 11, 2021) Pajarit v. Grassy Sprain Group, Inc. San Mateo County 18-CIV-05015 Weiner (December 17, 2020) Scribner v. Simm Assocs., Ina, et al. Santa Clara County 17CV3 12803 Lucas (December 2, 2020) Midland Funding, LLC v. Dong San Mateo County 18-CIV-06181 Fineman (June 12, 2020) Lock v. Global Credit & Collection Santa Clara County 2015-1-CV-283297 Kuhnle Corporation, er al. (July 3 1 , 2019) Homer v. Crown Asset Management, LLC Santa Clara County 17-CV-3 1 5221 Kuhnle (July 31, 2019) 14. On January 1, 2019, I raised my hourly rate to $550.00, representing the first increase in my hourly rate since July 1, 2017. Courts in the San Francisco Bay Area have awarded my previous hourly rate of $500.00 in a number 0f cases, including: (August 20, 2018) Case Name Court Case N0. / Date Judge Carlson v. Gatestone & C0. International, Santa Clara County 17-CV-306698 Kuhnle Inc. (March 29, 2019) Newsom v. Cavalry SPVI, LLC Santa Clara County 16-CV-299973 Kuhnle (March 1, 2019) Corso v. ML. Zagen P.C., er al. Santa Clara County 16-CV-298607 Kuhnle (January 31, 2019) Atlantic Credit & Finance Special Santa Cruz County CIS-CV-182328 Burdick Finance Unit III, LLC v. Nevarez, et al. (December 28, 2018) Prof’l Collection Consultants v. Lujan San Francisco CGC-S 17685 Ulmer County (October 17, 2018) Davis v. Cavalry SPVI, LLC Santa Clara County 2016-1-CV-30173O Kuhnle 15. Consumer Law Center, Inc., seeks compensation for 10.3 hours of the total time that I spent performing legal services for KINGSLAND in this case. -9- DECLARATION OF RAEON R. ROULSTON Case N0. 20CV361271 \OOOflQUl-RUJNr-A NNNNNNNNNr-‘r-‘r-tr-tr-tr-‘r-‘r-tp-nr- OOQONUI-RUJNt-‘OKOOOQO‘xUI-bwwr-‘O 16. The requested attorney’s fees and costs were reasonable and necessary to the litigation in this matter. Executed at San Jose, California 0n August 6, 2021. Raeon R. Roulston, Esq. Attorney for Defendant/Cross-Complainant RYAN KINGSLAND DECLARATION OF RAEON R. ROULSTON -10- Case N0. 20CV361271